I had a difficult time answering the clicker question. I believe that they are both possible. I heard of how a boy was so feminine and girly at a very young age. So this would be an example of how a person is born gay. And I also heard that there was a woman that my friend knew who was raped by a man and therefore despised being with men so she chose to be a lesbian. This is an example of how a person chooses to be gay. I would say that it’s more believable when a person biologically leaned more to another sex. Because, like the boy I described above, would he choose to be gay if he had a choice knowing that the world is so against this kind of group? No one would want to commit to being stared at or differentiated (well, I know there are attention seekers and strong individuals who do want this…) unless it was unbearable to live with the given gender, starting from a very young age. So I sympathize with them even though as a Christian I am taught that homosexuality is a sin. I know it’s a sin but I also sin with so many other things; therefore, I don’t avoid or ignore gay people at all. I guess when it comes to gay marriages and having children…. I just don’t know the answer to it.
Sam said in class that people have a hard time accepting gay people and without discrimination. But for people like me, we have a hard time trying to separate gays and not accept them. My friends who are very religious will not tolerate gays. And when I am with them I feel as though I have to not understand and have a opposing sentiments towards gays. I feel that since I am okay with gays (which I am in good terms with a few around me) and even gave a free hug to a gay at the HUB, I am less of a true Christian and more secular. So I try to think that gays and lesbians should not live the way they live; however, who am I to judge other people of their sin when I am also a sinner?
I believe this carefree attitude on gays comes from my father. He said he had a guy friend who had four older sisters. This guy friend was just feminine all the way, in his voice, movement and interests. My father understood that this friend was still a nice person; it was the environment in which he was brought up in and his natural tendency to be gay that made this friend that way. So, I am also rather accepting of gays, maybe from my father’s experience and influence. It is likely that one can disapprove gays and lesbians if one’s parents, friends and the society that one grows up in disapprove gays and lesbians.

Honestly, I do not like these type of questions in general because they are so overly dramatized and offer no exceptions. I understand the reason behind not being able to give a different answer other than the ones introduced to me, but I still frown upon these childish questions.
Anyway, since it is just for fun, I chose my child. I think I made the right choice and considering that I am a mother, my love for my child would be too great to even rationally decide my options. It would be almost instinct that I would swim to save my child. But, if I had a moment to think rationally, the answer would still be the same. My child.
Firstly, my mom would know exactly how I would feel since we are both mothers and she would support my decision to save my child instead of swimming towards her. It’s her grandchild as well, so I don’t think she would resent me as she drowns.
Secondly, my husband would also understand why I cannot save him. It’s his child as well so he would be glad that I can at least save the child and survive. If I did save him, he could be devastated that I saved him rather than the child. How can a parent live with that guilt?
If the child is young and cannot comprehend that his/her grandmother and father died because I saved him/her, that would be ideal but there is a possibility that s/he will blame me for letting them drown. This would be the worst case I could think of. I think the age of the child matters, because the older s/he is, the more likely that s/he would at least understand that I had no choice but to save him/her. But, the older the child is, s/he could blame him/herself for being the cause of the others’ deaths. This is pretty complicated.
I was slightly hesitant between my child and my husband or my significant other because like what other students said, I can always give birth to more children with my partner if I believe that he is my only love and destiny. But like what another guy said, I can always find another person and marry him. This can be tricky and will depend on whether a person believes in true love to be one’s destiny and that there can only be one person who can fit that spot.
But what made me finalize my decision to save my child was the thought that I would not be happy my husband knowing that our child is dead. I heard that parents who lose their child tend to get divorced because they cannot bear to live together with seeing their child’s face that resembles their spouse. Death of a child can tighten the bond between couples and families but can also shatter families. So, this was the decisive reason why I chose my child.
If I can answer this question with my own answer, I would say that I would jump in the river and drown with my mother, husband and child because I would not be able to live in this world with the thought that I was not able to do anything to save the other two. Well, this is getting way to serious for a random question in class.

I believe this stems from the history of the role of religion had on people. Centuries ago, the religious authorities and the Church were the power because they represented the people before God and were the middle passage to reach God. People knew nothing; the average men were not allowed to read the Bible. So, this tradition of learning from a religious figure who knows God more and can better confess the sins on behalf of the sinner and teach the way to live a faithful life still continued.
I am a Christian and I believe that as Christians we must go to church on Sundays to worship and praise. I believe that the congregation and the community that the church creates is a lot more important than the pastor. Essentially, the church is a place for Christians to get together and praise together more so than to listen to the sermons and absorb everything that the pastor says. With that said I am answering the question that people think they have to go to a religious figure to know God, but I don’t think that is the case. Of course, people can ask their pastor or religious leader for clarification on some dilemmas and problems, but they can always learn from their own ways and by the truth that is all around us. No one is blinded from the truth of the universe if they are willing to search for it. I believe that there is truth in this world that will never change. It is universal, so people can always learn about God through the truth. Also, Bibles and religious texts are available for everyone to study and read. So, we can learn and communicate with God through personal and individual ways without the religious figures.
However, those religious authorities know God at a deeper level because their vocation is to study and help the believers who struggle with their faith. When I read the Bible, there are times when I cannot understand the deep meaning underneath. So, then I would ask my pastor and hear his biblical interpretation of it. No one pressures me to believe it the way that my pastor believes. The pastors and religious figures are also human; therefore, they are limited in some ways and they absolutely do not know everything that God wants to reveal to us.
We can have our individual ways to know God and communicate with God. However, at the end of the day, I learn so much more from my fellow believers and I am happy when I know that there are people around me who believe in the same God. It gives me a lot of courage to interact and learn from them as well. So, I would still go to church and interact as well as ask my pastor for knowledge, rather than have my own individual relationship with God.

