When we first started to hear about the “lifers” both from Sam and Laurie, I really had a hard time grasping how these could be good people after convicting cold blooded murder? Could they really get a positive feeling by being around them, or feel that they deserve to someday possibly get acceptance? We talked about it in our discussion group as well and many people felt the same way as I did. I mean these guys committed (sometimes brutal) murder and I couldn’t find a way to look past that detail.

I think part of my issue with murder is that my father’s side of the family has experience of losing a loved one in that way. When my dad was only in middle school, his uncle (or my grandfather’s brother) was shot 42 times by an employee he had recently laid off. Out of nowhere the man showed up at the workplace, where he has just been dismissed from a few days prior, and let loose with a gun. I didn’t find out about this event for a very long time, but once I did it was easy to notice that each member of his family was affected emotionally when the name Shelton (the relative who was killed) was brought up. As a result of this I began to look at people who could murder as soulless, evil, individuals who had no reason being able to live thereafter. I could never personally imagine taking the life of another person, especially when it wouldn’t even be a matter of self defense.

It’s very interesting though, to hear from one of these murderers, their real life experiences, thoughts, and feelings. I still believe that there are plenty of horrible people in prisons who feel no wrong about how within seconds they changed the lives of dozens of people by ending the life of another individual; but, maybe there is a chance that some of them are not that different from you or me after all. Yes they committed a crime. Yes they deserve to take the consequences for their behavior. But yes.. they are living, breathing humans who still have sincere feelings? It is an interesting idea to ponder.

That being said, I still feel they should serve life in order to fully understand that what they did was inexcusable, but it is possible to see- this prisoner especially- as being an ok guy, who feels remorse for what he did. He shows that even though they may have committed a horrible crime or crimes, many people locked up still hold one important human behavior: compassion. This is weird to think about because compassion is the last thing you would associate a murderer as having, but as he stated, it is seen on a daily basis within the barb wire fences. And it makes me think: Is there is a chance they show more compassion to each other knowing they will be together until they die, than a number of other “not so nice” human beings show on the outside? A clean record does not make anyone more likely to feel things such as compassion or regret or desire to be forgiven.

I really appreciate this man showing us a different perspective because I had a hard time accepting them as “good” people by hearing about it from others alone. It may just be possible after all.

Interestingly enough, many people say guys do not give a crap about conforming to what others see as attractive or normal. But, when it comes down to it, I’m sure they don’t like being judged for being too short or too fat, just as much as girls don’t like being judged for being too flat-chested or too curvy. At the same time, I agree with you that it is much more apparent with women, even if it does exist in males as well. The main difference I get from the whole situation and question brought up is that women get conformance shoved in their face more directly through ads, celebrities, guys’ opinions, etc. For males it’s almost more as if they want to conform for themselves or for extra attention without being told directly that they need to.

On that note, I am a female, but I’ve always found myself being surrounded with numerous guy friends over having a big group of girl friends. Since I am around all the time and so close with all of them, they do not hold back in saying their opinions about different girls in our high school or now in college, or about people we pass on the street. Sometimes it is troubling to hear how exact, degrading, or judgmental they can be. I’m fairly comfortable with myself and receive positive attention from people, but even that being said, it still does make me think, “well what are they saying about me when I’m not here..” After awhile you cannot help but think how can I improve myself to make sure it isn’t me that other groups of guys are talking about. The same goes for when you are watching a movie involving an actress who is “normal” sized and looking and people mention about how “she’s not what they expect a star to look,” or “why wouldn’t they choose someone more attractive like Megan Fox.” These little thoughts and statements about flaws in a certain female are so common in our everyday lives.

That is where I see a small line drawn. It would be dishonest to say that girls don’t mention a guy being a little chunky or not as attractive as someone else, but it’s much more subtle and private. I’ve never encountered a girl walk up to a guy and tell him he’s “beat and fat”, but I have seen in my personal experience that very line said to one of my larger girl friends. I just asked my friend Pete about this as I’m typing and he even said that for him its more when he hears someone say how good looking another guy is, it makes him want to work out more and have a chance of getting to his level. It’s an idea of conformance because you personally want to improve yourself vs. conformance to stop people from talking about your flaws.

