Contrasting Differences in Family Life in USA and Mexico Essay Example for Free

Contrasting Differences in Family Life in USA and Mexico Essay The family is the basic unit of any particular society or community. It is therefore imperative that for the society to exist the family has to be there to produce members into the community. The community or national character any particular country is basically determined by the nature of the family values. An individual is shaped in the early ages by the family. In the contemporary society there are increased diversity changes in the family a characteristic of the many changes in culture, political, economic, social, and psychological and even the environment. The content definition of has not been agreed upon because of the great changes that are so accommodating. In the previous many years the family was considered as the people who are related by blood. This definition based on the kinship ties has been revoked due to the influence of many forms of families which has stripped off the family its actual definition. For instance there can husband and wife who do not have any kinship ties and they go ahead to adopt children. Another case that has changed such a definition of the family based on kinship ties is the increasing number of intermarriage within the context of race or ethnicity. This brings out a mixture of offspring and therefore it is difficult to trace the family bonds based on kinship ties. The issue of who is next to kin is no longer important in the current families. The most common aspect in the current families is the bonding based on mutual understanding. The many changes of husband and wife have been changed by the introduction of lesbianism and gay. These try to go against the grain of opposite gender type of marriage. The concept of marriage has changed from opposite gender type of marriage to a mixture of gay, lesbianism and opposite gender marriages. These are some of the dynamisms that are facing the contemporary families. This paper shall give an indebt analysis of the family, the changes in roles and functions of the families and the general effects of such changes to the contemporary families. A close reference and examples shall be drawn from the US and Mexico, the countries that border each other geographically. The contrasting differences I n family issues shall be pointed out clearly. Family life in the United States The family relationship in the United States has undergone several transformations due to the effect of globalization. Race and ethnicity are the most significant factors in shaping the variety of values, attitudes and behaviour amongst the families in the United States. There are a number of changes in families in the United States. These changes range from political, social, economic, and psychological to spiritual. The social dislocations have given rise to new ideas and values especially there is increased individualism among the members of the community. In the US there increased diversity in the organizational structures. There are many cases of divorce and separation in the United Stated which has grabbed the family the unity and love that is supposed to be enjoyed. Most the single families that are common in the US are as a result of divorce and remarriage due to greater democratization. (Hines Morrison, 2005) Cultural diversity in the US is accounting for the many different types of families that have emerged in the recent past. The United States constitutes almost all races and ethnic groups in the world. For this reason there are diverse cultural values as a resulting of this contact. The factor that there are free intermarriages between these diverse races and ethnic groups has made the US to have diverse cultural values which transcend the native culture. The immigrants who move to the United State try to maintain their native language despite the fact that they are forced to learn the official language of the United States, which is English. The immigrants from Spanish speaking countries (Hispanic) when they move to the United States they try to maintain their languages. The culture of the people is usually transmitted through language and due to the numerous languages in the United States there exists different cultures. This means that there are very many family clusters formed through the sharing of the languages. For instance most of the Hispanic immigrants have formed family clusters in the sides of Florida. The black American speaks a variety of English as they identify themselves as belonging or originating from one family. These disparities have affected the notion of the family because these people are allowed to mix freely with people from different cultures. The concept of the family in the United States is changing even the more during the advent of the green card where people from different pasts acquire citizenship. Many people from different races and ethnic groups have found their way to the US and as such most of them are allowed to move with their families. The nuclear family still remains an ideal source of the society in the United States. The United States families are characterized by the great social stratification. In the United the families are organized according to different classes. Among these classes there are great disparities in terms of economic value. The choice of families has not taken shift from mutual understanding to materials and resources. This has affected relationships from a sociological point of view. This issue of the class is a dominant phenomenon among the families in the United States as those who are rich wants to maintain the status quo. This is done through the inheritance that is passed within the nuclear families. The nuclear families in the United States are