I watched the episode on Wednesday that was a continuation of last week’s episode. The thing about South Park that you have to keep in mind is that they are trying to make a point and deliver a message with all of the fun that they poke at different topics. The whole Muhammad thing may have had blasphemous connotation. But there is always a greater message behind it. Matt and Trey do not hate those who worship Muhammad, and as you may notice there were many other dietys whom were also made fun of. For example Buddha, Krishna, and Jesus were also included in the gods on the show. And, to top it off comedy central even edited the show that Matt and Trey had intended, bleeping out much of the commentary that was included in the end. Also, the creators pointed out that Muhammad was never shown in any form. At the point in the show where they may have shown Muhammad, it turned out to be a hoax and it was Santa Claus instead.
The deeper issue here is humility and a bit of ethnocentrism. This group in New York City who threatened the creators of south park in my opinion were very off target and out-of-line. In the United States of America I would not say that it is proper custom to send a threatening message to creators of a show that made outlandish comments toward one’s god. You cannot refer to gruesome pictures of a past film creator who did something similar and was brutally killed because of it.
I am all for voicing ones own opinion. If something offends you on South Park or another TV show or different publication, or really anything, then I think you have an obligation to speak out against it. But there is a right way and a wrong way to do everything. You cannot make life threatening messages over trivial opinions and jokes. Instead, you need to be assertive and make your opinions known, and ask south park to stop. From there, further decisions will be made, but to be rash and start threats, it belittles your argument.
So ok, lets say that this group in New York goes and kills Matt and Trey. Then what? The whole group and whoever was associated will be locked up and put in jail, or put to death themselves. I’m no lawyer, but aggravated homicide is not going to get you 3-5 years in jail. So I’m just saying, if this is really the avenue that those who worship Muhammad want to take in order to support their god, then good luck I guess, you’re gonna need it.

Grouping people together in categories is the real issue here. This girl’s husband is just a person. He is a human being who has become who he is today through his family, experiences, cultures, and religions. But aside from everything, he is just a guy just like anyone else. You cannot say that all Muslims are out to kill Americans. That’s one of the most ridiculous things that I have ever heard. The fact that people fear all Muslims or Arabs because of 9-11 or a suicide bombing or something of the sort, is simply asinine. Being Muslim or Arab is just a common trait between this girl’s husband and Osama Bin Laden. The common trait between them is not malicious intent or killing Americans; it’s the fact that they are both Muslim. Where do people make the connection of malicious intent?

Think of this all as if you are a white redneck from Kentucky. You are a perfectly kind and caring person, with two sisters, a mother, and a father. You are very gracious of other people and respectful to nearly everyone, as long as they provide you with respect as well. Now, consider that a boy you went to high school with, whom is a white redneck much like yourself, decided to highjack a plane and fly it into the world trade center.
Now, would you immediately consider yourself a malicious person with intent to harm others? Would people in society look at all white rednecks and think to themselves, “oh, I shouldn’t go by him, he may want to kill me”. If that is the case, then all hope is lost. If we as a world are no longer looking at individuals anymore, but are instead racially profiling and stereotyping all of the time, then there is no hope left at all. However, I do not think that everyone does that; I think the stupid people who are amazingly narrow-minded do that. But you need to look at everything from a couple of different points of view.
If you think of everything in the way you usually would, and then you proceed to think about it in the exact opposite of your original opinion or idea, you will learn a lot more about your topic or subject. So, going back to this girl’s husband, I hope that he can realize this as well. Just because someone is like you, it does not mean that their actions are your actions. Everyone can make any decisions they want. At the end of the day, when it is all said and done, all that you have is yourself. Everything else is just an add-on, but an individual can always do whatever they see as fit, it’s something important to remember.