This is the main difference for me, but it is no doubt in my mind that guys feel the need to conform whether they show it always or not.

I think that this is a very controversial game; however, I am going to take a different approach to my response and talk about how I unfortunately think it may be hard to ban. My personal opinion as a female is that it should be, because rape should never be looked at as victory or “winning”. It is twisted and as the one woman anchor stated, “it moralizes rape and sexual harassment.” This should never be the case. But, this alone may not be a strong enough argument for why games such as these are wrong for society’s recreational gaming.

As seen in the video even a female named Lucy in England was seen playing and stated she wanted to try it for the fact it was controversial. By being so contentious there is a good chance it will gain a lot of attention from people for the basics of their curiosity. And people will argue that playing a risqué game like this does not mean people will carry over its ideas to the real world. But what if it does? As for what Sam mentioned about this being a way for pedophiles to get their fix, I do not feel that’s the case. In my mind, it will only make things worse.

The difficulty here comes from reality that many of the video games existing today have with it a degree of violence. While I am not a gamer myself, my little brother is an avid one and I see him play from time to time. Whether it deals with hijacking cars in Grand Theft Auto, or the violence associated with wartime in call of duty, gamers see violence on almost a daily basis. I fear that if they will hit the argument that if one type of violence is banned, all should be, and it is unlikely since the world of video games would collapse as we know it. Going further than just the violence factor associated with rape, people could also argue that other games deal with sexuality such as Fable 2 where you can have sex with prostitutes. You are in a way taking advantage of women in this situation as well. So some may argue this game is not much worse than others, and therefore deserves to stay. I personally feel very different on the matter.

To me, there is a fine line to what is ok in the gaming community, and already it has stepped over that boundary. I actually had to write a paper on this last year and I feel that with the younger and younger generations getting involved, the gaming regulation commission needs to intensify their rules. Parents as well need to be very careful in what is getting into the hands of their middle school and younger children. With the specific game plot shown in the clip, I would hope no parent would buy this for their child regardless of what age, but you never know. The idea is twisted, but it has potential to catch on, which is frightening.

Twisted. Unnecessary. Inappropriate. That is how I would describe the topic for this post. It’s just too unfortunate that people are actually enjoying this game, and that it passed in the first place.

To start off I will say that I am very distinctly white (Blonde hair, blue eyes, light skin, etc. ). That being said, although I am white, I can get some sense of what you are experiencing and struggling with. I personally get confused on how to group people, and that is without trying to figure out which team I’m on myself. And your situation gets even more complex because you do not look as much like the group you have always associated yourself with. It might have been a little easier if you still grew up with your mother and associated with being Hispanic, but had darker skin so that people understood by looking at you.

Sam mentioned in class that for the purposes of keeping things simple enough for discussion he would keep things separated as the black/ brown team vs. the white team. I have a hard time accepting this decision because I think that Asians and Indians have customs and lifestyles much different than Hispanics and Blacks. Truthfully, they all have factors that make them different from each of the others and therefore it’s troubling to lump them all together. It seems to me that there should be some slightly more complex method of separating the groups than simply two groups (white and black/brown.) And maybe it is just my view, but I feel like a lot of the issues we reference to the black/brown team end up being more about simply the black team. As I think about this more I wonder if maybe it would make things easier if we simply said the white vs. minority team. Just a thought.

However, going back to the video post, I really feel that for mixed people the decision on who to associate with is a personal choice. If you have one white and one Hispanic parent, but grow up and feel more Hispanic, than that is the way you should side, regardless of what your external appearance hints at. The same would go for a half black, half white person who looks dark but grows up in a predominantly white atmosphere, and therefore would side with white over black. To me, this also means that mixed individuals can switch their association if they feel so inclined to do so at one point in their life. But that being said, having a few people, such as Sam, assuming your white, does not mean you should instantly question what you’ve grown up as.

Racial identity. It’s a complex thing. It is a personal matter. And it is one in which people have the potential to evolve or entirely change their views about. Besides, outside of the class, you really don’t have to choose a side, so I wouldn’t spend too much time fretting over it.

