When asked whether or not I would go to a party where I'd be one of the only people of my race I initially thought that I probably wouldn't go. But I think like any other party, it comes down to a lot of factors. If a friend of mine was having the party or wanted to bring me then I'd be more inclined to go because I would know people and feel more comfortable. But like any other party it can be a little uncomfortable not knowing any one. I'm not sure I would really go to any party that I heard about through a flier. But when I think about a situation where there are two parties, and at both of which I wouldn't know many people, and one party was all white and one party was all black, I would probably feel more comfortable at the all white party. Or maybe, a little less uncomfortable. I don't know why. I have black friends and feel comfortable with black people but I guess I've never been in that situation before. The more I think about it though, the more I want to see what a party like this would be like. I'm sure it would be fun, I know black or brown people like to have a good time so ultimately I'd probably just get used to being the white guy and it wouldn't be a big deal. I guess one part of being a minority somewhere is not what you think about other people, but worrying what they all think about you. As long as you can get over this self consciousness, and realize that it ultimately doesn't matter to most people, you should able to enjoy yourself any where.
I wonder what connection this could have to latent racism which was another topic we talked about in class last week. Would I feel uncomfortable because of subconscious attitudes I have towards people of different races? It's strange to think about it, but the more I do, the more I feel like that's not the case. Truth is I've never been to an all black party and never really had to opportunity. I'm not against the idea, and if I have some friends who want me to come to one then I think id be down. Probably more so now that I've spent some time seriously thinking about it, but that's just the way it is I guess.
I think one reason white people see black (or brown) people as the racial 'experts' is because we see them handling situations like this more than white people do. Most of the time I see black people is when they are around mostly white people, whether it's in a class or at a party, and I think that seeing how comfortable they look makes us feel that they have a better grasp on race relations.

I think a lot of this sort of communication comes down to how much you know and trust your partner in this situation. There is a lot of pressure on both the males and females during sex to do what they have come to believe are the right things to do, say, or even feel. We don't want to hurt each other's feelings, or put down anyone's egos (unless it was really that bad). So most of the time it's just easier in the females case to lie about an orgasm, or the male's case, just not ask. But an important thing to realize is that sex is not perfect every time. Some people expect every time they have sex it should be just like it is the movies or in porn, where there's a lot of passion and moaning and both the people orgasm together. But in reality, this doesn't happen all the time. And I think once people are ready to understand that sex is not like that, there is a lot of pressure taken off.
When it comes to discussing whether or not a female has an orgasm, I think it depends on the situation. In a one night stand, or a very casual type of relationship guy's are probably less likely to ask if their partner had an orgasm. If you're not sure whether or not they had one, it's much less awkward when you don't bring it up. There's a level of trust and comfort needed to talk about these things. But when the partners trust each other, and have a more comfortable relationship, these things can be important to talk about. As sam said in class, as relationships grow sex becomes more enjoyable after a while. And I think this is due to communication and the fact that both people really care about pleasing each other.
Sex is a difficult thing to talk about in the our culture in this country. In some cases it has become a taboo or risque topic. Sex can be very enjoyable, especially when done with someone you really care about, but it can leave people feeling vulnerable to judgement and feelings of failure. I think that when we get past the idea of talking about sex as a taboo, and let go of the misconceptions or standards set by the media, sex can become a natural and simple topic that can be easy to talk about with your partner. I would want to know if the girl I was sleeping with was having an orgasm or not because if you care about them, it's important to make sure the pleasure is mutual.

After thinking about this question I decided to think of a couple names, and then picture the kind of person I would expect to have them. I don't think anyone can deny that there are names we associate with being white, black, latino, and so on. However, I am not sure where these associations stem from. Is it racism? Nationalism? Or is it just based on the people I've known and met throughout my life. I think ultimately, it's just comes down to the latter. This of course should not be an aspect of judgement, or more specifically, whether or not to call someone back to a job interview. That fact that someone can get turned down, solely because of their name, while having an identical resume as someone with a 'white' sounding name is very wrong. It may not be blatant racism or nationalism, but I think it is a subconscious desire to be around people we think we are more comfortable with, and that are similar to us. It's fascinating because we all make associations like this every day, when they probably no little to no bearing to truth. Muhammed and Steve may have very similar resumes but Muhammed could be a much more dedicated worker. But statistically, employers chose to overlook this and chose the applicant they feel more similar to.
On whether this trend is a matter of racism versus nationalism, I can't really say. I think it ultimately boils down to a very slight combination of both. It is unfortunate really, but im sure it happens all the time. I think that even people who aren't racist, might make this mistake in judgement subconsciously.
I remember someone from class played devil's advocate and raised the question of 'why would people give their children these names if it creates a disadvantage for them later in life.' I thought this was a good question, as well as a controversial one. I would personally hate to let my decision for my child's name be based on the biased judgements of others, but it is a legitimate concern. It's also one i don't have to personally worry about. My name is Jake, that's pretty generic and 'white' so i don't have much to worry about. But if my name were something much different, maybe a latino or middle eastern sounding name, I would feel deeply wronged if i was turned down for a job that i was fully qualified for.
I dont think you have to be racist to make the choice to hire someone who sounds more like yourself, but I do think that everyone should refer to this statistic when making a decision like that. It should be more widely known that this sort of discrimination takes place. It opened my eyes for sure.

