As a Christian, we are taught to read the Bible. We are taught to pray for others and our world, and we are taught to be kind in all circumstances. No, I do not believe that God supports the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are two major themes in the Bible that relate to lecture on Tuesday. The first is we are taught to love our neighbor. In the famous and well referred to biblical reference, Jesus shows us what you have to do in order to be a good neighbor, or a “Good Samaritan”. Nowhere in this well known passage does it say to go to war. Crusades in Europe that happened historically were fought “in the name of God”. Who were the people doing the fighting? Human beings. Just because some people claim to be doing something in the name of God does not mean that it is rightfully so. Humans are corrupt, sinful, and that is just the way life is. Over my life, I have received loads of Christian teachings from many different sources. All of them do not believe in war. Yes, soldiers may be Christian, but all people are at different maturity levels. Perhaps some soldiers are younger in their faith then others. This is just the way life is. It is a tragedy and a blessing. We are taught to love our enemies no matter what the circumstances. We are taught to be peaceful and not violent. This is the life I lead, and it is the life I pray others will lead as well. The second major theme in the Bible is evangelism. Evangelism is an extremely difficult topic for Christians. Most of the Christian communities I am a part of push evangelism, but to me, it is very difficult. It is hard to explain just how incredible God is in words sometimes, and when you tell someone about your faith, often you are putting your whole self and then some out there. It is a very difficult thing to do, especially when you generally know that you and God will be rejected. Nevertheless, we are taught from the Bible to spread God’s word. No, I don’t necessarily agree with soldiers giving Bible’s out to Muslims in Iraq, but I think the concept behind it is just. The way they go about spreading God’s word is, in my opinion, not an effective way. For example, think of those Gideon’s that hand out New Testaments on College Ave all the time. People take them just to make them get out of your face, or they snicker and laugh at them. I don’t think that giving people Bible’s in such a way does anything. I think evangelism is more about having conversations with other human beings. We, as Christians, certainly are not perfect. No human is. The only person who walked this earth that never sinned and was perfect was Jesus, and although Christians strive to be like him, there is not one person currently on this earth that can say they have never sinned. It is in our human nature. I do not believe God supports the war in Iraq, but I do think that spreading God’s word is what He wants, even though I don’t think the way people generally go about it is effective or just.

Out of my mere speculation on the matter, I believe that victims would need a huge amount of support in order to speak out about their abuse. I think there are many reasons why this speculation is true. For example, I think that a huge reason why victims of sexual abuse do not speak out about the horrors of their past is because of shame and embarrassment. This is true for both genders, but I believe that this is more prominent in boys than it is in girls. The male gender roles are socially constructed from day one. Boys are growing up learning to be tough, to be the protector, and to lead fearlessly. This is jut how our society runs, whether we like it or not, these gender roles exist. I think that victims of sexual abuse, especially boys, are silent partially because of this reason. Because they learn from such a young age that they are supposed to be tough, and speaking out about abuse, especially sexual abuse that was done to them is violating that social expectation of a man. Boys feel ashamed and embarrassed that what happened to them did, and this induces silencing. Now, I think this is just a small fraction of the great multitude of reasons why victims of abuse are silenced. Another reason might be that chances are, the person doing the abuser is someone close to them. Perhaps a caregiver, a brother, a cousin, or a grandparent was the one committing the abuse. If the victim spoke out about their painful and disgraceful abuse, they would completely split their family apart. Everything would go up in turmoil, and life, as they knew it, would change. Sometimes, the victim might fear that if they ever spoke out about their abuse, that the person that abuses or abused them would simply lash out more. There is a danger effect in telling the truth sometimes, and it is our natural instinct to first and foremost protect ourselves. I also believe that society has a ton to do with silencing victims of abuse. We do not like to talk about it as a society. This prevents easy access to help, and so many other social injustices. It sickens my stomach to understand this harsh reality. So, when asked the question, what do victims need in order to speak out against their abuse, I say a tremendous amount of deep and genuine support. The victims of abuse have so many reasons to stay silent, and the only way to break that would be to have an army of support behind them. Our society needs to recognize this problem, and make it a lot easier to access such support. Victims of sexual abuse need no longer be silent.

