In the age of political correctness, it is difficult to have one clearly stated definition for what racism is. The most appropriate definition I can give to it is anything that can be interpreted as offensive based on race. I can also say that motive plays a big role in what can be interpreted as racism. If the intent behind a statement is to be harmful or insulting towards another than and comment or derogatory statement is made in reference to race then that can be interpreted as races.
Personally, when it comes to race I am not easily offended, I try to take a persons’ statements in the most positive context. In saying that while I am not easily offended I have been victim of racism. Last February there was a white guy who I shared a class he would rarely ever speak to me but this month he every time he saw me he would tell me happy black history month. On march 1st I was sitting down in a common area studying for an exam and he comes up to me and ask me if I feel sad. I replied no and ask him why should I be sad and he responded because black history month is over. He then asked me how did I celebrate by drink some koolaid, and eating watermelon and fried chicken? I responded no and went back to studying. The next day my self the guy and a few other students arrived at class together. This guy was having a conversation with another student. The student makes a remark that he believed that 80 percent of college students are retarded. The white guy looks around the room and begins to count 1, 2, 3... He gets to me and says 3/5 and turns to the guy and continues to speak. I really wanted to flip out on him at that moment but I gathered my thoughts said a little prayer and then responded to his very ignorant joke. ‘
I believe that racism does exist, but I believe that people can be both overly sensitive and overly insensitive which contributes to the ambiguity of the definition. The question that I consider is what should we be focused on, what is racism or how do we move past racism. How to move past racism is a question that I often ponder. As an individual you can do but so much but how can an individual effect change in the world? How can the world change from a place that is so dependent on establishing divisions between people move forward and no longer be racist? Will it only occur when all people look the same decades after our children’s children have passed on? Fortunately, enough individuals are making he effort to change the world a little at a time

I do not often use racial labels or signifiers in my conversations. I try to be as unbiased in my speech as possible so unless it is absolutely necessary that I do not comment on a person's race or gender. I do not add those details I do not believe that race and gender are details they are relevant to most stories, or recollects of a day. Like same mentioned in class I do believe that there is a time and a place for using racial and gender signifiers. I believe that most of the time when people use racial labels they do not intend that they sound or come across to people as racist. I believe that they are used mostly as a way to paint a better picture of the event. We as human being want to be able to convey and our points and deliver an image when telling a story about the events of the our days that going to allow others to feel as though they are right in the moment with us.
I do however notice a lot when people use racial labels in their stories unnecessarily. I often think to myself gee I wonder what relevance that has to the story but I rarely say anything. People, I’m sure unintentionally, have bad habits of attaching racial labels in stories to prove stereotypes or generalization that previously held.
I would love to see a world where race and gender were not so important that when recalling a story a person feels it subconsciously necessary to mention or emphasize either one of those characteristics. I the current shape of not only our society but the world it may not be necessary but it is very common. The interesting thing about it is that it is common across all gender, race, class, age lines which makes me think it is a human occurrence and not just a western commonality. So because it is so common does it serve a legitimate purpose? If so what is besides painting a picture for the listener to better imagine a recollection, or to distinguish between individuals? I also wonder of the use of racial labels has declined or increased over time? It would make sense that prior to emigration and immigration the need for racial labels did not exit or did it? What seems to be a consist thing within various civilizations and societies is division and making a clear and obvious note of the division. Maybe there is no escape from the use of racial signifiers and labels maybe the most one can hope for is that these things will only be used when necessary and will not be attached to negative generalizations and stereotypes.

So then i brings up the question what is the sociological impact of porn. is there a correlation between the rise in homosexual women and increase of popularity of porn. A possible connection can be made there. Some lesbian women may not be fully attracted of satisifed by another women but seek the intamacy and connection as well as respect for space and person that the find in another women. Most men learn about sex from other men and therefore will find it difficult to please a women and most women feel as though because there is a belief that men are by nature more expirenced with sex that they know what they are doing. So no matter what is going on to that women she may feel that if she disagrees with it there is something wrong with her. I'm not really sure how to fully attack this question I feel that the impact of the porn industry is huge and far more complex than most people think or care to admit. I feel that porn is a powerful tool in the on going struggle with the battle between the sexes.

