First off, this question doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. He starts out by saying that “if affirmative action helps white people”, which it does not do by definition. Affirmative actions means that schools and institutions will take an affirmative action to allow non-whites into their institutions. So I think if the guy asking this question realized that, then maybe he wouldn’t have to ask why there are so many white people against affirmative action. But maybe he just worded the question wrongly and is wondering, so I will try and explain. Let’s say you’re a white person applying to college, and you’re applying to a school where you sit right on the border between getting accepted or rejected. Let’s say that you end up getting rejected from the school, while your friend who is a minority got in although he had significantly lower SAT scores, GPA, etc. Isn’t there something wrong with that? The answer is yes to a lot of white people in the world. While the theory may sound good on paper, because having a diverse student body or population is important for a lot of universities and institutions, it ends up hurting a lot of white applicants who are more qualified than some of their minority counterparts. My personal opinion is that affirmative action only encourages the idea of racism. If we say that we want to live in a world where all races are equal under the law, then laws like this which literally divide races need to be exterminated as quickly as possible. Because the bottom line is that the best applicants should get the job, regardless of color, regardless of race. Any law or custom that encourages otherwise is bullshit. I don’t think that making a university of a job environment more diverse is worth hurting more qualified applicants and having an overall less qualified student body or employee. I think that the person or people who decided to implement affirmative action must have disagreed with me. I guess maybe it was more important to have minority groups present back when affirmative action was originally implemented and racial tensions were much stronger than they are today. But I think that at this point, there is no place for affirmative action in the world.

I think it is an over generalization to say that Americans are unwilling to do the kind of hard labor and physical work that Mexican immigrants typically do. I think essentially it just comes down to simple economics. The type of people that immigrate to another country are more driven and determined (as well as physically able) than other people that choose not to immigrate. They are also, therefore, more driven and determined to succeed and work than some Americans that were born here, just as they are more determined than some people who were born in Mexico and decided to stay because they did not want to put in the hard labor that it would take to make it in America. Therefore, because of their determination, these Mexican immigrants are willing to work for a lower price of labor than most Americans. Keeping that in mind, if you are the head of a construction company, who are you going to hire? The American who wants 10 dollars an hour or the Mexican immigrant who will do the same job for half that cost to you. Obviously you would hire the Mexican, assuming you are not some giant racist or something. I think that some people overlook this fact when they generalize and say that Americans are not willing to work the same way that Mexicans are. But as I mentioned before, there is some truth to the fact that Mexican immigrants are willing to work harder than Americans. If you have enough courage to pack up, leave your friends and most likely some of your family behind in Mexico to move to America for a chance at a better life, you definitely will be willing to work your tail off. For this reason, I would bet that a higher percentage of Mexican immigrants are willing to do manual labor for cheap wages than Americans. But there are still a ton of Americans who do many of the same jobs as Mexicans, I think that people just don’t notice as much when they see white people doing yard work or construction as opposed to a Mexican. There is a psychological effect going on in our minds that we remember more of what we want to remember and think. So, if we think that we will see more Mexicans than white people doing those kind of jobs, we will remember it more when we see Mexicans.

I think it’s insane that white people will be the minority sometime in the not so far future. Just looking around campus and even the class in 100 Thomas, does this mean that in the future most of these people will be colored? Not that I really care either way, but it’s just nuts to think about how radically everything will change. I wonder if maybe what I just said is a bad example, because I wonder if this means that the majority of people in college will be non-white. I don’t know. But as a person who grew up in a predominately white town, this idea will definitely take some getting used to. Not to say that there still won’t be white neighborhoods and towns in the future, but just that there will be fewer of them.
Part of me is skeptical about this whole idea though. I think it is misleading to say that white people will be the minority, because many people who are not “white” appear to be white. Take me for example, according to the census I’m Hispanic because I’m half Cuban. But odds are, if you saw me you would just think I am another white person. Take the example from class on Thursday as another demonstration of this. When the young woman was asked to group the 20 or so people down on the floor, she made one group what she considered to be the “white” group. In this “white” group, was a man who said he was 100% Mexican. He looked entirely white though. This is the root of my skepticism. While being technically “white” may be a minority in the near future, I still think that more people will look white than this prediction implies. I mean if one person out of about twenty looked white but wasn’t, that’s 5% right there. If you extrapolate that to the entire population, that would mean that the percentage of actual white people and people who look white would be off.
But to answer the question of how I feel about the whole idea of being a minority in the near future (although technically Hispanic, I still identify as white), my answer would be indifferent. I really don’t care that much. Hopefully by that point in my life I’ll have more important things to worry about than whether or not I am this imaginary thing called a “minority.” Big deal if more people in the USA look different than me. I’m not going to lose any sleep over it.

