When Maziar was on the Skype call and gave his words to us saying the people affected by the Boston bombings were in his prayers it was almost bitter sweet. Maziar is from Iran and since our government and the media portrays them as terrorists and killers; it is only natural that many people in our country will believe these ridiculous accusations of Iranians and other Middle Eastern countries. His words were very kind and it was nice to see him speak as sincerely as he did for those affected by the tragedy. I was happy to see Maziar say those words because it just goes on to show that even though we live on opposite sides of the globe we are only different in traditions and culture but still have all of the same morals and values. No one wants to see others being hurt or killed. Iran is known to be one of the countries that dislike the United States the most and the majority of Iranians based off of what Maziar had said were genuinely sorry to hear what happened. The country who hates us feels sorry that the tragic event occurred. It doesn’t really sound like they hate the people in America.

After Maziar said his words, it was interesting to see the student from Oman offer his condolences to Maziar for the bombings in Iran. The reason why this was interesting is because there were very few students in the class that knew of the events that had occurred in Iran. There are so many more bombings in Iran that go unnoticed or are unheard of in the United States. This is very sad and wrong. Almost everyone in the world heard of what happened at the Boston Marathon, this may be due to the amount of nations partaking in the race but nevertheless, America does not show other tragedies that occur in other countries in the news. This is a problem and should change.

I was very happy that Maziar said this because it shows that it is not the people of different countries that hate or dislike each other but rather the governments of these countries. This is important because it can lead to the connection of people in these countries and help begin to erase the hatred. The Boston Bombings was an absolute tragedy but should be used as a bridge. It is evident that other countries sincerely care about the citizens of America. There were responses by governments saying they condone the attacks and someone should be punished. More importantly is the responses by average people from foreign countries. These people have posted, published and done other things on the internet to show their support. This should lead as a bridge, others showed their support when America was attacked and we should show our support when others are attacked, including the nations we are told to hate like those in the Middle East.

In the American society, whites and males have always been dominate. In the earlier stages of this country it was because other races were made slaves and women were forced to stay at home to take care of the house, almost a form of a slave if you open your mind up because they were unable to make decisions for themselves. It was obvious in this time period. Since then, women have earned the right to vote and so have African Americans. There are still many forces and factors outside of their control which governs much that happens to them.

We have learned how there are strings that prevent many minorities from becoming more successful in society. They are overlooked in jobs not only by white employers but also from employers of their own ethnicity. These factors that affect minorities is also present for females. The way it occurs is a little different though. There are many claims that women do not get jobs when qualified as much as a man or they receive lower salaries but there was never any evidence of this provided in class like for minorities. The reason women also suffer from these strings is more due to social norms.

When women are younger they normally do not talk openly about things like their menstrual cycle. This makes females less comfortable to talk about it in their future which limits them. The reason for many of these social norms is due to what the media publicizes. On television shows in any sex scenes, as talked in class, they always show both parties pleasing each other. Due to the statistics this isn’t always necessarily true. Females actually have an orgasm almost half of the time that males have an orgasm. Not many people in the class knew this based on the clicker questions and since intercourse is finished once a man has an orgasm it makes sense that when females have sex they do not worry much if they have an orgasm and end up lying about it. Is it our world that makes females lie since they think they need to please their partner? If so that would show these strings affecting them.

It was also talked about what the world would look like if in the media intercourse was show from the female’s perspective instead of the males. Instead of it being over when the male is finished and leaving the two lying in bed saying how amazing it was, it would look much different. if this was the case intercourse would look much different in this world which in turn also changes our society from being male dominated but rather a more equal world.

During the class involving the immigration to America, Erick’s story was very interesting. Mostly what I know of Mexican immigration is from things I learned from what others, as in friends and family, have said or what I see on the news. This definitely creates a biased opinion on the issue or an uneducated opinion. From what I knew previously, I just knew of Mexicans jumping the border to come to America. There was a book that I had read that followed the lives of young Mexican boys who had crossed the border by swimming the Rio de Grande, and they were captured by an American institution that uses these children for labor in what is very similar to a concentration camp. This story is very similar to Erick’s as both had a guide who was to help the Mexican citizens to cross the border into America. The interesting aspect of Erick’s story was what happened to him and his family once they had crossed the border and their reasons for crossing.

He said his family was almost passed on from different safe houses, which seemed very similar to how black slaves were freed to the North. Once his family was farther from the border it seemed like they basically settled into a community and tried to live normal lives in America. The thing I never understood since I was never an immigrant was the fear him and his family always had. Every day they needed to be careful of what they say to other people because one wrong act and they could be deported back to Mexico. I never knew of this fear that they had to live with every day and how it affects every action, afraid they may go home and their mother is gone, or worse have someone waiting there to take them back. So the natural questions should arise. Why come then? Why live in that fear? Why not stay in Mexico? Why not become a legal immigrant? These questions are a little more complicated then they seem.