In my opinion, nepotism and affirmative action are distinctly different, despite their similarities. In both cases, people who may be less qualified for a job will end up getting it. This is unfortunate for more qualified applicants, but in the case of nepotism, I don't see much of an issue. The important difference between the two is that nepotism is not based on discrimination or race. I think it has always been acceptable, and even expected, that family members will look to help out for their relatives by getting them work. It seems natural that a parent, or an aunt or uncle, etc, would offer a job to a relative whom they know and trust. Other applicants may have a better resume or more experience, but its also helpful in a work environment to hire someone you know based on more than what can be seen on a piece of paper.
I have personally benefitted from nepotism. I work as a production assistant on tv, commercial, and movie shoots. I got my first job from a family friend. I had zero experience, but was expected to know how to do many things specific to the business as well as know how to navigate New York city. There are many people who know much more about the job than I did, and have had many years of experience on me. But I got the job because I knew the right people. However, because I got that job, I learned on the run. I picked things up on the way, I learned my way around the city, and in a few weeks I was on par with people who had been doing my job for years. That is one of the biggest advantages of nepotism, I was given an opportunity to learn an occupation that I might not have otherwise been able to do. The person I worked for mentored me, and helped me along the way. And in return I worked my ass off in an effort to not disappoint him. This is an advantage of nepotism that some cases of affirmative action probably don’t have. I may not have “deserved” the job, but since we knew each other he felt he could trust me, and return I worked hard not to let him down.
Nepotism is may not be fair to people who are more qualified. But I feel for jobs that are more difficult and demanding, that require a great deal of experience and qualifications, nepotism is not seen as often. In theory, nepotism and affirmative action are similar. But nepotism is not a racial issue. People benefit because of who they know, or who they're related to, not because of the color of their skin or racial background.

I feel that the fear of death is the most important motivation we have in our society. We spend millions of dollars on things like medical research, defense technology, and other things that make us feel that our own livelihoods are protected. For example, we have consistently raised millions of dollars for cancer research at our university alone, for many years. We are afraid of death, because of how it affects our lives and the lives of our loved ones, so we worked endlessly towards cures and research to prevent these illnesses. One of the main recipients of our tax dollars is the defense system in our country that we as a nation feel is imperative to our country's safety. We fear attacks from foreign nations, or terrorist organizations, so in response we put a lot of focus on building and funding defense systems and technology that will protect ourselves and our nation.
On a personal level, our fear of death is what contributes to behaviors such as safe driving, healthy living, and basic knowledge of protecting ourselves. We pay attention to things like health research to have a better knowledge of how to protect ourselves.
Personally I have feared death when out on the road in my automobile. Driving is one of the most dangerous, and statistically deadly activities that we as humans take part in. I have seen the news stories, and witnessed many accidents that have hurt people which have manifested a fear within me that causes a conscious, or perhaps subconscious, concern for my own livelihood especially when im out on the road driving.
For example, driving late at night leaves you in danger of possible threats like drunk drivers. They are incredibly dangerous so I have learned to take extra precaution when on the road late at night. You just never know when someone's going hit you so it's important to take additional care when there might be drunk drivers on the road. Likewise, when the road things like texting or calling people while driving can be incredibly dangerous. For this reason, laws are passed to try to protect people by punishing them for these actions. It is ultimately, our fear of death that inspires such legislation to be passed.
Additionally, our fear of death is what inspires a great majority the stories we find interesting in entertainment. Criminal dramas on television, as well as actions movies, where people are constantly in danger of dying are what interest modern audiences. We not only fear death, but we are fascinated by it. It is our natural human instance to fear death, so we either consciously or subconsciously act in ways that will protect ourselves. But this fear of death is also was captures a large part of our interest in things that entertain us.