This blog post really stuck out to me when Sam mentioned that maybe we should consider this information if we someday end up visiting the beautiful beaches for a trip. What an interesting topic. I have visited Hawaii for a family vacation but just thought of it as a nice place to get away and enjoy some relaxation and sunshine. It never even caught my mind that the indigenous looking people we constantly passed while there were not always Americans, and were not necessarily being treated the way they deserved.

I myself, just as many others I’m sure, had failed to even consider the fact that Hawaiians were once their own indigenous group. You just assume that they have always been considered a part of the United States of America. Who would have thought, Hawaii maybe did not want to become the 50th state. But after looking up some information, it becomes known that their fate started out when the Kingdom was overthrown by American (and some European) businessmen in 1893. From there it became an independent republic but eventually was annexed by the United States as a territory in 1898. Hawaii then finally became considered a state in 1959.

This all happened far before my lifetime, and unfortunately as Sam mentioned it gets talked about even less then the unjust put upon Native Americans. As the article stated Native Hawaiians face constants struggles. On average Native Hawaiians earn less money, live shorter lives, and go to jail more often. Does this sound familiar? It sounds a lot to me like what we hear about Native Americans in class lecture. But at least Native Americans have received small amounts of help from the United States government. After hearing this I cannot understand why the Native Hawaiians would not receive recognition as the Native Americans and Native Alaskans. Although it does not completely take back what happened, they at least deserve some compensation, including land and money.

At first I thought, why now is there an article talking about the Native Hawaiians struggles, when I have almost never heard about this topic previously. Then as I read on it mentioned a final vote occurring, as well as mentioning Obama. It interesting that it took a Hawaiian born president to take office for this issue to finally gain some progress. One thing that hit me hard was some of the statistics found in Niesse’s article. The numbers in the article don’t lie, and it appears that this group is in need of serious help. They account for almost 28% of homelessness in Hawaii, why only accounting for 20% the total population. Giving them land and money could help the members of this group who are struggling have a chance at improving their lives.

So as for the question mentioned, "ever think of them?"
I guess the answer for me would unfortunately have to be: before this article and post, not really.

I have to agree with you on this one. Whether or not people took the exercise in all seriousness, I definitely felt somewhat offended by the responses from the colored people. And it is probably pretty obvious, but I happen to be a white student for those who were interested or could not tell.

I feel that this video post brings up a very interesting topic. I couldn’t help but notice another classmate on this blog mentioning how there was a complete uproar when one white person wrote something offensive, but there was offensive material when the colored people answered and the class made almost no response. If anything people kind of laughed about it all. So what makes it ok for colored classmates to be rude, and have no repercussions; but, as soon as a white person does, the whole colored community kind of freaks out. Does that show equality? I wouldn’t say so. It goes back to what we all agree was so wrong about our past. Something is seen as being ok for one group, and yet not ok for another. Whites are constantly frowned upon for behavior that is seen as racist or for just intensifying the idea of stereotypes, but I’ve had numerous experiences with it reversed. In those cases however they usually just goes unnoticed.

We all understand that in the past many actions and things were said and done that we not ok. But it is never going to be possible to move on without the help of colored people being open to people slipping now and then. In reality we would love to have a world where no one is rude or offensive to people of a different race of their own. But that is the problem; it may not be reality for a long long time. At the same time we can’t dwell on one little thing, which I feel happens far too often. So one person slips up and instantly progress gets pushed back. If people could explore the idea of maybe trying to look past those smaller issues and focus on the future I think race relations overall would be much better off.

This also means that we cannot always blame whites, without putting some pressure on colored people to behave respectfully as well. It’s well known whites were evil towards blacks in the past, but as the old saying says, two wrongs don’t make a right.

I guess where I’m going with this is simply that offensive or rude behavior is a two way street. Just because your colored doesn’t mean you should be able to be rude and have it seen as acceptable. Whites get offended too! That is just sort of the feeling I had leaving class on Tuesday. If we’re trying to work on being equal and fair, then we should ALL be held accountable for our behavior.

