My perspective also changed when Sam asked us to put ourselves in the Muslim’s shoes. I had never thought the war from that point of view. I too would be angry if American’s were invading my land and killing my people over a simple thing such as oil. A war is not the only way to obtain resources. There can be treaties and trades done to obtain resources. There does not have to be a war.

part 2:
They failed miserably. They did not have to make their punishment so harsh. I was shocked when they had a tank crush their car. I was even more shocked when I found out that the man’s car was his only means of income. He was a taxi driver, and that was the only way he could support his family. The soldiers did not have to do that. They should have handled the situation differently and I am extremely disappointed in them.

part 1:
Sam’s lecture only changed my perspective on the war in the Middle East slightly. I already knew that the war was over oil. They certainly were not trying to hide it, as seen in the power points Sam showed us in class. It was pretty much out in the open. Almost every war is over some sort of resource, our’s just happens to be oil. One thing that did change for me though, was the way that I view our soldiers. I once thought that United States troops were untouchable, that they could do no wrong. I always held them to a higher standard. I always thought that when faced with difficult decisions, that they would always do the right thing. After Sam’s lecture, I no longer believe that. I was shocked when Sam showed us the video of the Iraqi’s who stole some timber. On one hand, it was wrong of them to do that. On the other hand, they were poor and simply had no other way of obtaining that wood. I thought that our troops would do the right thing in this case.

Sam’s lecture only changed my perspective on the war in the Middle East slightly. I already knew that the war was over oil. They certainly were not trying to hide it, as seen in the power points Sam showed us in class. It was pretty much out in the open. Almost every war is over some sort of resource, our’s just happens to be oil. One thing that did change for me though, was the way that I view our soldiers. I once thought that United States troops were untouchable, that they could do no wrong. I always held them to a higher standard. I always thought that when faced with difficult decisions, that they would always do the right thing. After Sam’s lecture, I no longer believe that. I was shocked when Sam showed us the video of the Iraqi’s who stole some timber. On one hand, it was wrong of them to do that. On the other hand, they were poor and simply had no other way of obtaining that wood. I thought that our troops would do the right thing in this case. They failed miserably. They did not have to make their punishment so harsh. I was shocked when they had a tank crush their car. I was even more shocked when I found out that the man’s car was his only means of income. He was a taxi driver, and that was the only way he could support his family. The soldiers did not have to do that. They should have handled the situation differently and I am extremely disappointed in them. My perspective also changed when Sam asked us to put ourselves in the Muslim’s shoes. I had never thought the war from that point of view. I too would be angry if American’s were invading my land and killing my people over a simple thing such as oil. A war is not the only way to obtain resources. There can be treaties and trades done to obtain resources. There does not have to be a war. The comparison of China invading America for coal also changed my perspective. I never really thought about anything like that happening here, but it is certainly possible. Just like the Iraqi’s are upset and angry at us for invading their land, I would be upset if China did the same to us. My perspective of christianity changed too after this lecture. Seeing that I am a Christian myself, I never really thought about how violent our background is. On the news, all we ever hear about is how Muslims are so violent and angry. If we take a look back in the history of Christianity though, it is clear that it is us who are more violent. We pale in comparison to Muslim extremists.

I believe that the riots that occurred last wednesday night would have happened with or without social media. For one, the board of trustees made the announcement at ten o’clock at night. Everyone was out of class and everyone was anxious to see what they had to say. Tensions were running high and although it started out as a peaceful protest, you could easily see that it was going to escalate into something more. Joepa is a huge part of this school, and students were not going to take that lightly. The way that the board of trustees handled it only further angered students. We were not given any explanation as to why Joepa was fired. There was no formal email or message from the University about what was happening. We had to find out from other news sources. We trusted the University to do the right thing and they unfortunately failed us. I think that students would have rioted because of those reasons regardless if we had social networking sites or not. There would have been an uproar either way. However, I do believe that social media helped people get to the riot a lot quicker. If the riot had spread from word of mouth, people would not have gotten there as quick as they did. It would not have happened as rapid fire as it did. There would have been some confusion and delay over what time or place to do it. Social media however, makes that process go by much faster then just word of mouth. With a click of a button, all of my friends and family can know what is going on in my life.They can know every last detail and we can even post pictures and videos. It would not be hard to get a ton of students to go downtown in such little time, especially since most of them live there. So I think that social media made the organization process of the riot faster then if we had gone without it. I do not think that less people would have showed up because of the lack of twitter or Facebook, since so many students felt passionately about the situation. I do believe that social media played a huge role in letting the rest of the world that we were having a riot though. The night of the riot, there were a ton of trending topics on twitter about the situation. There were a bunch of posts on Facebook as well. Most of them were not from Penn State students, but from outsiders. So, social media definitely played a part in spreading the word among people who were not attending Penn State University.