created and broken up and then reconstituted. This has led to the decline of family values which consequently affects the family patterns. This diversity in family pattern has been identified as the cause of problems such as violence, crime and drug use in the united state. The parents are usually very busy with their duties (United States, Congress, 1992). The increasing cases of divorce and separation in the United States have a negative effect on maintaining the ideal norms of the nuclear family value. The families that are exposed to values outside the parental domain are likely to deviate from norms. The human rights in the United States are considered fundamental. There is protection of the universal human right which is a recipe to the process of democratization. This the reason why the US government invest huge amount of money in education health and other basic sectors so as to enhance the promotion of the human rights among the citizens. The Family Life in Mexico Most people have preferred to live in Mexico for a variety of reasons such as social, political, economic and even good climatic reasons. Living in Mexico requires one to learn the Spanish language so as to increase effective communication. This is because the families are socialized in the Spanish language. The Mexican people are extremely warm and friendly as they are organized in smaller communities that come from the mutually intelligible families. This means that the socialization process is high since there tow much contact between the families. The family bonds are tightly held together and for this reason there is cultural uniformity. The society per se is integrated under common cultural values through the common language shared. Piped water is relatively inexpensive, but not always potable (drinkable). Decades of under-investment, combined with an attitude of impertinence towards paying water bills, has left Mexicos mains water system in poor condition. As a result, most people purchase bottled water, often in 20L containers. Bottled water is very expensive. Rents in Mexico can be higher than in equivalent-sized US towns or cities if the place is popular or fashionable, particularly places within easy reach of the US border. Mexico has a centralized economy: that is, most of the countrys economic activity revolves around. The Mexican pace of life is relatively slower than in the US Especially when the life in major cities is given consideration. The families in Mexico are closely tied as most of the families have time to attend to their families. There is a high degree of parental responsibility among the families. This transcends to greater heights of good values that the society enjoys. Mexico’s culture has a rich history in a consolidated family religion, people and tradition. The Mexican people are proud of their culture that they keep on passing from one generation to another. This is because there is little infusion of the foreign cultures. The family is the basic unit in Mexico and a cornerstone to the maintenance of the culture. The rate of socialization and interaction among these people is too high. It is a usual phenomenon to meet two or more families meeting for a common interest or for a special event. This part of the family function in Mexico, people in Mexico have free time to visit resort centers for the purpose of relaxation which is not a common phenomenon in the United States, where people are too busy. (Heymann, 2006) The Mexican People are too religious which is a big contrast with the United States where people feel that they are in control; of their own life. A large number of people are Christian and they are usually committed to going to church. When you walk in the Mexican homes it is easy for you to see the religious images. In America people stay a non-religious life thus an effect of religious intermingling that has made it difficult for the people to which religious practice to adopt. Thus they resign from subscribing to any of the religious practice. The social stratification is not prevalent in the Mexican family as it is in the United States; people are seeking for money the Mexican people strive for titles. The professionals in Mexico prefer to be addressed with the titles that they deserve. This is as a result of the traditional emphasis given to the tittles within the family domain. The economic living standards in Mexico are slightly lower than in the United State. There are many poor people in Mexico than in the United States. The impact of these high levels of poverty in Mexico has necessitated the immigration of most Mexican families to the United States in search of better jobs and pay of most illegal immigrants from Mexico have gotten their way into the United States through the Mexican borders. These immigrants have settled in cities such as Florida. Working in the United States gives them better pay. This aspect of brain drain is lowering the general development of the families in Mexico as most of the people move leaving behind other family members Basically the cost of living in Mexico is lower than that of the US particularly for agricultural produce. Other sectors such as transport and communication are also lower in Mexico than I n the United States. Other utilities as electricity are more expensive compared to the United State. Working families in the United States, observing how parents struggled to find a balance between caring for children and earning a decent income. When parents split and one of the parents went from Mexico to the United States and was no longer available to give the necessary care, families suffer. What significantly exacerbates the problem is when the borders are so tight that they prevent families from reuniting. This has been a common phenomenon when the immigrants