Apparently, you did not listen to Sam very closely. He said to eat the second piece of chocolate. The only reason he said you should not eat the second piece of chocolate, is if you were going to abstain from chocolate for the rest of your life. I myself knew that I was not going to accomplish that feat, so ate I ate the semi-sweet morsel of chocolate on my desk. Since, your comment seems to portray the fact that you did not eat the second piece, I wish you good luck in your future to never again eat chocolate. It’s a lot like the one time that Sam discussed what it truly means to support what you are saying. Only if you practice what you preach, every single day forever, can you actually support what you believe in. So godspeed, chocolate hater. The other thing you need to look at is the big picture. The chocolate on my desk is not the enemy. I was not literally eating the flesh of the black man in the ivory coast. Only someone who is extremely narrow minded would be blind to that. Saying that you were eating his skin, was figurative language used to try and get the point across in a stronger way than simply saying slavery is affecting my life negatively and you are supporting it. So, open your mind, welcome to college.
Again, chocolate is not the enemy, slavery is the enemy. The system is the problem, but you need to consider the fact that it is a HUGE problem. This is not something that neglecting to eat a piece of chocolate will save. Baby steps is the key to starting anything, but you do not have a problem if you don’t have a solution. In that case, it would simply be a situation. Slavery, is an intricate problem and I definitely think that there is a solution, but something so vast and intertwined with society needs to be solved by many minds put together. Therefore, the first step should not be voiding chocolate, but instead just spreading information. Information is the key to most things and if you ask me, it’s the only way to solve this problem. I think that people are very willing to help when they see a problem that they feel something about. Americans more so than anyone will do something about an issue that causes them unrest. Therefore, if you really feel strongly about this, so much so that you can’t even eat a piece of chocolate, then start groups online and switch your major into Poly Sci and start spreading the word. Or even just make it your facebook status, for starters. However, do not let yourself feel that by not eating the second piece of chocolate, you have proved yourself in some way. All that you did by not eating that second piece was save a couple of calories.

This is a really interesting topic of discussion. Ok, so first I just want to say that I think the reporter who was interviewing people on the street said it perfectly when she stated that people feel as though they can only check one box. I think that says so much about the way that many people in society think. They think inside of this one box, and feel as though they can only think one set of things, and nothing else. But that’s not how the world works. People are made up of lots of different boxes, and that is an awesome thing. People are not supposed to have one set of opinions in one little box. People should think millions of different things about everything. They should have many conflicting opinions in order to find the opinion that’s right for them. This is the issue that comes to mind when I see these people commenting on the census form. They are so closed-minded. They are blinded by the WORD (yes, the word negro is simply a bunch of letters written near each other) Negro, so much so, that they cannot even realize the reason why it might be on the form. … Maybe, there are other people who live in America who may identify themselves as a Negro. Would that be the worst thing in the world? If someone chose to describe themselves as something other than what you might wish to be called if you were them, would that really be terrible? I think not. I think people need to get a spine and stop being so sensitive. The census is taken in order to count the people, but also to see how people identify themselves. There is no right or wrong answer. And the census bureau has NO INTENTION of trying to make a joke or demeaning comment towards black people by using the word negro. Honestly, I think the census bureau has much more important things to do than attempt to demean a race, sorry black people but don’t flatter yourselves.
I really hope society embraces this census. Because for a lot of people, it may be the most interaction that they have with people of a different race (just seeing the different races on the same sheet of paper near their own). Which is a very sad thing, but hopefully America will be able to figure out that, there are others who call themselves Negro, and that is just fine. There are also people of the same race and ethnic background who want to be called different things, and that also is perfectly fine. Enlightenment is not something that happens easy, I realize that. However, all that I ask is that people just listen to what others have to say, from there, he/she may make whatever decision he/she sees fit.

OK, so first, why don’t men know more about women’s menstrual cycles? I think that this is because of the category that a women’s period falls into. A women’s period is a bodily function, something that your body does. If you just stop and think about it for a minute, its kind of easy to see that all bodily functions are sort of personal things. For instance, people don’t usually go to the bathroom in front of each other. Everyone in the world has to shit and pee, but for whatever reason we are uncomfortable doing it in front of each other. It kind of goes along with all other “bathroom” activities, which often include bodily activities.
So because all of these “bathroom” activities are quite personal to everyone for whatever reason, we decide to not discuss them very much, or feel the urge to know or understand someone else’s bodily functions. In addition to that, the male v. female factor is another thing to think about. Men may want to know about other males bodily function in order to someway learn about their own bodily functions and possibly how to make themselves healthier. However, there is really no reason initially to talk about bodily functions, so why would a man voluntarily be interested in a Woman’s bodily functions?
Second, If men had periods and women had periods then yes, I think tampons would most likely be free, or it would probably even more likely just be another product like toilet paper…kind of like it is already, accept both sexess would buy it, and those companies would be more profitable and successful and it would probably be a common thing to bleed. So, if both sexes had periods then no I do not think tampons would be free. Now, If men were the only ones who had periods and women did not have periods then I still think that tampons would not be free. Although, I do think that if men had periods it would not be as big of a deal, it would be more intertwined with common life. And that is basically all an effect of the man-dominated world that we live in. It’s kind of interesting to watch myself type those words, but I guess that its true. For some reason men are the dominating powers. I think that bleeding is made so uncomfortable because of the way that women seem to shun it, or don’t discuss it in public. If it doesn’t make you uncomfortable then women should talk about it in public, and then the men will eventually become used to it. I would be willing to bet that a lot of men could really care less if it was talked about it in public.