I have never really thought of myself as a feminist in any sense. I guess I never knew entirely what the word means, and even after watching that video I still don’t think I have a full understanding of what it means. The video made it seem like anyone who believes in equal rights for men and women is a feminist, so I guess in that case I would be classified as a feminist, but I still don’t think that that’s what the word really means. Similar to a lot of people in the video, I consider feminists to be very aggressive women that protest for equal rights, and usually come off as if they hate men. I can see how a man could be a feminist in that sense, if he was out with all the women protesting and going nuts, but I just haven’t personally ever seen one, and I’ve seen a lot of women that I’ve classified as “feminists.” For example, my sister went to an all girls high school, and when I went to her high school graduation the guest speaker was what I called at the time a feminist. Her commencement speech was completely ridiculous. The whole time she was talking about how great women are and not so discreetly bashing men. She addressed the fact that she was angry that a man got to walk on the moon first instead of a woman. I forget a lot of the details but I strongly remember the feeling that my family felt when the speech finally ended. We were all completely taken back by how strong her message was of shoving feminism down your throat and for that reason I have always tagged “feminists” as women who fit this prototype.
I guess I should expand my view of what exactly constitutes a feminist. Now I am wondering if a woman like that is even a feminist. I think she could be classified more as an extremist. From what I gathered from the video, a feminist would want equality for both sexes, while this woman who gave the graduation speech definitely wanted women to have more rights and opportunities than men. So I think with this new definition of a feminist that I would call myself a feminist. I just as easily could have been born a female, and I think it’s bull that for something you can’t control you are held back and not given certain opportunities. It’s a good thing I saw this video because now I know that a ton of people could be feminists.

I don’t think the discussion would have been all that different had we discussed gender as well as race. I think this because I don’t think there are near as many gender differences in the world today as there are race differences. What I mean is, for the most in America at least, women and men are much more equal to each other than different races are equal to each other. I think it would have been interesting to see how men and women varied in their responses to the ‘what stage are you in’ questions. It would be interesting to find out how black, white, Hispanic, and Asian women and men responded to the questions in class. I wonder if minority women would differ strongly in their stages than white men or even men in general.
I think some differences in the discussion would have been if there are “stages” for how we see gender differences as well. I think that there could possibly be the same stages. Just as people use racial qualifiers all the time, people also use gender qualifiers when they are telling stories or describing something that happened. I think using a gender qualifier is much more normal, however. For example I don’t think too many people ever find themselves wondering if they should describe someone as a man or a woman, I think they just do it without hesitation. Race, on the other hand, tends to bring up some mental questioning about whether or not to be more specific. A lot of times people think they may sound racist if they tell a story and mention if someone was black or Asian or whatnot.
I think it would have been cool to do the whole seat experience with men and women. I bet men would be more likely to sit next to another man that they don’t know than a stranger who is a woman. The only reason I say this is because if I’m on a bus or something like that I usually find myself sitting next to a guy rather than a girl if I have a choice. To be honest I never really thought about why that is or anything, but I think it would be cool to find out if that’s a normal behavior or if I’m odd in that sense. Overall, I think the discussion would have been pretty similar but it would have included separate stages for sexism as opposed to racism.