I personally think that the porn industry can be toxic to male female relationships as far as sex and intamacy goes because it is entirely fantsy based and skewed through the lense of a director. There is absoultely no explantion or regard for the other individual. The fantasies are acted out with two basic roles giver and reciever or pleased and pleaser. There are very rare occasions where both people are seemingly forfilled in a encounter. what is interesting is that because, like was mentioned in lecture, most women learn there sexual roles via porn, there is an unspoken inferment that many women have that they are not supposed to be catered to in the bed room. Many women feel that if they do enjoy sex or making love that they are dirty or that society will look down on them in some way. Or women feel that something maybe wrong with them becasue the do not enjoy the fast paced wham bam thank you may intercourse.

in some ways i don't believe that a in a women centered world the porn industry would even exist,but it certanly would not exist with women being subserviant or degraded in any way. In a female centered world I would agree with what was metioned in ecture that majority of it would be slow with a heavy emphasis on fourplay. But every one is an individual and has different interests and triggers for her sex drive and I blieve that there would more of an emphasis placed on a variety of fantsies. Where male centered porn there is a script that is very consisted and predictiable in its outcome ( forgive the pun) female centered porn would have different outcomes. Like was mentiond in many lectures females and males are very different an view sexuality and the act of sex and intamcy differently. As a result of this fudamental difference in perception of sex and connection to another person female centered porn would not necessarily end with penatration and ejaculation.

part 3) Prior to today’s class I never really thought about which philosophy applied most to not only my life but everyone. I believe in free will has the greatest influence. I think that an individual’s choices will prompt outcomes. Even if a person choose to do absolutely nothing their choice in doing nothing will initiate a series of events. If a person chooses to take charge of their life they will have a greater chance of prompting outcomes that are not only more favorable to them but also that will have outcomes more similar to their dreams and goals. In my own life I follow the philosophy of free will. I try to always make decisions that will hopefully have a favorable outcome, and even if the initial outcome isn’t great I believe that the overall effect will be positive. Everyone obviously has the choice to believe whatever they want but I find comfort in being able to have a little control in life.

A personality type that is more optimistic will probably be more likely to believe in free will because they are more outgoing by nature. This type of person feels as though they have more control over their future and thus the outcome of their lives. Free will allows a certain amount of control and gives unlimited possibility to a future. That type of philosophy says nothing positive or negative will happen without a person prompting it by some action. This type of philosophy may be scary for a pessimist because they may feel too much pressure to make the “right” choices in life in order to have the best outcome. A optimist will just make any decision feeling that all outcomes will be to their overall benefit. An optimist could definitely believe in determinism especially if they are very confident and have a lot of positive things happening in their lives.

Do you think that determinism or free will shapes people’s lives more and why?
I believe that in order to believe in one, it may mean that you can't believe in the other because the philosophies are opposite of one another. I feel that it may be personality dependent whether or not to believe in one over the other. A personality type who is more pessimistic is probably more likely to have a believe system that is more similar to determinism. They may use determinism to explain the short comings and disappointments that may occur in life. Many pessimists tend to feel that they have less control over the outcome of their lives. So that philosophy will give them a perfect way to explain negative outcomes and not blame their selves. Pessimist might also use the philosophy of determinism to possibly give themselves a reason not to try.

part 3) Or in cases where the homosexual, bisexual, or questioning individual remains in the relationship but both partners are unfulfilled because there are aspects of themselves as individual and as couple that are not fully explored. I do believe that people try to choose what they are attracted to but, more often than not are unsuccessful in there efforts. I do believe that people have the ability to choose there gender because gender is more of a behavioral role and a societal construct rather than biologically driven. I do not believe that a person in that case of sexual orientation can successfully choose because in the end a person wants what they want.

Part 2)I think another way to ask the question would be to say how do you think that sex, gender, and sexual orientation are connected? And are they fluid and able to be manipulated or static and unchangeable. If you look at the question from that stand point I argue that choosing ones sex is not fully possible. Negating recent medical and technological advances which makes it possible for parents to choose the sex of their unborn infant. Even for a trans gender or transsexual person that undergoes sexual reassignment surgery because He/she believes that they were born in the wrong body. They cannot ever change the fact that innately they once born as either a male or female and on some level they will always be what they were born as. I believe that it is possible to make the effort to choose attraction or sexual orientation. Which is evident from many cases of people marrying and having children with a person of the opposite sex then later leaving their long term spouse for a same sex partner.