This is great; I think that this is just another example of how people are slowly becoming more colorblind and more diverse in their lives. I sincerely hope that Natalie was not chosen to be the coach of the football team because she is a black woman. However, I don’t think that is why she was chosen. I think that she was probably the best candidate for the job because, if nothing else, for her overwhelming love of the sport of football. And, I’m okay with that. I can see no reason why she would be any less qualified than any other person for the job, male of female. And to me, the best person should always get the job. Regardless of any of their physical attributes, the person who is the most capable and whomever will be the most successful is the right person or the job.
To be honest, I have always thought that “powder-puff” football was really dumb. Its just flag football for girls, because girls don’t ever seem to play regular football. I never understood why girls wouldn’t want to play the same game that the guys play. I mean maybe they aren’t as big or as strong, but I am sure that some girls like hitting, as much as the guys do. In fact, I bet Natalie here could throw around a couple the football players on her team. There is not reason why women shouldn’t play football. Lace up and get out there.
One of the reasons that I am surprised that Natalie took the job, and maybe this is ignorance on her part, are the parents of the players. High school sports parents are terrible, especially football parents. They are some of the most obnoxious overly involved people around. And often, parents like their opinions to be heard by the coach. So, combining all of that with the fact that the head women is a coach, there may or may not be some controversy amongst the larger football family. But, I suppose that is a step that needs to be taken sooner or later. I wouldn’t want to bestow that type of fate on myself, but I think that Natalie’s love for football overpowers her second thoughts. From listening to the interview, I think that she sounds confident and ready to go. She just needs to get her plays set up, her players in shape, and her team morale together. How great must it feel for her whenever she wins a football game as head coach? The man who is coaching as her opponent will probably have a priceless look on his face. “Hey man, how does it feel to get beaten by a girl in the game of football?” Haha Priceless.

This is such a tricky topic and situation to discuss and voice opinion on. I would not expect the university of California at San Diego to be a racist school. That said, I don’t really know why I assume it to not be a primarily racist institution. I should not make assumptions on things that I have 0 knowledge of, but lets just say I wouldn’t expect to have this situation at UCSD. But hey, it happened so there you go.
We talked about this situation a lot in our soc 119 group. It was brought up that UCSD is a highly white majority student body. Which plays a large factor in the racist situations, but neither negative nor positive, but just an interesting aspect of the situation. But anyway, let’s take a look at the situation. A group of students at a fraternity decided to throw a party with a “ghetto” theme. There was a very in depth description of how to dress for the party as well as what the party will entail, on the facebook invitation.
First off, I am not sure how this has become such a widely surrounded topic, because I would assume that this is not the very first incident of this occurring on any college campus anywhere. However, I can honestly say that I have never seen or heard of Racist parties like this one at Penn State. I don’t really think that any of the frat brothers throwing the party had any malicious intent in throwing their party. Instead, I think that their intention was to have a big party and get drunk. And, to make it a little more fun they decided to think of a theme and dress up. I’m good with all of that, but I think they just made a bad decision on the theme. They took what they thought to be a funny joke and went way in depth with their idea. I think that this was more a case of ignorance as a result of lack of diversity in the student so of UCSD’s lives. I think that its really a product of underlying factors in peoples heads, where they just do things without really thinking about how it will affect others because they know that they mean no harm to others by doing it. That’s the issue.
I do not expect this to be solved overnight, but I really hope that people see this issue and pay attention to what is going on. There are a great number of people in the world who could learn a lot from this lesson. Racism is something that many people of the world are not exposed to in any way, and that’s when issues like this pop up. Regardless, ignorance is just an issue, and you would hope college students think a little bit before they do things in the future.

