en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/2440686 Comments by britt_92 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231908300 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. Sat, 3 Dec 2011 00:44:33 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231908300 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231896101 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. Sat, 3 Dec 2011 00:07:07 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231896101 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231895586 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. Sat, 3 Dec 2011 00:05:34 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231895586 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231894937 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. Sat, 3 Dec 2011 00:03:33 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-83/#IDComment231894937 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/10/voices-from-the-classroom-71/#IDComment223625655 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. Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:22:43 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/10/voices-from-the-classroom-71/#IDComment223625655 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/10/voices-from-the-classroom-73/#IDComment220661339 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. Sat, 12 Nov 2011 01:21:18 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/10/voices-from-the-classroom-73/#IDComment220661339 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/27/voices-from-the-classroom-55/#IDComment215060734 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. Tue, 1 Nov 2011 00:58:22 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/27/voices-from-the-classroom-55/#IDComment215060734 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/20/voices-from-the-classroom-51/#IDComment213148807 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. Thu, 27 Oct 2011 21:37:16 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/20/voices-from-the-classroom-51/#IDComment213148807 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/16/what-is-feminism/#IDComment210312400 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. Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:35:36 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/16/what-is-feminism/#IDComment210312400 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/11/blog-about-happiness-for-soc-119-and-learn-something-useful/#IDComment207231326 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. Fri, 14 Oct 2011 02:26:45 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/11/blog-about-happiness-for-soc-119-and-learn-something-useful/#IDComment207231326 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/06/voices-from-the-classroom-40/#IDComment204111824 Women are not “forced” to wear short skirts and super high heels. That is a decision that they make on their own. Personally, when I go out, I usually do not wear something like that. Usually I wear a pair of jeans and a nice shirt. I for one, would never wear a short dress or heels in the winter, especially in State College. It just isn’t practical. I can understand why other girls would want to dress that way though. For one, I it makes us girls feel more attractive. Girls are more likely to gain the attention from guys if they dress a certain way. Dressing up is also a part of “girl culture.” Women love to go shopping and get their hair and nails done. We like to look presentable because it not only makes us look good, it makes us feel good too. It is also the expectation that guys have of us. Guys are expecting women to dress a certain way when we go out to the bar. If a girl is dressed in sweatpants at the bar, chances are not many guys would walk up to her. Girls don’t just dress up for themselves, they dress up for guys too. The media is also influencing the way that we dress. If all the celebrities in magazines were dressing more conservatively, then chances are so would other women. Women clearly don’t wear the clothes for comfort either. If we did, you would see more girls wearing heels and dresses to class. We don’t though, and there is a reason for that. Those types of clothes weren’t made to be comfortable. They were made for a simple reason, to attract the opposite sex. Guys on the other hand, do not necessarily have to look good. I believe a big part of this has to do with their mindset. Guys do not have to look good because they don’t believe that they have to look good. Girls have it in their mind that they must look good always but guys don’t have this notion. In there minds, it is the girls responsibility to look good. I do think that guys do have a certain standard that they have to meet however. A guy can go out in jeans in a t-shirt however, he can’t go out in his sweatpants or pajamas. That’s not to say that just because the girls wear dresses and heels that a guy has to go to the bar in a tux. That just would not be expected of them. Just as guys expect girls to dress up, girls expect guys to do the opposite.There is definitely a different standard when it comes to guys and girls. Thu, 6 Oct 2011 23:25:35 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/06/voices-from-the-classroom-40/#IDComment204111824 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/27/voices-from-the-classroom-21/#IDComment200531214 I think that stereotypes have a lot to do with the fact that women are portrayed as innocent. In society, we traditionally view women this way. We see most women as mothers or potential mothers. They are the “caregivers” of our society and are more nurturing and loving then men. You would not picture your own mother as a criminal and that’s how the rest of society views women in today’s world. We do not see women as people who are capable of carrying out a crime. Society sees women as gentle and caring, characteristics that we do not associate with criminals. Our first reaction to a women attempting to get a locked bike would not be to call the police right away. Like the man in the video, someone would most likely go over to her and help her out. That is because our society views it as the right thing to do. Most people would not even question it, especially men. In our society there is a stereotype that women are way more dependent on men. Although this stereotype has lessened over the years, it is still ingrained in many people’s minds. That is why that man chose to help the women steal the bike. Men think that it is their “responsibility” to be there for women. In class we looked at some statistics on how many crimes women commit a year. The number is very low. I can’t help but think it is because many of them are simply not being reported. I am sure that many petty crimes (like the