In this discussion I feel that the term “rich” is being used very generally in the broad spectrum of the entire world. We aren't used to thinking of wealth in global terms. Rarely have I lined up my wealth with that of someone living in a far away or third world country because I've seen my life to be very different from theirs. I think it is natural that we compared our wealth to what we see most closely around us. So in that case, from what we see in the media, or from neighborhoods we pass, or the wealth we see in movies and television, many of us probably have not considered ourselves very wealthy.
However, when I do look at my own wealth in a global comparison. I see that the vast majority of people do not live nearly as a comfortable (or wealthy) life as I do. I see that I have everything I need to live and survive. So why then do we draw the lines of wealth based on the things we want? The fact that I have food, shelter, clothing, education, and more of these pretty essential things that many people do not have, shows me that my “wealth” as I'll call it, gives me an enormous step up. I don't have to worry about feeding myself, or having a warm place to sleep at night, so instead I can worry about my education and future. These things that I take for granted, or that seem so basic and simple to me, are the most important pieces of wealth that I own.
This discussion opened my eyes a little, or changed my thinking on wealth or how rich a person is. The majority of wealth isn't wether you have everything you want, but rather everything you need. Because when you have what you need, you have the ability to work to get the things you want. But without the sufficient wealth, where the majority of your work goes towards supplying yourself or your family with your essential needs, then you're at a disadvantage.
Seeing that I am now “rich” gives me a lot of hope. I don't feel bad about being wealthier than the rest of the world, instead I see it as a great opportunity. And this is not an opportunity for me to get a good job so I can afford an ipad 2, its an opportunity to have the means to pursue what I want. I have the ability to work hard and make whatever kind of life for myself that I want. I am not constricted to supplying myself with what I need to survive. Instead I can pursue the things I need to thrive.

The fact that 35,000 infants die every day says a lot about how much more populated Earth would be if they were all able to survive. There are a few surrounding factors, however, to consider when talking about this statistic. Infant mortality is definitely one thing that regulates the population of Earth and it always has been. It's a sad truth that infants and anyone else really must die in order to keep some kind of balance of how many people there are walking on this planet because quite simply, there is only a limited amount of space and resources for all species to last. That isn't to say that this statistic is a very unfortunate thing because these are people's children dying at a point where they haven't even begun to experience life. This is why as medicine and technology advances, that number of 35,000 infant deaths a day will continue to go down as Im sure it has from the past. This of course means an increase in population growth which leads to further consumption of land and resources. I don't think there can be an argument saying that we need all these infants to die, or that we should do nothing to change this number because otherwise we'll become overpopulated. I feel that we should do all we can to make sure as many babies are born healthy and continue to be healthy as possible. Medical research should continue to develop as should efforts to help advance the survival rate of newborns in third world countries because we should never stop improving our health system.
But as we are able to make sure more infants survive birth and early mortality, we must also be obligated to extend further research in the fields of alternative energy and conservation of the planet's resources. No matter how many infants die every day, the population of this planet will continue to grow at tremendous rates. Our population has grown exponentially in just the past 50 years that no matter how many people die every day, we will still become increasingly populated. To me this means that research and world wide efforts to conserve what we have on this planet are equally as important as the medical research that keeps more people alive and alive for longer life spans. We must continue to develop our knowledge of medicine and keeping people healthy, but shouldn't that also mean we need to keep developing our knowledge and efforts of keeping the world itself healthy? I think this is overlooked by a lot of people who see conservation as an after thought, or something that can be taken care of later. Keeping Earth alive is just as important as keeping a person alive, both are living organisms, but there won't be any more of us, or infant mortalities to worry about if we destroy the planet we live on.