What I see as the main reason and from what was said in class would be to live a better life. If people from Mexico thought it was better there, then why in the world would they put themselves through the danger of coming to America, it is senseless. The next question is then why not do it legally? I sort of understood this obstacle in how the process to become a citizen is very long and difficult. I remember hearing stories of how difficult the test was since it is all about politics and the constitution. The test is so difficult that the regular American would not pass it. Is that fair? Can it be justified by the fact that America already has too many immigrants and it slows the amount of new comers? The most interesting part of the whole immigration argument is that the Unites States of America is a country based on immigration, mostly white Europeans but many others who took the land of Native Americans, and now they are telling others that this is the territory of the United States and certain people are not welcome. A little hypocritical? Remember though, this is not white people who did it, but rather the founders of the US (who may have been mostly white but all white people should not be automatically associated with this process of events).

I feel there is a large difference between the way Sam and Jasiri X communicated the same issue to the class on Tuesday and Thursday. This is due to both the tone of the message and the style that the message was brought to us. In both classes the overall message was the unfair treatment to Native Americans in the United States and also the unfair treatment to other minorities. It seemed that both classes were trying to show everyone how many early white settlers who came to the Americas knew very little of how to survive in the new land. Then when they could make it on their own they took Native American land and imposed their own laws.

The styles of the two classes differed greatly as Jasiri X showed his message in the way of his songs. His songs and the background images did portray some of the history that occurred but his songs had mostly minorities in it from what I remember. And due to the style of music that he performs which is rap makes the approach seem much more direct and almost accusing in some cases. Through his songs he distinguishes a difference between whites and minorities. I don’t think this was his purpose but he definitely does this. It turns into a war almost between the groups, and he the phrases he uses near the ends of his songs can be seen as direct attacks to whites. This method makes it seem as if he is telling white people they need to make up for their mistakes of the past to make things right again. This is definitely not what he was attempting to do but is how it could easily be interpreted.

On the other hand, Sam’s approach did involve white guilt but it came from a different angle. Through his representation of what was occurring to other minorities of how they are advancing up the stairs but are significantly behind both whites and Asians. He showed all of the statistics and the different videos that show how Native Americans are suffering in very difficult living situations on the reservations that were created for them, created for them not by the white race but rather the government of America. This style of approach still allows for some people to feel that there is some white guilt Sam is trying to push on us but that will happen almost no matter how this subject is addressed. I feel Sam did it more in a way that shows how the only way for this problem to be resolved is for everyone to come together instead of accusing each other.

Affirmative action is used across the United States to help people of minority ethnicity and who may be women or come from low economic status. What it does is it allows these people opportunities that they may not have had due to their background. This is a good thing because it helps balance the playing field for people of different races and social status. Just because someone is born into a family that has very little wealth, doesn’t mean they should be denied the chance to go to a secondary education institution because they don’t have the money for it.

Some people in class say that nepotism undermines affirmative action, since family members are being given jobs that they may be under qualified for. The example in class of the guy who’s dad was able to get him a job in painting over the summer while he had never painted before in his life. Although nepotism does possibly take away jobs from more experienced people or qualified, I don’t always think it is a bad thing. Most times nepotism occurs by people having their parents either know someone or have their family continue the “family business.” I have benefitted from nepotism and know many other people who have also. It allows people to become more knowledgeable in a particular area and sometimes will have their family member help them as they go along receiving extra experience.

The main reason why I don’t mind nepotism isn’t due to the fact that I know I have gained an advantage or that I will gain an advantage in the future but rather due to the fact that there are so many ways people gain advantages nowadays. One of those advantages is one that all Penn State students will receive. This is that once we graduate, Penn State alumni are likely to give students from Penn State a job rather than someone from a different school. How is that fair to anyone else who has graduated from a different college? It’s not and is exactly like nepotism.

Going off on the point that nepotism should be unfair because people less qualified receive positions moves to my belief that affirmative action does the exact same thing. Affirmative action gives minorities a chance to get an education and then later when they are applying for jobs, it helps them gain jobs also. Being a white male, I am part of the majority and received no benefits while applying for colleges. Other people did though especially minorities. If everyone complains about white people getting jobs over minorities when they have the same qualifications, shouldn’t they agree that when a white person is more qualified they receive the position? I bring this up because when applying to colleges, I was denied while some people I knew who were minorities and had significantly lower grades and applied to the same school for the same major, were accepted. Just a thought that maybe affirmative action is just like nepotism in the way that they both allow under qualified people gain a position.