When the news story first broke, I was at home in New Jersey. I was watching ABC World News. It was literally a thirty second story. They mentioned that Sandusky had sexually abused eight children, that Schultz and Curley were being charged, and that Joe Paterno had reported the incident and was in no legal trouble. That. Was. It. That was all they had mentioned. I really didn’t think anything of it. I hadn’t heard anything from my friends back at Penn State, so I figured it wasn’t that big of a story here either. When I got back on Sunday night, there was barely anybody talking about. There was more talk of it on Monday, but on Tuesday and Wednesday the story blew up. It is absolutely mind-blowing to me that the media did a complete 180. Now the story is on every news channel 24/7 a day. There are trending topics on twitter, Facebook statuses, six different articles about it on Yahoo! alone. Most of it however, is negative. The media has completely blown everything out of proportion. For one, they are focused too much on Joe Paterno. Yes, Joe Paterno should have taken further action. Most of us can admit that. Joe himself even admitted that. He was fired because of it and in response Penn State students decided to start a peaceful protest. The peaceful protest soon turned into a riot as we all know. Students flipped a news media van and knocked down lamp posts. Most of the student’s who attended the riot however, were merely curious as to what was going on. The media of course, didn’t see it that way and instead focused again on the negativity. I have a feeling though, that even if the protest didn’t turn violent that they would try to spin the story anyway. It just doesn’t look good when 4,000 students are screaming someone’s name who the rest of the world see as a criminal. As far as companies revoking student’s internships and threatening to not support THON, I find it be ridiculous. The student body of a whole has nothing to do with this situation. This scandal has to do with the administrative staff and to be punished for their mistakes is just plain unfair. Especially for the children of THON, they suffer enough already. I think that at tomorrow’s game, our focus should be on the victims, the team, and on showing the world what it means to be a Penn Stater. Our attention should not be on the absence of Joepa. He will be sorrily missed but the truth is, he is not coming back. We need to keep moving forward in order for us to make it through these horrible times.

I am definitely in favor of legal immigration. I do not have any problem with it. There is nothing wrong with people coming over to our country to make a better life for themselves. They want better opportunities and more success and if they feel like this is the place to get that, then we should let them come. America is a melting pot. The immigrants in this country are what helps make us so diverse. Without them we would not be the same country.
As far as the debate on illegal immigration goes, I can see both sides of the argument. On one hand, I know that a lot of people complain that illegal immigrants are taking American’s jobs. I do not think that this is necessarily true. Many of the jobs that the illegal immigrants take are paying them next to nothing for the most part. The jobs that illegal immigrants take are often the ones that other Americans are unwilling to take. I do not see many Americans in this country (even in the recession) working in jobs such as mowing lawns or cleaning services. Americans are spoiled. They want high paying jobs with little hours and all the benefits. Illegal immigrants just want a chance at a new life. That chance starts out at those unwanted, labor intensive jobs.
On the other hand, I can see why illegal immigration is bad. For one, I do not think that letting just anyone into our country is a good idea. We have to take into account our country’s safety. Some illegal immigrants our in this country for other purposes then to make a better life for themselves. Terrorism is something that this country has seen on a first hand account. By letting just anybody in, we could be opening the doors for another terrorist attack. That is something that is a definite threat if we let every immigrant in. As far as the issue of regulating population goes, I do not think that it is bigger problem then the threat of terrorism. There has to be some level of safety in our country and if regulating who comes in and out of the country does that, then I am all for it. I also believe that illegal immigrants are being unfair to the immigrants that enter our country legally. Illegal immigrants give them a bad reputation. legal immigrants worked hard to get to where they are in this country. By sneaking into this country, illegal immigrants are completely disregarding all the hard work that legal immigrants have done. It also gives American’s the mindset that all immigrants do this, which is simply untrue. Due to illegal immigrants, the whole issue of immigration is now a controversy.

