Microculture is the term given by Neuliep to cultures that are smaller than and live surrounded by and/or within the larger dominant culture in some national or geographical setting. America, among its many, many positive attributes, has really an awful record when it comes to relations with and respect of microcultures. Of course the world is full of horror stories about cultures not fitting together well, so perhaps that is the way of things. The intercultural communication between microcultures and macrocultures is almost always a challenging thing.

This week's readings include Chapter 3 (Microcultures) and Chapter 4 (Environmental Context) in Neuliep and either Chapter 18 (Israel) or Chapter 20 (Belgium) in Gannon and Pillai. In your understanding of the matter, what is a central theme about microcultures – macroculture relations/communication and the natural or man-made environment (physical, political, historical, etc.) when/where communication occurs? You might make this about some experience you have had, something you realize overall or perhaps something about how environment makes a difference

Remember in this essay, you must start with a clear, concise claim (a full, simple sentence). You also need to cite (with page number and quotations or paraphrasing) each of the 3 chapters involved, something from the relevant lecture notes, as well as some outside source.

Despite your culture, at some point in your life you will be a part of a microculture.
According to Neuliep, a microculture includes different types of groups that could be classified by age, class, geographic region, sexual preference disability (e.g., the deaf), ethnicity, race, size, or even occupation (Neuliep, 2015, p. 98). These groups of people usually differ from the macroculture because they are not understood the way that they need to and/or the communication between