Many Americans are oblivious to how our government works and what it actually does. The government is powerful enough to control what the media shows the public so often times, the whole truth is not portrayed to American citizens. Also if a problem does not directly affect the public, they feel that there is no need to really understand what is going on. Americans have extremely busy lives, often with work, school, and family so they have little time to investigate in to some of the global issues. Also the issue involving the trading of rice to Haiti can be complicated to many Americans who may not have a background in global economics. Due to this fact the public is unaware of what our government has done to Haiti.

With that being said if all of a sudden there was some type of mass education of the public on the events that led to the public knowing the history of what occurred to present day Haiti, I feel there would be some change in America. Today there are many organizations that help fundraise money, provide medical and construction trips to Haiti and many other things. These organizations do not all understand the history behind Haiti but rather see a underdeveloped country that is in need of assistance.

I feel that if more of the public understood the actions America’s government did to destroy the economy of Haiti then there would be many protestors against our government. Today the United States imposes that Haiti buys the rice that is produced in America by lowering our prices compared to the prices of Haitian rice. This completely undermines the economy of Haiti and makes it practically impossible for Haitian farmers to make a living. I feel many people in America would be upset with this fact, and for those who feel why should I care since it doesn’t affect me; well it actually does. The only way America can make their prices of rice lower than Haitian rice is to pay American farmers with governmental money. This means tax payer money is being given to farmers so they can sell their rice in Haiti. This should upset working Americans because basically their tax paying money is being given to farmers so we can destroy the Haitian economy.

With this newly found knowledge I would expect to see many more groups rise and try to change the policy of our government. Some groups would want to help the Haitian people but I know some would selfishly only rise to try to cut taxes but cutting the payment of government money to farmers. No matter what the reason for protesting though there would be a movement in helping Haiti get back on its feet and become an independent country which does not have to rely on other larger countries to stabilize their economy. This would be a positive.

In the debate between creationism and evolution, I lie somewhere in the middle. Extreme creationists believe that there is a God who created the earth, everything on it from animals, to plants, to the soil, and also that this creator also made humans. There are many different beliefs of the story behind how the “creator” made our world. Some say he made it in seven days others may be longer or shorter and the facts of the story a little different but overall they are all based on the same connecting fact; some greater being than humans created our world. On the other hand lie the extremists of evolution. This belief is that all organisms came from single celled organism that has evolved over time. This is the belief that the human species is an evolution of the chimpanzee family. The evolution theory has many more supporting facts such as how human DNA is almost identical to that of chimpanzees. I forget the exact number but its close or more than 99%.

My belief is mixed because I do believe in the evolution that humans did evolve from another species that was or may still be here on Earth. I support the branch and tree evolution theory meaning that humans are a much more advanced form of a monkey. The reason I have some creationism also is that I do believe there is a God or supernatural force. I am Christian and believe that the God I believe in had a part in the evolution. I think that this God helped guide the process helping it in the direction that it went in. Due to my belief in both sides I don’t think my opinion would be swayed much by the news and a mass conversion of people switching sides of the argument.

If everywhere in the world, news channels, internet, blogs, and anything else said there was not a God and there was proof of his inexistence and all of the religious writings were false, I do not think I would lose my faith. This is because in today’s world, there are so many people and things saying that there is no higher power. There is not much circumstantial evidence that there is a higher being or that Jesus preformed those miracles (myself being Christian). There are stories of what happened. I believe in a God and most of this is based heavily off of belief and faith so when more “evidence” opposes it, there isn’t much of a change. On the other hand if these stations said there is a God, here is how we know, I think I would shift a little more to being religious. If it was said that he causes everything I would begin to question then why throughout history have we been evolving and why there is so much scientific evidence. Overall I am very stubborn and highly dislike change so I would want to maintain my belief system and how I think everything instead of following the rest of the world.

All three of these causalities heavily affect a person and their life. Beginning with when they come out of the womb. The causality of biological refers to a person being smarter, faster, perhaps better looking and other attributes due to their genetics. I do believe that this has some effect on people. Often in my life I have seen children who are very similar to their family; a son who is strong like his father, a daughter who is pretty like her mom, and children who have similar height to their parents. I believe these features have little to do with the success of a person. Now this is the physical attributes of a person. On the opposite side of physical features is more of the mind of a person. Just like physical features, it seems that a person’s behavior tends to lead towards their parents. Things like being funny, immaturity, intelligence, sensitivity, dedication, laziness and anger all seem to also be able to be passed down making them biological and these things have a direct effect on what a person does with their life because this is what makes them who they are. But are these traits really biological or could children foster the same traits as their parents by living in that particular type of environment? It makes sense for someone who has been raised in a hostile environment will become violent when they are older. Similar to someone who has very caring parents will also become caring. It may not be biological but rather the environment someone is in.