are not given the opportunity by the America to even visit their families in back home in Mexico. (Poole M. et al, 1993) Globalization of the economy created increased pressure for workers to accept lower labor standards, accept lower wages, longer hours, fewer benefits, and less paid leave. Both Nations likewise feel pressure from economic globalization not to implement family-friendly policies, such as paid leave for illness or when a child is sick, or paid parental leave. And that leaves working families struggling to balance work and their care-giving duties. The globalization process has affected families in both Mexico and United States economy was transforming the relationship between work and care-giving in similar ways everywhere. Globalization has forcing both countries to at a very high pace as far as labor standards and social policies are concerned hence leaving working parents with less and less time to raise their children. Parents work has shifted markedly around the world and that goes for every region. The child rearing process has been left in the hands of maids who offer supportive care while the parents are away working till late hours of the day. Men in particular have been moving away from one place to another in search of better jobs especially in various industries. Globalization has made men and women to work day and night and this has made them move away from their homes to go work in various places. A good example is that of outsourcing where people work in shifts where some work during the day and others at night. Women, likewise, have moved into the paid labor force and away from the home. From the period between 1960 and 2000 the number of women in the labor force went from 26 to 38 percent in America. The percentage of women in the workplace has increased both in the United States and Mexico. This has adversely affected the family care services that were provided by the women while their men were working in various sectors. This is a result of civilization which been brought about by the factors such as education, religion, work, urbanization among others. These factors have changed the various roles that were supposed to be executed by the family so as to prepare an individual to be a responsible member of the society. (Cecil, 1992) What has happened is that the world has seen women get better job opportunities which has assisted then them raise income to cater for their families. The increased number of single parent families has made it possible for the women to struggle to get money for rearing their families. While this is was going on there is also massive urbanization occurring all across the world. Thats not necessarily a bad thing, as people who move from very poor rural areas to urban areas often get better jobs, and become less dependent on, for instance, a good rain to feed their families. (Rowntree, Lewis, Price Wyckoff, 2006). References Hines D. A. , Morrison K. (2005) Family Violence in the United States: Defining, Understanding, and Combating. Sage Publisher. Heymann J. (2006) Forgotten Families: Ending the Growing Crisis Confronting Children and Working Parents in the Global Economy. Oxford University Press Poole M. et al (1993) Family: Changing Families, Changing Times. Allen Unwin publisher. Robinson, Cecil. (1992). No short journeys: The interplay of cultures in the history and Literature of the borderlands. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Rowntree L. , Lewis M. , Price M. and Wyckoff W. (2006). Diversity amid Globalization: World Regions, Environment, Development. United States, Congress. House America’s (1992) Families: Conditions, Trends, Hopes, and Fears: Family policy. United States, Congress, House publisher.

Death by Cell-Phone Essay -- Exploratory Essays Research Papers

Death by Cell-Phone Imagine being in the passenger seat of a car on a quiet street in Atlanta. At about 4:00 A.M. a cell phone begins to ring; then the driver reaches down to grab the phone. Within the next few moments, the driver loses control of the car. The car wraps around a telephone poll. This isn’t a dream. In fact, it was reality for model Niki Taylor in May of 2001. According to the USA Today, Niki Taylor was seriously injured in this accident with extensive damage to her liver and abdomen. Most people who remember this incident might not know that the cause of it was a cell-phone. This accident, however, is just one example of the dangers that are involved when someone uses their cell phone while operating a motor vehicle. Many people just sit back and think that this could never happen to them, but have they ever thought about how well they really pay attention to the road when they are on their cell-phone? It is proven that people talking on their cell phone cannot fully control his/her vehicle while moving stated in the Consumers Research Magazine. The use of a cell phone also can reduce the driver's physical control--one hand on the steering wheel, one hand on the phone--which reduces response capability during an emergency. Cell phones have become increasingly popular over the years especially through college age students. Most college students cannot afford to pay a phone bill at their house or in their dorm, so they keep a cell phone to talk to friends or family back home. According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), drivers between the ages of 20 and 54 accounted for 81 percent of the accidents reviewed. Some 72 percent of those talking on a cell phone at the time of acci... ...o State U lib. 5 March, 2003. http://search.epnet.com> Mathias, Craig. â€Å"Dumb and Dumber†. Electronic Engineering Times 1176 (Fall 2001). ) Academic Search Premier. Colorado State U lib. 5 March, 2003. http://search.epnet.com> Moore, Larry R; Moore, Gregory S. â€Å" The impact of cell phones on driver safety†. Professional Safety. 46 (Summer 2001). EBSCO Academic Search Premier. Colorado State U Lib. 30 march,2003. Ropeik, David; Gray, George. â€Å"Cell Phones and Driving: How risky?† Consumers’ Research Magazine, 86 (Winter 2003). Academic Search Premier. Colorado State U Lib. 5 March, 2003. Schwartz, Epharim. â€Å" Its time for drivers to defend the (wireless) right to bear cell phones†. InfoWorld 22 (Summer 2002). EBSCO Academic Search Premier. Colorado State U Lib. 30 march,2003. http://search.epnet.com>