Joining the military is an extremely personal choice that we are all asked to make. The question may not be asked to everyone directly but it is a thought that has probably crossed most people's minds. The important thing though is that joining the military in this country is a choice. There is no draft and it is not mandatory for citizens to serve like it is in other countries. Having this choice is a special privilege we are given as American citizens and I feel that it says a lot about those who do choose to enlist. Personally, I have no intention on serving in the armed forces. I have nothing but respect for those who have served and are serving currently. They are doing their country an amazing and selfless deed by devoting themselves and years of their lives to fighting for this country but I cannot see myself doing it. We use phrases like 'fighting for our country' and 'defending our freedom' when talking about being a soldier because they are honorable depictions of what soldiers do. But the context behind these phrases includes going to war, fighting and killing the enemy, and constantly living with the threat of dying yourself. At this stage of my life I am not ready to make that sacrifice. War is a terrifying and ruthless place that I have no intention of ever experiencing. One of the gentlemen from NATO who spoke to our class on Thursday raised the point of how can I let others go off and fight for my country while I stay at home and do nothing. It's an interesting point, but what it boils down to is the fact that I don't have to, and don't want to. I would be lying if I said I wasn't afraid of dying in battle, or losing limbs or suffering other serious injuries. The risk of coming back form war with something like PTSD is frightening because of how common it is becoming. I also can't say that I agree with everything our military is doing currently in the middle east. I don't know if I could accept every order given to me as a soldier while questioning the motives my country has in this war in the first place. Am I really fighting to protect my freedom? Or am I fighting to protect the special interests of a few? I do not intend to take anything away from those who are fighting right now, but these are thoughts and choices I am allowed to make. I've often thought if my choice to serve would change under different conditions. If the US was under a serious attack and more soldiers were desperately needed. I think that under circumstances similar to these, I would choose to serve and fight. If my country really needed me to defend, than it should be my duty and I would fight. But at this time, I reserve my right to choose whether or not I serve in the military.

I feel that people have many different definitions for racism. I remember our discussion group struggled to come up with a definite answer to this question because so many people react differently to certain experiences. Some things that I feel may fall under being racist, could be seen as completely normal and acceptable to someone else. Personally, there are things people say or do towards me as a Jew that can make me feel uncomfortable or wronged racially that wouldn't bother other jewish people. I've also come across things people have said that don't bother me, but I know it would bother other people. Ultimately, I feel racism comes down to the treatment of people based on their race. There are racial slurs or insults that fall under racism but I think to define racism, we must first look at how people are treated solely based on race. This includes things like special actions taken towards a person as well as excluding a person from something because of their skin color, religious beliefs, nationality, or any other way to categorize someone.
The Jim Crow laws in the US were a perfect example of segregation and racism on a wide scale. African Americans were prohibited from doing things for no other reason than the color of their skin. I think anyone would define that as racism. On a smaller scale, I feel that racism can be defined by how you outwardly treat a person, but this also is where the gray area forms. Personally, I feel the use of racial slurs, like the “n” word towards a black person, when used with the intent to offend, can definitely be considered racist. I know that if someone called me a kike and meant it in a way that hurt me, I would think they were being racist.
One problem in our country today that some people may not define as racism is the issue of gay marriage. However, I disagree and see that excluding gay people from getting married is a clear example of racism. Gay people aren't necessarily a different race, but excluding them from being able to marry each other, and enjoy the benefits of marriage falls under the justification of racism. It's similar to segregation in the Jim Crow era and without a doubt can be classified as a civil rights issue.
Overall, racism is hard to define because race itself is hard to define. People respond differently to things and what offends one person may not offend another. But when it comes down to excluding certain rights to a person because of how they look, where they are from, and even who they love, then that is racism.

It bothers me that whether or not president Obama is secretly a muslim is such a big issue in our country. I feel that the majority of the people who make this accusation are merely looking for a reason not to like him. This argument has no factual base and it was started for the sole purpose to raise doubt about the president. It seems like it should be common knowledge that he is open his faith in Christianity, he goes to church, it should not be a big deal. But for some people, they need to continue to raise doubt which leads me to believe they are predisposed not to like him, whether it be because he's a democrat, or even because he is black. The people who continually question his faith are simply trying to put his name next to the word muslim to create an association. I think that the fact that so many Americans believe he is muslim are either very misinformed, or possibly subconsciously want to have something to hate and distrust him for.

Sam made a statement in class that reminded me of how I felt before the 2008 presidential election. He said he told his class that the United States was not ready for a Black president whose middle name was Huessien, and Obama had no chance of winning the election. I remember feeling the same way, as did a lot of people I think. I look back now and feel glad that our country was able to rise above this level of prejudice because his win in the election solidified an important landmark in the tolerance in this country. There are still a lot of people who are unbending in their racial prejudice against the president, and there are others that dislike him for his political views. I just hope that more people who didn't vote for the president in this past election did so because of his policies and not because the color of his skin or the suspicion about his religion.