women stealing the bike) go without being reported. The fact that they go unreported could also contribute to the fact that women are viewed as innocent. There simply isn’t enough statistical evidence to prove otherwise. As far as race goes, it is true that black and Hispanics are more likely to get arrested. We saw that in the statistics Sam showed us the other day. The more “innocent” races on the other hand (whites and aAsians) seem to not have this big of a problem. As to why they are viewed as more innocent, I think that it is a bit more complicated. There is obviously still some form of discrimination still going on in our legal system. Especially since we have seen the statistics. Maybe stereotyping has something to do with it. It is ingrained in many people’s minds that whites and Asians are more “innocent”, even though we know this isn’t true. Maybe more white and Asian crimes have just gone unreported and that is why the statistics are so high for the other races. Whatever the reason is, it certainly needs to end. Wed, 28 Sep 2011 22:28:12 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/27/voices-from-the-classroom-21/#IDComment200531214 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/20/everyone-respond-to-this/#IDComment197058040 Having looked through all of the videos, there were two in particular that stood out to me. One of them was Clorene. There were several things that I liked about her video. For one, I liked that Clorene knew what she needed to do to improve her business. She may not have the resources to get her there, but she had a certain direction that she wanted to go in. Clorene knew up front that she needed her own logo. She knew that she had to get cheaper materials. She knew that she needed better equipment, such as a better silk screener. Clorene also realized that she needed more staff since she had to turn do larger orders. She simply couldn’t keep up. The only thing that I did not like about the video was the lack of design on her t-shirts and handbags. Clorene is an amazing seamstress. There is absolutely no questioning that. What I think she lacks is the ability to design. I understand that some of her orders are for businesses, and so she has to make shirts according to their wants and tastes. However, if she wants to sell her products in the global market, she has to make them more interesting and special. I don’t think that anyone here in the United States would buy a ten dollar plain t-shirt. For us to shell out that kind of money, it needs to be something that would be really special or unique. The other video that stood out to me was Anaes. Anaes creates handbags. There were several things that I think she could improve upon. I agree with Sam in saying that the handles of the bags need to be stronger. People want things that are quality made and will last them a long time, especially in this economy. If the handbag looks like it won’t last or will break, people will walk right past them without a second thought. I also agree that there needs to be more pockets placed on the inside of the handbags. I know that this is something that people look for when they buy a handbag. They might be less likely to purchase the bag if there aren’t pockets in it. There are also two things in particular that I like about Anaes’s business. For one, I like that she asked a local artist to help design some of her handbags. This makes the product more unique. Unlike Clorene, Anaes’s products have some sort of design to it that will appeal to more people. I also like that everything about her business is made locally. Every step of the process in making the bags is local which is a huge selling point. Thu, 22 Sep 2011 23:52:32 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/20/everyone-respond-to-this/#IDComment197058040 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/13/voices-from-the-classroom-9/#IDComment193851984 I am an education and public policy major, so i have devoted a lot of my time to analyzing the different factors of student achievement rates. Money does have an impact on how well you do in school and on the SAT’s however, it does not have as big as an impact as one might think. Obviously if you have the money to hire a private tutor or have private lessons, you will do better on the SAT’s and in school. If you attended a very wealthy school, you might also do better on the SAT’s. However, it still is not the number one predictor of student achievement. Money can only get you so far. The actual number one factor for predicting if you’re going to do well on the SAT’s and in school is your home life. I’m not just talking about the socioeconomic background you come from. That is an entirely separate issue. When I talk about home life, I am talking about things such as how you complete your homework. When you were younger and in elementary school, did you do your homework on your own or did your parent or guardian sit down and guide you through it? If you did your homework on your own without help, you will probably have a lower SAT score then someone who had help with it. It is the reinforcement of the homework and the unconditional support of your parents that really matters. It is what really predicts how well you will score on the test. Where you do your homework at home can also be a predictor of how well you preform on the SAT’s. Do you do your homework in front of the television or do you complete your homework at a desk in your room? It is things like this that you carry on through out your school years and really prove how well you will actually do. Wether or not your parents are knowledgable on the subjects you are learning in school can also predict how well you will do on the SAT’s. If your parents help you with your homework, they have to be able to understand what you are really learning. These are the things that really have an impact on your SAT scores. They may seem small and insignificant, but they are proven to have the biggest impact. Obviously money does play a part in this. If your parents are willing to help you with your homework, then they must have a good education (something you need money to get). It does not directly effect your scores though. Home life still has a bigger impact on your scores then money ever will. Thu, 15 Sep 2011 22:46:29 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/13/voices-from-the-classroom-9/#IDComment193851984 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/01/why-do-you-follow-any-religion-at-all/#IDComment190498240 I don’t really know if anyone really chooses their own religion. I feel like the older you get, the more chances you have to explore that aspect of your life. Growing up, I did not have a say in what religion i wanted to follow. That decision was made by my parents. So for example, both of my parents were raised Roman