A woman centered porn industry would definitely be completely different. There is no doubt that the current adult film/porn industry is made for men. Even though a lot of women do watch porn from time to time, men make up the vast majority of the market for porn. The people who make porn know this, and therefore the porn videos themselves are tailored more towards how men view ideal sexual encounters. The videos generally include very little plot, if any, and are primarily concerned with sex, as in actual intercourse.
If the porn industry were woman-centered, I would expect there to be a whole lot more plot in the videos. Rather than just having a pizza guy show up and then he starts having sex with the woman who answered the door, maybe the woman and the pizza guy would go out on a romantic date or something before hand. The videos would have to be actually more like short movies due to the increase in plot. There would have to be more scenes that involve things other than sex, so the actors would actually have to be actors, not just a pornographic actor. People who “act” in porn are not real actors, in my opinion. All they do is have sex, that’s not acting. But I feel like in a female centered porn world, there would have to be conversations before any sex, and these conversations would require actual actors to recite the lines. I guess they could film it with the “actors” that are in porn today, but I think the acting would be so miserable that nobody would really watch it, let alone pay to watch it. The woman centered porn industry I imagine would be a whole lot like a soap opera that included sex. Something like “The OC” except Ryan and Merissa had gratuitous sex mid-episode or something. Now that’s something people would pay to see. Or imagine right in the middle of “Gossip Girl” whoever the two main characters are (never seen the show) just start going to town on each other. That is what the female porn industry would include. There would have to be a certain degree of love between the two people having sex, and that love would have to be thoroughly established during the beginning of the episode for women to enjoy it, I think. That would definitely be the main difference between male and female centered porn- love. I don’t think the actual sex itself would be changed all that much, considering women already watch porn as it is, but the whole background between the two people would have to be changed dramatically.

I think the best way to aid foreign countries is the way we have been trying to help Haiti in our mini discussion groups. That is, try and give them an idea or teach them something that will help them become more self-sufficient in the future. The problem is, this is usually the hardest form of aid to actually carry out. Take the war in Iraq as an example. The US did not just take out the corrupt government, leave, and throw some money their way. Instead, the US is trying to give them the best aid possible by teaching them how to govern themselves democratically so that one day in the near future they do not need our assistance to the point where our military presence is required.
Giving money is a form of aid that some people consider the best, but in reality it is not for a couple reasons. One reason is that many developing countries are plagued by corrupt government, so unless you literally go to the country and hand a specific person that you want to help cash, the money you send will in all likelihood never reach your intended target. Instead, it will probably help fuel an already corrupt government. Another reason is that money can only help for so long. There is a cap to how much money can actually help people, unless we are talking about ridiculous sums of money. Money will help in the very near future with whatever people in that country are trying to buy at the time that they receive the funds. However it will not help them in the long run because after the money they received is gone, they are in the same position they were before you sent them the money (or a modestly better position).
The way we are trying to help Haiti I think is the way you have to do it, except obviously our little discussion groups are much to small to accomplish something on a large scale. But the principle still holds. If we were to come up with a really awesome and cheap way for a Haitian woman to package and sell peanuts, that would help her run a more successful business for the rest of her life. If we simply all pitched in $20.00 and mailed it to her, on the chance that she actually received the money, what would she do with it? Buy more peanuts, cups, and wrap probably. Her next sale would be a larger one, which is excellent, but it doesn’t really help her situation. These people need ideas, so therefore ideas and teaching is the best form of aid we can give.

I think this whole project is a pretty cool idea. I’m excited to see which entrepreneur or project my group will decide on, but if I had to pick, I would pick Sonia Joseph selling her luggage, insulated lunch boxes and other bags. I think it is fascinating that all of these bags can be made out of a simple sewing machine. For whatever reason, I thought the whole lunch box idea was fantastic. I think it’s because I have not used a lunch box since about the 4th grade, but I actually think if I had one right now I would use it occasionally. For example I went hiking last weekend and could have really used a bag like that. So if we partner up with Sonia Joseph, maybe I will be able to buy one off of her. She said each one of those bags is only $4.00. I am curious as to how Sonia’s whole operation works down there. How long does each bag take her to make? Where does she buy all the materials to sew? I also wonder how she is doing financially. I wonder how big of a market for bags and luggage there is in Haiti. I think it would be cool to be able to chat with Sonia online and see how and when we could help her business. After knowing that each bag is only $4.00, I feel like anything we could do for her would be immensely helpful.
Another entrepreneur I would like to connect with and help out is Manouchka, the woman selling the frames and hair products. After seeing how she is able to create such nice artwork from such simple materials, I have become a big fan of her business. Similar to Sonia, I think we would be able to help Manouchka a lot through a connection with her. I wonder if there are any materials that she would rather be using than what she is currently working with. I would bet my money saying that there are materials that would be an improvement for her, and I wonder, if she is our partner for this project, if we could arrange to send her some better materials and see if she could make something awesome out of them. That would be incredible. Maybe each person in the group could have her make them something small and we could be a large client group for her. I’m sure the oven she is using is not the best possible oven for heating up her materials. What I would like to get out of this project is for both parties involved to be better off in some way because of the interaction.