A question back at you: Why not have it be a theme party? I am a white female who has in fact hosted theme parties on occasion and therefore fit what you are talking about. Overall I find myself really enjoying the whole concept of parties. To me a theme party is just one way to add a little spice and variation to one’s normal social activities. From early in high school I have been a huge advocate for themes whenever someone who is hosting agrees. Why not make an excuse to do something different and allow people to get creative in putting together crazy outfits. Whether it is a holiday based theme, or the more typical toga and ‘anything goes’ type, I always find myself having a more enjoyable time. It makes a normal night into an event with lots of pictures, getting ready with friends, and laughs. And I do not think this is just my group of friends because I have heard others say similar good things about theme parties. Whether guys, girls, Asians, or Indians, I have yet to find someone who is totally opposed to the idea of a theme being added to a social event. I do not really know how else to explain it but that it is normal fun brought to a new level.

Going on to the second point, it is kind of surprising to me that you would think that most theme parties are racially generated towards black people. The only theme party I can see being ‘black’ orientated of all those which I have attended would be a ‘gangsta’ party. And while some may attach this to black lifestyle, I would not necessary say that is always the case. You could associate gangsta with Mexican gangs down in Texas, or Asian based gangs in New York. In addition, the majority of those ‘gangsta’ parties I have received an invite to have been thrown by my black friends. I could name twenty other themes I have heard of that have no connection to black culture at all. Some of these include CEO and Corporate Hoe, Country/ White trash, Toga, ABC (Anything but clothes), Yaht Club, “Would you be friends with me if I wore this out daily?”, Jersey Shore, Beach party, and famous lookalike. None of these have any reference to black. If nothing else they are being derogatory towards other subcultures such as Guido Italians, Greeks, or white ‘hicks’.

I understand to a degree how some may get offended by theme parties, but it’s somewhat unfortunate because they really are all for fun and games. No theme party that I have attended or thrown has been done so to intentionally offend a person’s culture or style. They are simply something different to do and look forward to.

I find this discussion interesting because I feel like this is one of those sensitive topics that it is hard to tell exactly what a person would do without seeing them actually in the situation. I prefer to think that I would be one of the eleven people (or whatever the number was that we were told in class) that would stand up and say how his behavior is intolerable, but a part of me feels like there is more to consider.

First off I just want to say that the shopkeeper was completely out of line with his behavior towards the Muslim woman. He had no right to go to the racist extent he did. Yes, people can refuse service to anyone they want, but there is nothing to support the crude way he went about it. She was not causing any problems and was not creating a scene; therefore he had no reason to do so either. Think what you want internally but at the same time do not go around screaming those thoughts, especially if they are racist obscenities. In addition, it is one thing to back up someone being attacked, but it is another to become a second attacker as some of the customers did. In my mind the other customers who portrayed racist behavior should have stayed out of the situation unless they were going to try and mediate the argument. Fueling the hate further was so incredibly unnecessary.

Without this sounding cold I have to somewhat agree with the one kid who spoke up in class saying that there are certain times to stay out of a situation. If the shopkeeper had physically caused harm to the woman then there is no doubt every single person should step in and help the Muslim woman. And that does not mean I agree that racial or frankly any verbal abuse is acceptable in any way, shape, or form. I do feel though that people need to consider possible repercussions before getting involved in a situation they were not a part of initially. From personal experience I have learned that getting into other people’s business can end with you being negatively affected. Whether it’s a verbal fight, or just simply silly drama, there are certain times to just stay out of it. It is horrible to think that the world has come to a place where helping becomes a bad thing, but I feel this is not completely off target. You most likely do not know the whole situation and could be missing a crucial step or piece of information. Within the specific situation we’re talking about, I feel one would have to consider any harm they might undertake by getting involved.

There are some crazy people out there. Everyone likes to think they would without a doubt be the hero and swoop in, but I’m being honest by saying I may take a little time to feel the situation out first. Either of the people involved could have been dangerous. It was a horrible thing that happened and she in no way deserved what she got which is why this becomes so difficult.
I don't think it makes me a bitch or someone who supports what the shopkeeper did, but I'm just trying to be honest in saying I don't know that I could have stepped up had I actually been there. Call it as you want.

At first glance when I saw this article and the picture shown I thought a man was just caught bringing a blow up doll as his date to some sporting event. At that point it was more humorous than anything else. Then it went into detail about how she’s been sleeping with him for somewhere between 15-20 years and I had to double take to make sure she wasn’t an actual human being. But it turned out she was in fact a plastic doll. I was dumbfounded. How could this man actually be considered sane? And without trying to be rude or unsympathetic to those who may use this product I found myself thinking “that is disgusting.”

