This is an extremely intense post from the very moment that it begins. It's a very interesting article though, and one that is very unlike the other articles we have read from other lifers. Most of the lifers haven't discussed the idea that their existence is meaningless and that their time behind bars is really as horrible as most people perceive it to be. And I was also not expecting him to say that a woman's love is what he really needs to make himself feel worthwhile. This post really makes me wonder what he did to get himself locked up for a life sentence, especially when he says that he did it to himself.
But back to his point about love and having a companion, lover, confidant, etc., it is extremely refreshing to hear that, especially when I have a boyfriend myself, whose presence I often take for granted. Love, as corny as it may sound, really is a key component of life, and personally, I don't know what I would do without it. It's the greatest and most energizing feeling in the world to be in love and I can't imagine going through my existence without even a glimmer of hope of that feeling coming my way at any point. I feel sympathetic for this lifer but at the same time, there's really no point on him dwelling on it. He must accept where he is in life and realize that as long as he's behind bars (which is forever) he's not going to have that love and romance he's missing. He needs to look within himself and discover his own happiness and maybe then will someone appear. As I mentioned before, I do feel somewhat sympathetic for this man. Despite the fact that he most likely ended someone else's life in order to end up where he is, not ever really knowing love in my opinion, would be worse than being incarcerated physically for a lifespan. Not ever knowing or feeling love is like being locked up emotionally and mentally. I hope that "M" will be able to find peace someday.

I was extremely moved and interested at the video we watched in class about the soldiers with post traumatic stress disorder. I was especially taken aback by the story of Jeff, the soldier who came home and developed an alcohol problem, isolated himself from his family, and then eventually took his own life. I had heard stories about such things happening before, but I guess the message never really hit me until literally seeing a personal story of someone who went through it and took their own life as a result of it. I have many different feelings after seeing that video. I wonder, why has our government really not done anything for these men, and why is there such a stigma for getting medical help when you need it? The men in the video needed the help, yet most of the time they explained how they were afraid to ask for it out of fear of being extremely stigmatized and put down. I felt so bad for these men. It's almost as if the military is de-humanizing their own people, and not taking into consideration what the war can do to someone mentally, not just physically. It's actually extremely scary. In my opinion, the mental wounds of war should be taken just as seriously if not more seriously than a physical wound. It boggles my mind that a government with so much technology, money, and information should be so behind when it comes to mental disorders and especially after seeing so many men suffer from PTSD, still doing nothing about it. I fear for friends that I know who are going to be deployed in the future. One of my best friends is currently in NAPS, the Navy boot camp, and will eventually be deployed as a soldier in the war. Will I never know the same Josh as I know now as a result? Will he develop such a strong mental reaction to the war? Will the government help him if he needs it? I just hope someday that the government will truly be understanding of what a serious issue this is and will hopefully do something to stop anything like Jeff's story from happening again to someone else and their family.

As the others above me have said, this post also really hits home with me as well. There are many reasons why this post means so much to me, but to summarize, I have been involved in relationships where my counterpart did not act in a way that was chivalrous or respectable. I think this is a lesson that young boys should be taught from the very beginning of life, that a woman IS special and that we are not this image that the media has portrayed. We all don't want "sex and money", we want to be cared for and understood. We want a guy to hold the door open for us or even volunteer to pick up the check at dinner. We want someone who's going to stand up for us, but also know that we are strong independent individuals with our own set of needs and powers. Today in class, as a matter of fact, I witnessed one of the most shocking and disrespectful acts toward a woman that I have ever seen. After several minutes of watching the film Professor Richards put on, two guys sitting in my row were continually talking, and not in a soft whisper tone. They were obnoxious, to be honest. Everyone in my section was annoyed, but no one wanted to say anything. However, it got to a point where no one could even concentrate on the movie, instead everyone was listening to their conversation. At that point, a girl sitting directly below me turned around and said, "could you guys stop talking?"...and one of the man's immediate response was, "why don't you s*** my d***." I was honestly completely shocked. It was the rudest and most crude thing I had ever heard. I could not believe that a man could be so rude and disrespectful to a girl that simply asked him to stop talking in class. It was unbelievable. It was at that point that I started thinking about chivalry and respect toward women. Society has created such an unrealistic and cheap portrayal of women that such a comment is literally not even taken that seriously. Not a single person sitting around us even attempted to stand up for her. It was just really upsetting to see such a situation just happen without anyone caring enough to do anything about it.