Why are we so quick to pass judgment? With the terrible situations that Penn State is enduring right now, it is in human nature to point fingers. All we do is point fingers and blame people around us, in reality, when has anyone stopped to think and remember what really is important in this situation? People can blame whoever they want all they want, but that does not make any of this be true. We, as humans, try to get a sense of purpose throughout our life. We try to constantly make sense of what we are going through, and we search for answers. Judging people in situations in which we barely know any of the facts is a poor decision, but it is in human nature. Personally, I am tired of hearing everyone’s opinions of the matter. I am sick of hearing about random people’s opinions who are uninformed, and done explaining to people the actual situation. What we, as a student body, need to focus on is honoring and respecting the victims in this horrible situation. We need to be the voice for the past victims in addition to all other victims in the future. When children, even adults, are abused, they are usually silent about it. When we are so quick to pass judgment as a student population and a community, how can we expect people outside the Penn State community to not judge us? It is human sinful nature to judge, when in the Bible, we are taught not to judge. It is not our place. How can we judge other people when we are so sinful as well? It is a huge catch 22 in this situation here at Penn State, but in reality, we do not have the right to judge. We cannot escape it, though, because it is inevitable. We are so incredibly and tremendously sinful to judge. As a Penn State community, I can only hope that we congregate and honor victims of child abuse. I hope that we can be the voice for those that are too afraid to speak up, to ashamed, or afraid of more danger. It is up to us as a student body to be the drive for this movement, and show the victims that we are not judging, and that we are there for them one hundred percent. This is the most important thing in this horrific and traumatic situation. If we can be the voice for those that cannot speak, we are ultimately putting the focus on the victims, and not on all of the judgment in this town. I pray that I try not to judge, in addition to the well being of the victims. It is so unfair to them. They were ignored and left alone in the past, so let’s not leave them alone anymore.

When people around me are speaking a language that I cannot understand, I never am uncomfortable. I usually try to listen, and decipher what is being said, just out of pure interest and love for languages. I speak three languages. English, Spanish, and Italian. I am fluent in English and Spanish, and am working towards fluency in Italian. I have the desire to speak and understand many languages because that means there are a ton of more people in this world I could potentially communicate with. I believe that there are a lot of Americans that would feel uncomfortable with people speaking different languages around them. For example, my little sister and I were at a nail salon getting a manicure and pedicure. This particular nail salon that is in my hometown is Vietnamese owned. The owner is from Vietnam, and the rest of the staff speaks Vietnamese as well. Sometimes, when the staff spoke in their native language while my sister was there, she would always assume that they were talking about her. Granted, she is in a developmental stage in her life where she is very self-conscious about herself, but ultimately, she constantly thought that other people that spoke in different languages were automatically talking to her. Her main thought process was, well, the only benefit to those people speaking that language is because they don’t want me to hear what they are saying. I do not believe that is the case at all. I see it as this; it is a struggle to speak English at times. Most people in businesses that speak a different language and are first generation immigrants tend to only speak English in the field they are specifically working in. For example, in the nail salon, most of the workers there only knew and understood the vocabulary they needed to communicate with the wants and needs of the customers. If they ever wanted to speak to their coworkers about something completely different, they might not know the English vocabulary for that, so they use their native language. It is easier, and it makes them feel at home. If you were in another country, and you were constantly surrounded by other people speaking other languages, and you finally found someone that spoke English, you would talk to them more too, wouldn’t you? This is because it is your native language, and it always resides home for you. You can have deeper conversations because you know the language so much more in depth than if you learned another language as a second language. I believe that it is all about taking another point of view in this case, and really just thinking about it from a foreign language speaker’s perspective.

If immigration suddenly came to a halt, I think that perhaps people living in the United States would become extremely racist, and maybe revert back to the horrible state that our country was at before the Civil War. Racism still exists today, but I believe that if immigration suddenly ceased, racism would increase. This might be the opposite of what people would most likely think though. For example, when people think of immigration, they think of a different group of people from a different country moving to their own country. It is assumed that then, that people already living in the country intensely discriminate against the new group of people that just immigrated into the country. Whatever the case, I think that this view is flawed. When we examine the history of the United States, there was always the other. There was always a group of people that were discriminated against. It is in human nature to divide people up in categories and do as such. Italians and Irish were discriminated against when there was an overflow of immigrants from those corresponding countries. However, in our present day, it is common to be Italian or Irish. These groups of people are no longer discriminated against. These people from Italy and Ireland have assimilated to the culture, contributing to it and taking things away from it as well. I believe that this will ultimately happen to the groups of people that are discriminated against today. Sometime in the future, whether it is far or near, certain groups of people will not be discriminated against anymore, because they specifically have become part of the majority. If there is no immigration, just because there is no new group of people from a different country to discriminate against does not mean that there will be a halt in discrimination. This will heighten discrimination. Groups of people from other countries will not assimilate. Groups would be segregated, and the majority would pinpoint against the minorities. It happens in human nature and it is a given. If no new immigrants from different countries come into this country, then the majority of people would discriminate against all of the same minorities that are discriminated against today. I find it impossible to imagine a world without discrimination and race. I wish this wasn’t true, but I feel as if it is in human nature to categorize and separate people. How do most people judge? By looks of course. And this is easiest to judge, usually by skin color. I am not saying that any of discrimination is justified. I am against discrimination, I am just saying that I think it is inevitable for it to happen. I believe that there is no way it wouldn’t exist, because it is sinful in human nature to constantly discriminate.