We talked about affirmative action during one of our first meetings in group discussion. And, there were so many different ideas that were thrown around. Everyone seemed to agree that there was a need of some type of support to help people of color, but we also all seemed to agree that affirmative action was not the answer. So I don’t know if anyone can really say exactly what should be put in place for affirmative action, but affirmative action is not the perfect solution. There must be a better system to help society.
Going back to this original question, I think that black people are very similar to white people in the way that they decide on applicants for colleges and careers. I think on the whole for the most part people do not intentionally single applicants out because of the color of the skin. But, I do think that many people have these underlying inhibitions that many people have to those of another skin color. And, to try to keep these inhibitions from being there, I think the only thing that will really help is time. Overtime things will change, as they have done during the past. I know that there are lots of issues with affirmative action and job candidate selection but people are trying to do what they see as the best solution. And sadly it is the only solution we have, at the time, so we have to try and make it work.
I think it will be intriguing to see how black people respond to the question this girl raised. I think that if I were a black person, then I would see things differently, but not too differently. Morally I would say that most human beings have a good set of morals to live by. And on the whole, most people respect other life and hopefully do not try to deter it. So, it’s always hard for me to understand why there is so much racism in this world. And as a white person I just think that it is important to try and understand why things are how they are.
If you asked me, I would say that a black person would respond similarly to a white person. They may have some underlying inhibitions about employing a white staff member. But I do not think that most intelligent businessmen and women would hire a far less competent applicant on the basis of color. It is simply not an effective way to do good business. If one applicant if far more intelligent and productive than the other, then the company should hire that applicant. That would be the best way to optimize your employees and your companies productivity.

Sarah Doe once said, "I'll kiss two girls with one guy if I'm elected president." ... Sarah Doe was the Class President at my high school, and although this was a joke amongst a few friends, it sparked discussion amongst us. Sarah said that she would actually do that if the oppurtunity presented itself (not for her to get elected). So, I asked if that made her bi-sexual and she was quick to say no. But, I'm not sure. I still try to think about it today and figure out what it really means to be gay/lesbian.
I don't understand why people just kind of laughed when Sarah Doe said that in high school. Granted, it was mostly just close friends however it still seems unusual. I think this is another example of lesbian acts, or the idea of two women in someway having sex or romance, and how lesbian acts are more accepted among society. Although it may be a subconscious decision by society to, for some reason, accept two women more than two men, it still seems wrong.
I want to just talk about what sam was saying about how lesbians are women looking for "manly" women and Gay men are often looking for more "feminine" men. I can only begin to wrap my mind around this issue. I don't know how to explain it and I'm not sure if you can, but it is just an interesting point worth thinking about. Why do we think in the way that we do? why are we attracted to a certain sex, or both sexes? What makes every person excited? and is it the same in some people? or is it different in everyone? I know these are all just questions, but I think questions can say a lot more. Hopefully, one day whatever people want to do will be accepted, and LGBT people will not have to deal with ridicule and all of these topics surrounding their lives and beliefs.
In the end, my opinion is that men have more of a personna surrounding their sex. Men need to be MEN. That is the idea of many men across the world. It is sad that the world has to be this way, and I would say that things seem to be changing for the better these days in terms of people being more accepting of others. However, this shouldn't be an issue that society has to deal with from the start. Men and women all usually seem to want equality, so I think this is another situation where things are unequal between men and women and need to be changed. I think that it would a help for everyone on both sex teams.

There are two sides of this. First, this guy comes off as a dude who is just looking way too much into a movie. Avatar is a huge movie and a huge hit, but it can be easy to get carried away talking about one movie. Brooks’ comments are just crazy and they don’t hold true whatsoever. However, there is the other side of the argument that accepts his criticism and thinks about the fact that that may be true. Is it really a movie that is supposed to have a racial undertone? Was that a conscious or subconscious decision? Things like this make me really think about what is going on in this movie.
I think it would help a little bit if I explain my experience with Avatar. When, I first saw the movie, I saw it in IMAX 3D, and I was blown away. I thought that it was great, and no racial undertones ever really came to mind. I just thought it was good based on its great graphics and interesting story/idea. I thought I would see it again. It caused me to think about the future and what is really “real” in life. I thought it was amazing in those senses and nothing about race or ethnicity ever really came to mind. It was more of a unique culture coming together against others trying to ruin their way of life.
I see what brooks is saying and I think that I agree with it. Along with Pocahontas movies like this are common it seems. And it’s a problem in society that we’ve become brainwashed by things like this. This is what is happening with so many things. The world is becoming wrapped up in a made up world. So many of the things that we think are real, are just ideas that we make up inside our head. If you are able to think in a more primitive sense then you can better understand how life really is. Skin color isn’t real, we are all just humans. Hollywood isn’t real, it is just a made up thing same as television and anything that is seen on it. All these things are just made up. We are all just equal Human animals, many of which are too developed for their own good.
In the end, the idea is that we should not have so many of these white person heroes’ stories, because I think that it is a subconscious action that leads to racism in America. We are slowly progressing away from racism, but we have to help the process to help fix the issue. Racism is become another subconscious thing, and in my mind that is a very dangerous thing.