A few questions came to mind after reading this article, most importantly, if he was such a great guy, what did he do to deserve a life sentence? And in what situation was his life that he has been in prison for 10 years already at the young age of 28? I just don't understand how life could progress in such a way so quickly. But besides the obvious questions that come to mind, I wonder is it really necessary for a person to spend their life in prison. Especially after reading this article, I wonder, does one have to be considered a "bad" person to spend their life behind bars? obviously not if a man of his condition would still have such strong ties with his family at home and his teachers from the past. Also, it is a clear inclination of his character that he selflessly takes a vested interest in the younger inmates. It shows a lot that he offers guidance and to support to people that never received such attention and respect from their friends and family at home.
I've really been thinking a lot about the conversations we've had in class regarding prison sentences and the government as a whole. People are so willing to accept the conditions we've been dealt by those with more power than ourselves, but if we simply gathered together and spoke up for our own benefit, would things be different? Why can't the general public make a significant impact on what we want as a whole? And in regards to prison sentences, why does the government have the power to put people such as this inmate behind bars for the rest of his or her life? Shouldn't we as people have the right to make our own theories and decisions? I wonder what life would be like without the constant constraint of societal measures and expectations. I don't think in many cases that people should be willing to accept any sort of social control that the government chooses to hand us.
Professor Richards has completely changed my viewpoint regarding government control and the societal forces that determine are almost every move. I wish, as a collective unit, that citizens would develop a stronger individualistic and group force to end such significant pressures and controls.

This post really gave me a new perspective on what it means to have a life sentence. Because truthfully, I had always just assumed that in order to have a life sentence placed upon you, it was almost necessary to have taken another person's life. I was also inspired by this article. In my own family, I have a cousin who has fallen extremely off the path. He is a drug addict; addicted to heroine, cocaine, alcohol, and basically whatever else he can get his hands on. Most recently, he was put in jail due to a possessions charge. It has essentially torn my family apart. My grandmother is practically on her death bed out of sadness and dssappointment. His mother and father divorced when he was very young, and has had an abusive relationship with his father for his entire life. His father was never there for him, nor my aunt, not to say that she did a great job either. But back to this inmate's story, I was truthfully inspired by the fact that he was able to find art and music and to completely change his life and mindset around. It amazes me that even under such horrid situations he were able to come out resiliently. Although changing his mindset does not alter the fact that he will be behind bars for the rest of his life, at least internally and mentally he is able to find harmony and peace and to forgive those who have troubled him in the past. I hope someday that my cousin will be able to find internal harmony as well, and to fight the demons that haunt his daily life. I hope that someday he will be able to realize his mistakes and turn them into good before it is too late. And I agree with the idea that freedom is not necessarily being able to go and leave when one pleases, but rather, the ability to completely control your own conscious thought without the influence of others and anything. It makes me wonder, who would I be without the physical things in life and the profound influence the society around me has? Would I still be the same person I am today? I tend to think not.

It's funny that this article is the one we must respond to considering the discussion we had in class today. It reminds me of the little argument that Professor Richards got into with one of our classmates. In class, the argument was about deserving to be in prison after committing a crime such as murder, even if the person has been changed after time spent behind bars. Professor Richards kept explaining that there is this gray area involved in such things, and that everything is not always black and white. Our classmate didn't quite understand that concept. In this article the inmate says that he deserves to be in jail. He knows he committed a terrible crime and does not believe he should be allowed out in public again after his actions. I think it's really interesting to think from that perspective. Continuing on from what we discussed in class today, under what circumstances should someone completely deserve to be in jail for life? If I accidentally killed a biker tomorrow while driving my car, would I fully deserve to go behind bars for life knowing the kind of person I am? I just don't really have a full understanding, after today, of what being in jail for life really means. I used to think that people that were in jail for life were the scums of the earth; terrible, awful people that committed the worst of actions with little remorse. But now I have a completely different set of thoughts and ideas. Maybe these people are just normal people that accidentally made one wrong move that got them in their situations. This inmate says..I used to be a husband. Now I'm an inmate. Where does the black and white end and the gray begin? There's many questions to consider. This article, along with our discussion today really has changed my view on prisoners, the legal system, and simply how unpredictable life can be.

I thought this post was extremely thoughtful and eye-opening. I really enjoyed his analysis of what freedom is to him, as well as the thought-provoking questions he asked his readers about their definitions of freedom. The most interesting part of the article to me however, was his mentioning of the element of escapism used by prisoners. This inmate describes escapism as when a prisoner discusses and dreams about what they will do, who they will meet, and where they will go once they are released from jail. They spend an extremely large percentage of their time focusing on what will be instead of thinking about time in the present moment. Although I can hardly compare my life or my fellow peers' lives to the inmates, I do believe this element of escapism also greatly effects the lives of myself and others around me. On a daily basis I hear students talking excitedly about upcoming events or seasons, saying things like, " things are going to be so much better once spring arrives", or "this summer is going to be great". No one wants to live in the present moment because it's easier to believe that life in the future is going to be better than life in the present moment. However, in reality, life for these people is most likely going to be exactly the same, despite the changes in weather. But still, we choose to believe that "the grass is greener on the other side", succumbing to an irrational and cliche thought process that just ends up deterring activities and lives in the present. So although this article was very interesting and well-written, I couldn't help but take notice of his acknowledgement of escapism. I find it interesting that once again, despite the so-called freedoms that we have in comparison to the prisoners, still leads both groups of people to a similar thought process that usually ends fruitlessly. I think it is extremely important for people, including myself, to focus on living in the present instead of constantly dreaming or yearning for something else to come along.