From the perspective that we are living a white centered world, the question comes up, what if that were the opposite? What would a black centered world look like? When I think about the reasons why we are currently living in a white centered world, I immediately think about history. It is a given that somewhere, some specific group is alienated. No matter what the topic is, what time period in history, or what part of the world, there is always a smaller group that is differentiated and discriminated against in some ways. When we trace back throughout our history and comb it with a fine toothcomb, we can clearly see that one of the major reasons for white supremacy is power. Many European countries had the most power throughout history, and due to their geographical location, their skin color is lighter. Europe isn’t on the equator, so therefore, there is no need for more skin pigmentation. Let’s say, for example, parts of Africa and India overall were the most powerful consistently throughout history. Picture explorers coming from parts of West Africa instead of the so commonly known European explorers. This would lead to a dominant black centered world. I believe it all has to do with power, those that had the most power in the past, and where it has brought us as a world today in regards to racial issues. If there were African explorers that were well known, instead of for example, Christopher Columbus, then maybe instead of the white race coming to America, it was all flip flopped. What if instead of Europeans capturing African people inhumanely and selling them as slaves in America wasn’t the case? What would change if there was this flip in history? I think that ultimately, our discussions about race would change. I believe life would be the same way; the only difference would be that I believe race populations in certain locations would be different. I think that, in the United States at least, whites would be the minority. There is always a majority and a minority, and I believe it would just be opposite how it is today, based on population. I can’t necessarily say how all of this would pan out historically and socially. Perhaps whites would have been and still be more discriminated against. I’m not entirely sure. I just really believe all the populations of race throughout the world would be distributed differently. It is all about thinking about this question from a historical point of view, trying to keep all biases out of the picture. When we examine our world’s history, I believe patterns would change and be opposite. Other countries would have had high political and military power way more consistently than some countries in Europe.

I thought the article reading was really interesting. I loved the break down of the interpretation of happiness throughout history. I really agree with the idea that happiness is socially constructed by the surrounding society, whatever time and place that might be. However, I did have a hard time actually adopting this way of thinking into my own life. I grew up in a household with extremely different personalities. My brother was sick for an abundance of years while he was growing up and was constantly depressed. Me, on the other hand, I was more easy-going and always was generally happy. We grew up in the same circumstances, the same household. We attended the same schools, and the majority of our experiences were the same. The difference between us was our view on life and our personality. I see life as short, and I have always tried to make the most of it no matter what the situation. Making the most of any situation and thinking positively gives me happiness. It is an emotion that I feel the majority of the time. Granted, I do not always feel happy, no one can always feel the same emotion constantly, but the majority of my life, I feel happy. Most of the happiness comes from laughs with friends and family. Maybe that is enough for me, but it must not have been enough for my brother. I guess I see it hard to accept the fact that happiness is not a real emotion. I agree that it is socially constructed, and the concept of it has changed over time, but does that make it fake? A lot have concepts have changed over time, but I don’t think that makes them not real. I feel as if I have witnessed happiness and the lack of happiness in the same setting, therefore, I feel as if it must be real. I am unsure if this is a just enough reason for contradicting the article or not. Perhaps I believe that the emotion is so completely true, even though maybe my entire way of thinking was influenced from my surrounding society. I do not know. I believe that there are two ways to look to a situation: positively or negatively. If one chooses to think in a positive way regarding a specific situation, then I feel as if they would be happy. There is a lack of stress and worry in this feeling of emotion. However, if a person begins to think in a negative way regarding a situation, then I believe they will not feel happy. They will be worrying and stressing out about the future or whatever aspects of the situation there is to worry about.