Determination is the next causality. This is much more important than biological in my opinion. The message that everyone tells young kids is if they put their mind to then they can accomplish it. Unfortunately this isn’t completely true. There are some people who are limited by where they live and the resources that are available to them. People growing up in the slums won’t have the same opportunities as children of wealthy businessmen. This is not to say that if those children in the slums are not determined that they could work their way out. This is very closely connected to the third causality which is free will because a person’s determination is part of their own choices to work hard for something they want. If someone wanted to become a doctor than it is in their own free will to make that choice. The next obstacle would go through the intensive schooling that is needed to accomplish their goal. This is where the determination would come into effect. They will need to be determined and not just give up when the work becomes difficult like it would be to certain to become. This is why determination and free will are more important than biological because with determination a person can change their outcome of where they will end up if they choose to.

Before this presentation I had a very biased opinion toward other places in the Middle East. My opinion of this area in the world was ignorant and still is ignorant to an extent. Never have I ever held a conversation from a person in this demographic region. This is why I know so little about it. I never opened a book or tried to find a truthful view of Iran. All I know is what I see on television or hear from other people but these people also have biased opinions because they only learn from the media. The news only shows the violence that occurs in this region, not necessarily in Iran but possibly neighboring countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Due to negligence, I made all of these countries the same in my mind. I always hear of the Muslims and see images of people wearing clothing that I am not used to seeing. This means that I thought they were different and the only thing I knew about their area was the violence I saw on the news.

Seeing the video made me actually see Iran. The people are normal and a lot like myself than I ever could imagine. They do the same things I do and enjoy the same things that I enjoy. The video chat with Maziar only proved my previously ignorant thoughts. He is just like people from America. Enjoys being with friends, seeing new things and even has the same favorite show as me in Friends! That video chat was able to make me see the similarities in people who are from the opposite world. It helped open my eyes and start to see the world for how it really is instead of being trapped inside of the American view.

This show did make me want to explore the world a lot more. I always have wanted to travel outside of the country for extended amounts of time but it was always to the normal places an American would want to go. I would have never of thought to go to the Middle East. It would have never had been an option. Now I would absolutely consider going to the Middle East or Iran. My parents would look at me weird for wanting to go and probably be scared because they don’t really know what is there. They only hear about the violence in that area so they would be nervous in the exact same way as I was. I now would be very interested in going to many places possibly other than Iran that before I may have never thought of going before. This session with Maziar makes me want to go out and see the world for how it truly is and make relationships with people who I would never reach out to before this class.

If there is a gene that directly affects whether a person is attracted to people of the same sex or of the opposite sex and there was technology enough to locate this gene, I would not tell my child if they had the “gay gene.” I would not even tell them when they became older. There are multiple reasons for this. The first is that if I told them they were supposed to be gay then I feel it would constrain them. I do not think as a parent I should tell my child what they are because from their perspective it is as if I am telling them that this is what they need to become. It is as if they have no choice, which may actually be true if it is genetic. I feel that by not telling them they are able to go on a journey through life discovering who they are rather than being told. I wouldn’t want my child to feel trapped thinking this is what I must be.

My second reason is because I don’t believe that just because you have a certain gene for your sexuality that it will one hundred percent of the time be correct. There are two things that affect a person. They are their genetics and then also the environment in which they live in. This is the reason why identical twins that have genes that are extremely close can end up being completely differently. They are shaped by the world around them and will have very different thought processes. So there is a chance that even if my child had the homosexual gene they could be heterosexual and also vice versa.

When I have a child, I would want them to be heterosexual. With that being said if the technology existed to change genes, I would never change my child’s genes. If they had the homosexual gene, I would not want to change it. Also if the sexuality trait existed and my child had the heterosexual trait, I would not tell them either. It connects to the same thought as above. There is a chance that they could have the gene but be the opposite and I wouldn’t want them to make my child feel like that is the direction they must swim. I guess overall I wouldn’t even want to know the gene that they possessed because in my eyes it doesn’t matter. It wouldn’t matter because no matter what I would not change the genes of my child to satisfy what I desire in my child. To me it is morally wrong.

Overall I would not tell me child if they had a gene that would directly affect what type of person they would become. I believe that they need to go through life discovering who they are instead of people telling them who they are supposed to be.