Maybe I just feel this way partially becuase I am not a man, but honestly, what has this world come to! As I write this I am still trying to wrap my head around how this is a real thing and not some article found in a fake magazine. And it was not just surprising to find that it was an actual product on the market, but that it is not the first of its kind. There have actually been other less advanced and less expensive dolls created prior to Roxxxy. It is slightly disturbing that someone has created a sex robot that can mold into any position, and literally behave as though she is having an actual orgasm. Roxxxy has literally been produced to act like a woman would in bed without actually being human and enjoying it herself. Not only does this seem to be unsanitary, but it also carries with it a troubling nature. How can someone justify a man sleeping with a doll instead of going out and pursing a real life relationship? And what would lead someone to invent such a creation? These were just a few of the many questions that instantly flooded my head. I do not care if you are a shy and lonely old man; the whole concept still does not seem to settle right in my mind. And while some may argue that this is just something to men as vibrators are to women, vibrators are nowhere near on the same level as a functioning sex robot. She has plainly been engineered to look, feel, and vocalize similar to a real person.

To bring an interesting view to my opinion I want to reference the show Sex Rehab with Dr. Drew. This is a show airing on Bravo TV in which celebrities go and receive help for their sex addictions. There are people out there like these celebrities that have a serious problem. It seems to me that a doll like this has potential to only increase the severity of their problem.

Lastly, I have to express how startled I was to read on and find out that she is not just a one-of-a-kind deal. This $7,000 talking sex robot has already been pre-ordered by 4000 men with around 20,000 or so more men requesting information about the product. And there is now a male robot in the making? Wow. Overall, I personally find this product to be unnecessary and unsettling; however, being currently enrolled in a marketing course, I am somewhat interested to see the potential Roxxxy has to take off in our wide world of consumers.

This is an interesting topic to bring up. Without even noticing what is happening debates on inequality almost always end up turning into a Black vs. White dispute. Even in class we most commonly end up circling back to these two subgroups. And it’s interesting because even though Black inequality is the most widely known and referenced to, Whites did some very horrible things to Native Americans and Asian Americans as well. These historical happenings sometimes get overlooked. Throughout class the past week or so we keep coming back to how Native Americans end up being the lowest income group with the least likelihood of going to college and moving up in the world. When white man first came to America they completely kicked the natives off of their rightful land, forcing them to march thousands of miles, with many dying along the way. It seems to me that this could be just as bad as how we treated slaves; maybe even worse than some slaves’ conditions. Yet in class yesterday, we focused on how blacks never got a fair playing field because even when they were freed they had nothing to start a promising life with. What about those Native American’s that basically went through the same thing when they lost everything? We didn’t seem to touch on this at all. The focus was all about Blacks struggling from the get go. Interesting huh? Even Sam seems to in a way fall into the black vs. white trap. Asian Americans seem to be slightly more fortunate and many have found ways to overcome the unfairness dealing with the Pearl Harbor situation. They too still face problems however, but we almost never find them the center or debate. We instead see them on the top of income and education charts, and talk about how successful they are as a whole.

“So why blacks?” one might ask. Regardless of the struggles other groups have gone through, the reality is conversations in today’s time always turn back to a black vs. white discussion. I have to agree with Laurie that part of why it turns this direction is that we have the most vocalized past with them. African Americans struggled for many years; however, thanks to men like Martin Luther King Jr. it did not mean they would let it last forever. Even after slavery was abolished, inequality was still very prevalent. They went to the extreme of starting a whole Civil Rights Movement in order to gain the rights they deserved. And people took notice. It would be dishonest to say that they have reached a perfectly even playing field even today, but they have come a long way. As a result of them going to extreme measures to portray their inequality, White Americans seem to find a need to defend their actions specifically against this group. The Civil Rights Movement was such a large part of our countries history and this is why black inequality seems to gain the most attention. The anger of the Blacks vs. the defensive nature of Whites becomes the frontrunner almost robotically. Therefore, I completely agree that the African American movement is a large part of the explanation as to why Black vs. White is everywhere!