Why do women dress a certain way but want to be treated in another way? This question needs to read most women. When considering undergraduate students here in State College, not all women go out to the frats, wearing short slutty dresses with high inch heels. It just really isn’t the case. I know this because I am a woman, I am straight, and I don’t dress or act in that way on the weekends. Yes, most women here at Penn State do in fact do that, but not all. I dress in a way that is comfortable for me, and I am treated accordingly. Something interesting happened to me recently actually. I went to a party where the theme was to dress up as someone else, so I went out in a short skirt, high heels, and a tight, low cut top. Granted, this attire is out of the usual for me. Anyway, I noticed I was treated extremely differently. I was hit on so much more. I joke around about it, and say it was like night and day differences in the way that I was treated. In one instance, I was treated like a sex object, and in the other, more common scenario, I was treated normally, as I appreciate deeply. Therefore, considering this personal experience, I don’t think that all women dress a certain way and expect to be treated another way. I think most girls who dress in short dresses and high heels and go out on the weekend generally know the way they will be treated. If they are going through the pain of wearing such outrageous high heels and no clothes during cold winter months, they generally know exactly why they are doing it. Granted, this is just one point of view. This is my take on it, it doesn’t mean that all girls know why they do what they do. Maybe some dress in that fashion because the rest of their friends do, or perhaps they think it is what is expected of them to dress like. Either way, it is perplexing. It is really interesting to think about why they would even dress like that in the first place, especially in really harsh cold climate conditions. I believe it is all socially constructed, and going off of the famous Needy Penis lecture in class, society is looking through a man’s looking lens. That idea resonates with me, and I really understand it, because I think it is true, despite some women’s ideal circumstances and beliefs. The idea that all of these invisible strings society casts down on us shapes us, and it is extremely odd and almost terrifying to think about.

Throughout our history, it is known that women have always been the underdog, similar to how minorities seem to be an underdog as well. In a variety of cultures, women have been viewed as innocent. They have even been viewed as property of a male, when you venture back far enough in history. When you analyze and truly think about the history of women over time, it is clear why women are viewed as more innocent then men. Women are known for being more sensitive, more gentile, and more caring then men. So, according to society, why would someone who is sensitive, gentile, and caring commit harsh crimes? It is a common misconception because of how we grow up. When people think of a women that is a criminal, they associate that women when their mother, their grandmother, their sister, or perhaps their wife or girlfriend. When people think of a man who is a criminal, they merely see him just as that. I believe that our common misconceptions on a women’s innocence all has to do with past history. It is just the way it is, how society constructs things. In addition, I also believe that some races are viewed as more innocent then others. This is all socially constructed. For example, if we look at two mug shots, one of a white male and one of a black male, and we told someone that one of them is a criminal, which one do you think most people will choose? I am not saying that people would pick a certain race, per se, I am merely posing the question. I believe that some people view the white race as more innocent, merely because it is the majority. When you compare the majority to the minority, I have this feeling that people of the minority get more of the attention, criminal wise. I believe that there is an equal amount of people in each race that commit crimes, whether they get arrested or not. I think it is all in proportion to the populations of each race. I believe this because we are all human. It is society, or a bunch of humans inhabiting this earth together, that create the common misconceptions concerning women and race. It is interesting to think about though. It truly is. When comparing a woman’s mug shot and a man’s mug shot, which picture would people pick as being the convicted criminal? My gut tells me most people would pick the man. I think this because I think I would pick the man. Whether this is right or wrong, I am not sure. But one thing is definite, it is all very much socially constructed.

I have always been extremely interested in helping other countries, whether there is a reward or not. Last spring break, I went to the Dominican Republic and taught English side by side a woman named Marge in the Peace Corps. This year, I plan on going to Ecuador for a month to teach English. So concerning the Haiti project, I am all for it. I think the most interesting thing is that the program picks people with determination. The entrepreneurs are hard working people with skill and the drive to succeed. They aren’t just people that want charity. I think that it’s truly remarkable that each entrepreneur doesn’t just want free charity. They want to work hard, and pay for what they need over time, each month. That is where we come in. We can micro finance each necessity that they need. I also thought it was extremely important that there was functional advice given to them. These people want to improve and grow, with aid, but they are good for it. For example, Anaes was constructing tote bags that had straps that were not strong enough. I think it is vital that Sam told her the key was to improving her business was to make the straps vital and stronger. It is small pieces of advice that can make a huge difference in a person’s business. Something that struck me was the fact that a lot of the economic problems that are in Haiti are most likely caused by the United States government. Before lecture on Thursday, I did not really have any knowledge on the problems in Haiti. However, upon listening in class, I am thoroughly concerned that most of the problems in Haiti’s economy are because people rely on food products from the United States. I never knew about the rice subsidizing policy here concerning United States farmers, and I am unsure how I feel about it. I do not agree that our tax money is going, as Sam put it, “directly into the farmer’s bank account.” I do not believe this is just. Also, it amazes me that there is such fertile land in Haiti. Most of the pictures and videos you see in Haiti are destructed and poor land. If there is such fertile land for growing rice, then why is the United States selling rice for so cheap on the global market, causing Haiti to rely on the global economics fluctuating constantly. I think it is important that Haiti becomes self-sufficient. In this project, it is almost on a smaller scale, helping each entrepreneur become more self-sufficient, thus allowing people to feed and provide for their families. I am excited to learn more about the Haiti project, and work more with it.