American Indian Hist

The question of what motivates people more when they act – cultural priorities, such as religion or tradition, or the so-called â€Å"rational† motivations, such as economics and politics – has been one long debated on. This debate has been quite fierce, members of both sides providing valid and powerful arguments to support their claims. One of the focal points for this discussion are the people known under the blanket term â€Å"Native Americans†. Where did their motivations stem from? Was it merely pragmatism, a wish to get the most out of any outsiders? Or was culture and tradition vital to decision making?It is doubtless that both of these factors were present, however, the question is, which was the initial factor of influence, dominating thought and action. Scholars have attempted to prove points both ways. I support the side which claims that culture was the primary factor. I shall first provide counter-arguments to the opposing side, then provide supporting arguments for my own claim. First, however, it must be noted that Native Americans is a very catchall term, which is used for lack of a better one. As the website of the Native American research center states, â€Å"It must be emphasized that no one person speaks for Indian People.There are nearly three hundred distinct American Indian Nations in the present United States. Each has its own language and history, its own sacred places and rituals. Each is rooted in and part of the land out of which it grew. â€Å" There are dozens of tribes, including some that are officially considered extinct now, that had quite different customs. If we say that there were Native Americans and they had one kind of culture and, as a consequence, had the same customs, we may just as well say that there are Europeans and they have one culture, completely losing the obvious distinctions between different nations.The cultures of different tribes of Native Americans are very different  œ to deny this would be to unjustly diminish their cultural value – and yet there are cultural tendencies, and there are exceptions. I will attempt to prove that the tendency is to use tradition as a guideline, and the occasions where â€Å"pragmatical† reasons have been primary are the exceptions verifying the rule. First I shall examine the political argument. It seems very difficult to think that â€Å"politics† in the sense that we understand them now had an influence on the Native Americans.When we think of â€Å"politics† we think of diplomatic traditions, of treaties that are made to be broken, of backstabbing. This, however, was not the dominant case with Native Americans. As Dee Brown wrote in his book â€Å"Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee†, â€Å"So tractable, so peaceable, are these people,’ Columbus wrote to the King and Queen of Spain [referring to the Tainos on the island of San Salvador, so was named by Columbus], ‘that I swear to your Majesties there is not in the world a better nation.They love their neighbors as themselves, and their discourse is ever sweet and gentle, and accompanied with a smile; and though it is true that they are naked, yet their manners are decorous and praiseworthy. † This was verified a number of times by other observations, Columbus’s report being merely the most famous occasion. Time after time, the settlers used the same tactic. While officially recognizing the natives as owners of the land, they used any tactic possible to get them to sell the land, up to getting the chief of the tribe drunk.Then, once the treaty – which usually went along the lines of â€Å"There are white men on your lands now anyway, but give us a part of your land, and we will not go on your land without your permission. † – was signed, in a few years the expansion continued in the same manner, and new treaties were signed. Despite these circumstances, there have b een virtually no instances of the treaties between the Indians and the Europeans being broken by the Indians – however, Europeans were breaking these treaties constantly, in 99% of the cases!One would think that if politics were the defining factor in the Native American’s way of dealing they would have changed their tactic after the first few times these treaties were broken – they were not fools, and hundreds of years of such tactics would have destroyed even the most saintly naivete. So the conclusion must be that there was something more than mere hope that the white men would see reason standing behind these promises that forced the Native Americans to keep them. The next common choice for primary motivation is economics.However, despite the fact that the Indians had private property and were no strangers to trade, this could hardly be the dominating motivation. First of all, the Indians were completely self-supporting. Even if they did require something es sential they could not produce themselves – which was fairly rare – other Native American tribes generally proved much better business partners, generally being more honest than the Europeans. Consequentially, all the Europeans could offer them were luxuries. This, naturally, should not be underestimated as a lure in any way.However, a trade which truly entails only luxuries is always small by necessity. In any case, trade relationships were not nearly so large-scale as in the Old World. They could not have been the driving motivation Also, we have numerous documents that detail the interaction between Native Americans and European settlers. The initial reply to the abovementioned land-selling treaties was nearly always quite similar. For instance, an excerpt from the 1752 Abenaki Conference between Captain Phineas Stevens and the St.Francis Indians shows the Indian’s attitude to these treaties: â€Å"4 – But we will not cede one single inch of the lands we inhabit beyond what has been decided formerly by our fathers. 