Catholic. They decided to stick with that particular religion their entire lives and in turn, I too was raised a Roman Catholic. I had to attend Sunday school from kindergarten until I was in ninth grade. I didn’t really like it and I remember I always put up a huge fight about going to Sunday school as well as mass. When I finally graduated from Sunday school in the ninth grade, I really took a step back and asked myself wether or not I wanted to continue practicing my religion. It took me until my freshmen year in college to figure out what I wanted to believe in. I decided to remain a Roman Catholic, but I decided to pick and choose what I believed in within that religion. So for example, I decided to no longer attend church. I never liked going and I felt closer to God out in the real world then inside of the church. So I believe that you do chose your own religion to some degree. When you are younger, you sort of have to go along with what your parents want you to believe. You don’t know any better. However, once you brake away from your parents you can start to form your own opinions on the religion that you follow. As to why people bother following a religion at all, I feel like it gives them a chance to be closer to a higher power. It guarantees that someone is always looking over them. It guarantees them that even when all else fails, religion will be the one thing that will always be consistent in their lives. It gives them hope that they are not alone in the world no matter how alone they really might be. For many, it gives them a chance to not only connect spiritually with God (or whatever you believe in) but to also connect with other people who believe in the same thing. Religion is something that guides people and it gives the answers to many of lives unanswered questions. For many, it is just their way of life. Like I stated above, many people don’t really “choose” their religion. Those people that bother following religion are most likely doing so because their parents did so also. It is the invisible strings that really decide for us. Wed, 7 Sep 2011 00:26:57 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/01/why-do-you-follow-any-religion-at-all/#IDComment190498240 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/08/26/what-do-you-want-to-know-before-its-all-over/#IDComment189154966 What do I want to know before it’s all over? That is a very hard question to answer, mainly because I have so many! Sociology 119 has already opened my eyes and put things into a different perspective for me. The question that I would definitely want answered though is: why do certain forms of “segregation” still exist today? What I mean by segregation is, why people of the same race or religion drawn to each other? Why don’t more people branch out and hang out with people of a different background then them? For example, I attended a high school in central New Jersey. I lived in a very diverse neighborhood, and so naturally the school that I attended was also very diverse. Diversity was something that my school thrived on and was proud of.We had students from many different races and religions. However, when looking around the lunchroom, you could see that wasn’t necessarily true. It was true that we had students of various different cultures. However, none of them really seemed to interact with each other. The white people sat at one table, the middle eastern people sat at another table, the black people sat at another table, etc. It was clear that there was a real division happening. That is not to say that people never interacted or associated with people of a different culture then them, it just didn’t seem as common. Even in the classrooms you could see that people separated themselves by race or religion. There would be little sections or groups (much like Soc. 119) where people would sit with other people of the same culture or background. Looking back at it now, it didn’t seem like a really big deal. It seemed to be the everyday norm and nobody really questioned it. However, since we discussed it in class a little bit, I have began to notice it more and more. Even here on campus it is pretty common thing. I see it almost everyday as I walk to class. People tend to walk with other students of the same race or religion. In classes (even in Soc. 119!) people tend to sit with people who have the same background as them. In the dining halls the same thing seems to happen. I’m even guessing at this weekend’s football game that students will sit with people of the same race or religion as them! That is not to say that people here don’t associate with others of a different cultural background then them. Just like my high school, it seems to be the norm around here. People of the same race or religion just seem to be drawn to each other. Fri, 2 Sep 2011 22:07:39 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/08/26/what-do-you-want-to-know-before-its-all-over/#IDComment189154966 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/what-americans-fear/#IDComment144965904 Watching this video certainly inflicted some fears and concerns in me. I did not realize that a lot of things that were stated in the video had actually happened. I think that anyone who watched this video, no matter what race or religion, would feel at least feel intimidated by it. When terms such as “death to America” and “behead those who insult the Allah,” it is hard not to. Living in the United States, we have almost been sheltered by much of what is going on in other countries around the world. When September 11th happened, it was kind of a wake up call for many Americans to realize that terrorism was a real thing and it was happening to our country. It suddenly became something that Americans feared and worried about on a daily basis. It is still something that Americans fear (although this has lessened over the years), especially since some of these people are inside the country (as seen in the video). And it is especially hard when we hear of smaller scale terrorism plots on the news (such as last years Time Square bomber). While it is understandable that many Americans would find this video to be disturbing, I also think that it is important to realize that this video provokes many of the fears that we have. It is a very one sided video. It in no way reflects the feelings of all Muslims. Many of the Muslims that are depicted in the video reflect the extremists of the religion. I think that it is fair to say that if someone outside our class had seen this video, they may have misinterpreted it. They may have had the notion that all Muslims are like this, even though we know that it is only a small (and radical) group of people. I feel like many Americans tend to think that all Muslims have something against the United States, even though we know that it is simply