I do not think that hanging out with people of a different race makes you a poser at all. Before taking this class, I might have thought it would be true. However, since learning about the various stages of race, I can see that it is untrue. A person who is a stage six would have no problem hanging out with a group of people from a different race. In stage six, you are completley aware of race and you are comfortable with it. You would have not feel uncomfortable around other races. People from the outside looking in might view you as a poser (most likely someone from stage two or three), but you actually aren’t.It is the people who are stuck in stage two or three that would feel like they were being a poser if they hung out with someone of a different race. People in stage five would also be pretty comfortable hanging out with a group of people from a different race. Although, they might feel like they still have to seek approval from the other race to do so. There are various other reasons besides the stages that a person would want to hang out with someone of a different race then them. Chances are, if you are hanging out with someone who is different then you, you didn’t choose to hang out with them based on skin color. You would have chosen to hang out with them because you have similar interests. You might have similar personalities or share other commonalities. Hanging out with that person or group of people certainly does not make you a poser. Another reason you might get together with someone from a different race is because of where you grew up. If a white person grew up in a predominatly black neighborhood, then chances are they will have friends that are black. They aren’t trying to “act” black, they are simply hanging out with their friends. This does not make them a poser. Again, outsiders might view it that way because they simply do not know any better.
Coming from my own experiences, I have hung out with a lot of people from different races. I come from a town that is really diverse and so I had a ton of friends who had a different skin color other then my own. In fact, one of my best friends from elementary school was asian. That does not mean that I was trying to be asian though. I simply found that we had a lot in common and we quickly became friends. It has nothing to do with race and it has nothing to do with being a poser.

I would not call myself a “feminist,” despite the fact that I am a women. I do agree with ideas that they believe in, however. I do believe that there should be equal rights among the sexes. I don’t necessarily call myself a “feminist” because I feel like it is sometimes a negative thing. As we saw in the video, many people feel the same way. They used words such as bitchy, aggressive, hateful, and irrational to describe people who are feminists. Those are not the words that I would want people to call me, and so I do not identify myself with the word “feminist.” I believe that the media has a lot to do with this way of thinking. Our society is a very man-driven place to live in, and so of course the media picked up on that. The media helped create the misconstrued idea that all feminists are “man-haters,” even though we saw from the video that it is not true. The misconstrued definition has been a part of our society for so long, that it is very difficult to get people to understand the real meaning. That is why the idea has stuck around for so long.
As far as the people in the video go, I still think that they were a bit confused about the idea. When the question of “Are you a feminist?” was asked, not a lot of people responded with a solid yes. There were many people who said no. Some of those no’s belonged to women, which was sort of shocking to me. I somewhat expected more women to respond yes. Just like me, I believe that many of them might be afraid to identify themselves with the word “feminist” because of the way it is perceived in our society. They may identify with it off the record. However, with the additional pressure of being in front of a camera, they are less likely to. This was also true for the people who responded “ I don’t know,” when they were asked wether they were feminists or not. Many people were unsure and quite a few of them did not want to associate themselves with the word. Even after the true definition of the word was given, many people still did not identify themselves as a feminist or at least said they believed in the feminist movement.
Personally, even though I do not associate myself with the word “feminist,” I would like to. The word just has such a negative feedback to it, that I’m afraid to identify myself with it. If we can help rebuild the true meaning of being a feminist, then I think that everyone would be benefit from it.

I thought that the article “5 Scientific Reasons Your Idea of Happiness is Wrong,” was fairly interesting. I think that the last three points in particular really resonated with me. Point number three (Money Can Buy Happiness), is something that I think most of us have felt. The fact that we are so attached to our material possessions might just be our downfall. It not only drains our wallets, but our happiness. So many of us are constantly trying to keep up with the trends and impress our friends with our new belongings that it can lead us to be downright depressed. The fact that our memories lead us more to happiness speaks volume. Yes, sometimes they may cost a lot of money (think vacations, football tickets, concerts), but they will stay with us for a lifetime. We can think back to them at any time and feel that happiness all over again. To feel happiness with our material possessions, we have to replace them with newer and better ones.
The next point that I found interesting was number two: freedom of choices. The fact that there are so many sometimes makes me feel overwhelmed and quite frankly, rarely happy. It only leads me (and many others) to mass confusion and indecisiveness. Those choices can especially make us feel unhappy if we happen to chose the wrong one. Big decisions such as what college you go to, what career you choose, who you decide to marry or date, etc, can make you feel downright miserable. Those choices in particular can make you unhappy since they are big life decisions. It’s not a small decision such as choosing what you want to eat for breakfast that day, it is a decision that will effect you everyday for the rest of your life. Sometimes it can even make you miserable to look back at the decisions that you chose. We sometimes sit and forever wonder if we chose the right path or made the right choice. It can literally kill us from the inside out and it definitely doesn’t lead to happiness.
The last point that I found interesting was point number one: Treating Happiness as a Goal is Bad News. I can definitely relate to this. I always feel like we should stop expecting to be happy. That can really only lead to disappointment, especially if things don’t always go your way. If you expect the worst, you will most likely feel happier with the way that things go. Expecting the worst might make you feel miserable and worried for a little while, but the end result can make you feel twice as happy. Happiness as a goal just isn’t practical.