5 – You have the sea for your share from the place where you reside; you can trade there; but we expressly forbid you to kill a single Beaver, or to take a single stick of timber on the lands we inhabit; if you want timber we'll sell you some, but you shall not take it without our permission. † And there exists a number of other documents revealing a similar attitude.Could this, in truth, only be showing that the Indians merely wanted a better deal? One could naturally gain a leeway in trade by keeping the land and selling its resources. However, it is a basic law of economics that one wishing to trade must meet the demand. Had this trade in itself been a factor of dire importance to the Indians, they would have put forth an effort to convince the Europeans that trading would prove profitable. However, the attitude that prevails in documents is one of indifference. It seems like the Indians did not care f or the presence of Europeans.If the white men wished a trade, then they would get a trade. If they did not, the Indians seemed perfectly content to let them live without making any more contact than absolutely necessary. Trade was not of importance – it influenced the relationship between the natives and settlers when it was present, but it was by no means the most important factor. On the other hand, tradition and culture was of extreme importance, influencing entire tribe’s behaviors – especially such a part of culture as religion. For Native Americans religion was of utmost importance.Even the Canadian Jesuit missionaries remarked that the Native Americans were highly religious – and not in the â€Å"Sunday Christian† sense, either, but with deep roots and a great influence of every aspect of their lives. This is a characteristic feature of most tribal societies, where little distinction is made between the sacral and the mundane. However, for I ndians religion had special relevance, as it was one of the things that allowed them to cling on to their cultural identity, saving them from assimilation. Yet even before this was a relevant factor, religion permeated nearly every aspect of Native American life.Their religion was (and remains) one of pure personal experience, not leaving any room for dogma. The Native American worldview is mythological. For all practical purposes, this means that religious factors such as hunting rituals and their theoretical results are the perceived as being absolutely as physically real as an arrow fired into an animal, having the same kind of cause-and-effect that a physical event might. A deal with a spirit, for instance, is treated as seriously as a treaty with a human. A spirit’s warning was heeded as much as a human’s would, with absolutely the same kind of discretion.And magical means of solving problems were taken as absolutely valid. One of the most well known incidents was in 1876, before the battle at Little-Big-Horn when the famed Sitting Bull performed a three-day shamanic ritual to decide what to do with the white men, staring at the sun and wounding himself until he fell unconscious. After he came to, he announced that the white men were there for the Indians to take, because he saw white men fall into the Indian’s camp headfirst, losing their hats, meaning they would be the killed by the Indians.Also he announced that â€Å"They had no ears†, i. e. they were deaf to reason, giving the Indians a moral right to attack. This is not the only incidence of religion influencing political activity. The Ghost Dance religion can be cited as another famous example, showing how Native American religion changed with the times, how it adapted to the flow of time and adopted alien cultural notions and yet survived without losing all of its cultural value, keeping the spirit, though changing the form.One might say that this lack of dissemination between regular life and religious life simply brings more factors into the political games. Religious leaders are used as figure heads for power play, and spirits are dealt with in the same manner humans are dealt with – if, indeed, the shamans who contact the spirits even believe in them and not use them as a means of their own power and control! This is, however, hardly the case, as there are numerous arguments against this position in the study of tribal societies as a whole.Firstly, their religion was always very personal. Every single Indian had their own religious experience and, as with any religion that requires its neophytes to work out their own niche – clergy being needed only in extreme cases – it is always very strong. The strength of this experience makes it difficult to give anything that is lower than it is a higher priority. The Native Americans did not believe in their gods watching over them – they knew the gods were there as much as t hey knew that their teepee was still standing.And while white men were considered a temporary nuisance, guests or invaders at best, and were treated that way, the gods were almost like family, and treated with necessary respect and given due priority. Second, as the phenomenon of the Ghost Dance shows, the acts done out of religion were not necessarily the