untrue. They are not the face of every Muslim person, even though to some Americans it can feel like that. Fri, 22 Apr 2011 01:11:40 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/what-americans-fear/#IDComment144965904 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/11/the-cost-of-empire-soc-001-blog/#IDComment143237877 I found this video to be very interesting, especially since it touched upon many of the topics we discussed on Wednesday. I think that the use of the term “empire” was fairly accurate. We have streached our military presence to a huge amount of countries and our military budget has increased for the first time since 2009. These things can be viewed in both a positive and negative light. On the positive side, our military spending and presence has caused us to be one of the most influential countries in the world. It also gives the United States citizens a real sense of security. Having military bases in so many places can also give other countries the sense that you are a powerful country and that you will not mess around if a conflict should arise. On the other hand, there are several negative aspects to our military. For one, our country is in serious debt yet, we continue to spend millions on unnecessary military bases. As stated in the video, the United States has military bases all over the world. Some of them are completeley unnecessary, considering that we are not in conflict with most of those countries. The hundreds of military bases are just another costly way to expand the “empire.” Some of those countries are even fighting back, like the country of Ecuador. The president of Ecuador claimed that he wanted to close the military base there. It served no purpose to the United States nor to the country of Ecuador, so it made little sense to keep it around. If the United States cut some of the bases, it might help the economy a little bit. I do believe that it is extremley important to have a presence in other countries. However, I do not think that you have to have hundreds of military bases to do that. It is obvious why the United States does it, so they can show off how powerful and influential they are. With our economy the way it is, it makes sense to cut spending towards these bases, at least for a while. Fri, 15 Apr 2011 22:35:26 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/11/the-cost-of-empire-soc-001-blog/#IDComment143237877 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/03/women-and-war/#IDComment141046923 I think that this video really brings attention to the fact that women contribute way more to war then the media portrays them to. The media, as the speaker says, does not truly capture the feelings and the emotions that are going through your mind when you are in a war zone. When people die, the media portrays them as “casualties” instead of civilians. They make them seem like they are just another ordinary person who died. They are so much more then that though. Like the video states, almost 75 percent of the population that is killed are women and children. These are not just any old people. They could be your mother, your child, or your sister. Many people do not see just how much women contribute to war. They are what keeps society going. They are the ones making sure that their families are safe and provided for. They are the ones making sure that their children are going to school on time despite being in the midst of war. Without women, everything would fall apart. Society would collapse. Even though you may not be fighting on the front lines of war, life still goes on. People are not sitting in their homes waiting for the next air raid to come. There are things that still have to get done such as school work, laundry, cooking, etc. The world just does not stop when a war overcomes a country. People still need to push through their daily lives as normally as they can. As the speaker says, there is two sides to war. One is combat fighting and the other is fighting to get through everyday life despite the circumstances. I think that the most powerful part was at the end of her speech, when she was talking about the women and her sons. She said that she hopes her sons will not have hatred in their hearts and seek revenge one day that could possibly start another war. Unfortunately, the invisible strings are influencing us everywhere and if their fathers took part in the war, then there is a greater chance that they might be seeking revenge in a future war. Fri, 8 Apr 2011 17:33:37 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/03/women-and-war/#IDComment141046923 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/23/managing-crowds/#IDComment138895457 I found this article to be very interesting, especially since it focused on the disaster in Japan. It was a more recent event to focus on the subject of managing crowds. In the readings that we had to do, there was a particular article that had to do with fear. It gave the example of the September 11th attack on the World’s Trade Center. People acted calm despite what was happening. They even went as far as to help each other out. Most people would have expected much more mass panic and chaos, but there was none. When the towers collapsed, there really was nothing that could be done to manage the crowd. It was unexpected, and so there really was no evacuation plan or precautions that the crowd could take. With the disaster in Japan, there was some warning. Because of the earthquake, there was instant warnings of a tsunami approaching. Tsunamis are sort of like the afterthought of an earthquake. Many crowds of people did try to evacuate to higher grounds, however for many it was too late. Then the nuclear reactors went off and mass evacuations on the area had to begin. The crowd however, is not in charge of these evacuations. They must go along with what the government wants. It is kind of unnerving to know that you are under their control. It can even be confusing and dangerous. Like the article states, mass people were being evacuated across a small bridge in two different directions. Although most of the people were obviously shaken from these turn of events, they did not panic. It is best for the crowd to evacuate however, the government needs to come up with an efficient way to move people out of the area fast and efficiently. For the situation in Japan, I really do not think that free riding off people was a particular problem. Everyone in the nuclear reactor area had to evacuate. There was really no exceptions. They all had to participate in the evacuation plans. Managing people will always be a hard task, however with proper preparations it can go off without a hitch. Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:03:22 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/23/managing-crowds/#IDComment138895457