I don’t think the SAT is a very effective indicator of anything, excluding the math section. The critical reading and writing sections are greatly influenced by the amount of time spent in preparation for the exam. There are tons of little tricks about the reading section that people just would not know without being prepped for the exam well. There are certain ways to write the essays that score better than other ways, and test takers need inside information to know these things because they are not made clear in the directions. The reason I excluded the math section for this is because I don’t think there are too many tricks in the math sections of the exam. At least from what I remember, the math section was pretty straight forward and without relearning the material and brushing up on algebra, not too many tricks exist that will significantly help. Getting all this help for the reading and writing sections is not cheap in the slightest. Therefore I am not surprised at all after viewing the tables comparing SAT scores amongst different income levels. The fact of the matter is that some students will be able to afford private tutoring lessons or a Kaplan session and some students won’t. This is not to say that every student who receives tutoring or other purchased help will outscore all the other students who don’t, but over such large numbers of people it is clear that that is the case.
Another thing that would help wealthier students would be the schools that they go to. Some public schools in wealthy areas and certainly a substantial amount of private schools offer tutoring geared towards the SAT and ACT college prep tests. These advantages are given to these students because they can afford to go to these schools (or live in the areas where the public schools are).
I don’t think this information should be surprising to anyone, because the SAT is a test that one can be trained for. The test does not test for intelligence, but rather accumulated knowledge about vocabulary, mathematics, and reading comprehension. I would be willing to bet that IQ scores would not vary nearly as dramatically throughout income levels as SAT scores do. That would be interesting to see in class.
I think a factor that was overlooked in class is the cost of the test itself. I don’t know the exact price, but from memory each time you sign up to take the SAT it costs a couple hundred bucks. Students from poor areas could be forced to save up for one crack at the exam. I took the exam multiple times and improved each time, therefore if I was only given one chance to take the exam, I would have ended up with a significantly lower score than what I actually finished with.

As people, I don’t think that we choose our gender nor our sexuality. As for gender, this may sound ignorant but I really don’t believe how anybody could think it is a choice. A person is either born with a penis or a vagina. There are some cases of hermaphrodites where individuals are born with both genitals or some combination of the two, but nevertheless that is by no means a choice. I would be interested in hearing an argument claiming that gender is a choice, because I just do not see how it could ever be a choice. Even undergoing a sex change operation would not really be changing your true gender; it would just alter your appearance into looking that way. As far as I know, the surgery doesn’t change XY or XX chromosomes. People can behave like one gender or the other, but once again that is by no means choosing your gender, but rather acting like the other gender. At the end of the day, a person is either a male, a female, or a hermaphrodite. That result is not because of a choice the individual made, but rather by biology.
For sexuality, once again I do not believe people can choose their sexual orientations. My main basis for saying this is that I never recall a day where I had a choice of being a heterosexual or a homosexual. There was never a time where I was on the fence about what my sexual orientation was. I know I can only speak for myself, and I’m sure that plenty of people have been at a stage when they were unsure about their sexual life. However, I strongly believe that sexuality is something that people have no control over. I can never pick whom I am attracted to sexually, and therefore I feel that nobody can. I think of sexuality somewhat like how I think of food. I either like a food, or I don’t. Similarly, I am either attracted to somebody or I am not. No matter how much broccoli I see, I will never like it. I am the same way with men, no matter how many men I see in my life, I will never be sexually attracted to any of them just as I will never want to eat a plate of broccoli. I think some people may be under the impression that sexuality is a choice because people can choose to engage in homosexual behaviors. Although this is true, engaging in homosexual activities does not necessarily make that person a homosexual. Elton John is an out of the closet homosexual, and he was married and engaged in heterosexual activities for a long time. That did not make him a heterosexual, nothing will.