wisest politically – such as the sending out of search parties to look for the Messiah said to be an incarnation of Jesus, and this at the time when men were crucial to survival – so faking divine inspiration for political power is ruled out.So, if the leaders genuinely believed in what they saw, the fate of hundreds and thousands rested within religion – more than enough to define it as one of the crucial influencing factors. It can be seen that politics and trade simply not as much of an influence on life, while religious and cultural activity was always extremely important, guiding the life of every Indian to a certain extent. This was the source of much misunderstanding, since for Europeans politics often took the leading role when religion failed to provide the necessary support and guidance.This made both sides misinterpret the others’ actions, resulting in a long and bloody war that spanned generations. The Native Americans also had also led wars between each other in the past; they were no strangers to military tactics. However, their wars had rules – ones that the settlers naturally broke, thus spelling defeat for the natives. This also shows just how big a role does tradition play in Native American society – had they adapted to the way of war which the Europeans brought to them, they would have survived losing less than they did.In conclusion, it can be said that, as we have seen, purely empirical evidence proves that the Native Americans did not use either politics or economics as the prime guideline for building the relationships either among themselves or between them and Europeans. These factors were not considered firsthand in any crisis situation, and even 370 years of war against the Europeans did not put them very high on the list of priorities. However, ethics and religion made quite an impact on the decisions made by the Native American people, and remain influential factors in their thinking to this day.This was the true motivation of most Native Americans, and remains so up to modern times. Works cited. 1. American Indian Culture Research Center: http://www. bluecloud. org/dakota. html 2. Dee Brown, â€Å"Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West†, Henry Holt & Company; Reprint edition (February 1, 1991) 3. Terry L. Anderson, â€Å"Dances with myths – truths about American Indians' environmental ethics†, Reason, February 1997. 4. Ghost Dance Religion: http://www. bgsu. edu/departments/acs/1890s/woundedknee/WKghost. html 5.Cultures of North America: http://www. mnsu. edu/emu seum/cultural/northamerica/index. shtml 6. Cultures of North America: http://www. mnsu. edu/emuseum/cultural/northamerica/index. shtml 7. David Stannard, â€Å"The American Holocaust†, Oxford University Press, 1992. 8. The Massacre at Wounded Knee: http://www. hanksville. org/daniel/lakota/Wounded_Knee. html 9. The Wampum Chronicles: Mohawk Territory on the Internet: http://www. wampumchronicles. com/index. html 10. George E. Tinker, â€Å"Religion†: http://college. hmco. com/history/readerscomp/naind/html/na_032600_religion.htm 11. NativeWeb: http://www. nativeweb. org/ 12. Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties. Compiled and edited by Charles J. Kappler: http://digital. library. okstate. edu/kappler/Vol1/HTML_files/toc. html 13. Abenaki Conference with Phineas Stevens. Documents Related to the Colonial History of the State of New York Vol. X. pg. 252-254. Donated by Jeffery Miller – Administrator of Fort #4. http://www. avcnet. org/ne-do-ba/doc_1752. html 14. The M anataka Oath, Creed and Code of Conduct: http://www. manataka. org/page182. html

Should I Live at Home While Im in College

Living at home while in college is a serious option for many college students. There are many benefits -- from saving money to avoiding the chaos of residence hall life -- but also many challenges. If youre considering living at home during your time in school, make sure to think through these aspects before making a decision. Things to Consider About Living at Home in College Finances. You may save money by not having to pay for room and board. But you may also have other expenses that you wouldnt have if you lived on campus, like commuting costs (gas, car maintenance, a bus pass, carpool costs), parking expenses, and food that youll get stuck buying when youre on campus during the day. Make sure to consider the costs of living with your parents as well as living on-campus to make sure youre taking everything into consideration. Time. Living at home may take time away from what you can spend physically connected to your campus. On the other hand, you may be more efficient at home than you would be in a residence hall, for example, when doing your homework. Think about time and safety intersections, too -- you may not mind staying late one night to finish a group project, but will you feel safe commuting home if its really late? Personal factors. Living on campus or with your parents is a personal decision. You may want to connect more with other students (in a residence hall or Greek house, for example), or you may want or need to stay closer (physically and personally) to your family. How will living at home have an impact on your personal life? Your family life? Your social life? Will you regret not living at home? Will you regret not living on campus? Other Alternatives to Consider If you dont want to stay in a traditional residence hall but dont want to live at home either, there are some alternatives you may want to consider: Living in off-campus apartments owned by the schoolLiving in off-campus apartments independent of the schoolLiving in a Greek house or theme house-sitting for a professor on sabbaticalRenting a room from a professor or houseLiving in married student or family housing, if youre eligible