This article was very interesting and almost shocking to read. I honestly had not anticipated that he would bring the root of his problems back to his sexual desires and promiscuity, but it really does make sense. He was driven by not only internal forces but also external ones, brining me back to topics learned in class such as personal troubles/public issues as well as the invisible strings that drive our choices and mind sets. This story, is in fact a perfect example of personal troubles v. public issues. Initially, he began his story by talking about all of the reasons for his incarceration, and trying to point a specific finger at where his life went wrong. He initially began to blame outside sources, such as his father, his neighborhood, and drug use. However, as he continues on, he explained that he realized after quite some consideration, that the real problem was within himself. He wanted to blame public issues but ended up realizing that it was his own personal troubles, or his sexual needs and inconsiderate decisions that led him to where he was. The invisible strings that work on us on a consistent basis told him that he needed to obtain drugs and alcohol, to go to these extremes, in order to achieve the satisfaction he desired. It wasn't his upbringing or any other factors that many people can easily blame their situations on, it was simply his own actions and decisions. I think that also leads to an interesting point; many people in similar situations consistently blame their environment or their early family life for any misfortune or bad decisions they may have made. Why are people so quick to blame others before looking at their own reflection in the mirror? Why are many people able to escape the harshness of a bad situation while others simply fall right into it? In order to progress as a society, I believe it is necessary to first look at the individual, or psychological aspect, and then look at the broader, sociological context in which we live. If this prisoner had realized what he was doing to himself at an earlier age he might have avoided the situation in which he resides now.

Although many may criticize or judge the lives of which these people thrive and life, in a practical, societal context, it makes complete sense. The society and culture that these people live in greatly supports their lifestyle. As the video emphasized, they are happy, peaceful, and content with their polygamist ideals. They are able to maintain the amount of land that they have, take care of the children, and adequately feed themselves. It's almost as if these people, with their lifestyles and historical backgrounds, are forced to live in these types of situations. In order to maintain the land that they own and to upkeep the farming they would need more than the hands of just one male. I find it most interesting though, as the video described, that since their area has been infiltrated with satellite dishes, televisions, and roads leading to distant cities, these people have begun to question the concept of having more than one spouse at a time. I think that is a prime example of socialization in process. These people, although slowly and apprehensively, are being socialized into a more westernized point of view about love, romance, and marriage. Societal and cultural expectations are constantly changing and social norms are a reflection of those changes. I wonder, in a few years, will the people of this community still find it acceptable to live this way after they've been further exposed to monogamous relationships as the norm in their television shows? Will their culture and individual lives completely change due to increased media exposure and alternative cultural ideals? Will the invisible strings that affect this polygamist family now, change as a whole? Or will they maintain their own ideals despite a new cultural infiltration? I believe that in a few years, and even more exposure to westernized point of view, less people in the community will be able to accept such a lifestyle and will change the way people view themselves and their choices. However, despite these inevitable changes that will most likely come to this community, as of now, the system of polygamy works. It's hard to criticize a society that clearly supports the people that live within it.

I have mixed feelings while reading this article, "Remember". Initially, I couldn't help but feel bad for this inmate as he recounted all of the things in life that he no longer has, such as a support system or even contact with his wife, but as the story continued, I no longer felt bad. I guess once he started mentioning what he did remember, it's hard to say that you could feel bad for someone like that, despite his clear amount of sympathy and remorse. To take a 19 year-old's life...literally robbing someone of almost every great experience they have yet to come by, I just find it difficult to feel sorry for. About a week ago, one of my friends committed suicide. A 19 year old boy drunkenly took his own life. Now, who are we to assume that we have such a power? The power to literally "play" God. To take our own or someone else's life is something that we shouldn't be able to do because it is God's will when we should be taken from this earth. I know this is a tad bit off topic, but in my present life, this topic has been mulling around in my head constantly. Who are we to decide when we, or someone else, should die? This prisoner deserves every possible negative consequence of his actions, despite his feelings or regret now. So for me, he can save his sorrow, because nothing could ever change the lives he ruined and the people he's changed. Professor Richards mentioned in class today that in prison you either go crazy, or find God. Well personally, I think that whole "finding God" aspect is a cop-out. Just because the people in their lives can't forgive them, doesn't mean they can look for anyone, including an intangible higher power, to find forgiveness. I really feel like most prisoners just look for that, that element of forgiveness in any way possible that they go with this "finding God" excuse. I could be absolutely wrong and I could be being absolutely harsh, but that's just the way I see it.