The video could have been over-exaggerated to become a racist, discriminatory and offensive video if one could stretch that far. However, it can be casually overlooked and just understood as how Asians really do not know football that well and it’s not a big deal.
As the students who spoke in class took note of, the Asians who were interviewed were clearly fresh-off-the-boat international students. They had distinct accents and were not very fluent in English. How can you expect those Asian students to know the details of their school’s football team when they are dealing with the big issue of learning the American culture? If you have this observation as a basis, the interviews should not be offensive but just a fact and a given thing.
The interviewer’s decision to strategically pick on the Asians, especially the not-so-Americanized students, was not wise. It was set up to only interview the Asians who were assumed to have a difficult time comprehending the questions and struggle to come up with things to say. But, because we know that it is natural that they don’t know, we can just have a good laugh, not at Asians but “with” the Asians.
I admit to not knowing our school’s football team and its history. I rarely get any news about it, I don’t talk about it and I am not in search for the newest update and this is fine with me. I told my discussion group at the end of the discussion when we were talking about football and Paterno that I knew nothing and did not understand since I had no idea what we discussed that day. My group could think that I am a typical Asian who doesn’t know about football but I am not offended because it’s my personal preference and I lack interest in football because I am like that (I am not really interested in any sport), even before going into my race. I am pretty sure there are Asians who are passionate about American football and there are White people and people from different racial groups who dislike/lack knowledge in football.
I believe that the Asians who spoke in class about how they also thought the video was funny are not disowning their race by laughing at it with the rest of the class but merely accepting the fact that it is likely for Asians to not like football and that those particular newly arrived international students are even more likely to not like football, or maybe not yet know football.
If there were some minority group students who were offended even if they were not Asians, they should relax. The video is not to make fun of the whole Asians. Or it should not be interpreted like that. Just laugh it off knowing that those Asians were not accustomed to their school, let alone the American culture, to understand what the interviewer was asking. Give credit to them for at least trying hard to give an opinion and answer well as much as possible!

I believe that children see the world and people with pure and uncontaminated eyes. They accept things as they see and experience without any preconceived perceptions. As we grow, we learn the history, interact with people and know the relations that different ethnicities have. These effects how we think of a new person we meet for the first time. A little white boy might freely approach a person of color or a minority while his parents are hesitant to do the same. The parents might even quickly snatch the boy and tell him not to do that in the future. The boy has no idea why but will learn to never repeat that just because his parents told him not to. Now, this is a very dramatic and racist example. But it’s just to explain how those social influences accumulate to somehow, naturally, mold a person’s racial actions and perceptions.
In kindergartens and preschools, of course the teachers tell the kids that they are very special, much loved and unique. This is to encourage those kids to be creative, happy and to grow well. I mean, little kids are so cute that you would just say things like that without any intention to socialize them.
As we grow, things are different. We see that there are a lot of people. We realize that we are just part of a society, an individual but at the same time a small and insignificant part of a large world. Because we realize the how miserable and scary it is to be out in the world by ourselves, we try to associate with the same kinds and feel that we are a member of something. Naturally, it feels comfortable to be around people similar to us, and continue to be in a familiar setting.
Also the respect to another human being may be the reason why we are careful not to think we are different. We, in our “political correctness”, try to not to offend anyone-thereby try not to see the differences when we can clearly see them.
I think the whole thing depends on the environment in which you grew up and is right now. The stages that Sam mentioned in class are essentially proportional to the amount of time spent with different races and the effort to know them personally. So a kid is in Stage 1 because they no nothing. They give no thought about their race. As we grow up, assuming that we interact with more diverse group of people, we go up the stages and end up in a higher stage, fully aware of the diversity of this country and the world. If we realize that we are all unique, then no one is unique. Therefore, we understand that no one is really different. This video question doesn’t quite make sense and can be answered without the ethnicity/race approach but I tried to incorporate it as much as possible.

As for the oil issue, I absolutely think that the war was because of oil. Politicians say that America is fighting a moral war and a war over ideologies but realistically, it is oil. As an International Politics student, I know that states do not go into war if there is not a reward or result to be awarded through this expensive event. I do realize that as a country of democratic freedom, U.S. wants to spread this ideal government ideology all over the world but this will never be the main reason; rather it is an excuse and rationalization. Can’t people act sorely for the benefit of others? Yes they can. As a Christian as well, I know people can do good for the sake of others without desiring a gain or benefit of their own; however, countries/governments do not. This may be why the Iraqis are upset with the U.S. for coming into their country despite the good things that the U.S. has done in Iraq. The Iraqis could see that the U.S. are getting the oil reserves clearly with their own eyes than us.

As much as the Americans were shocked and enraged by the acts of a few terrorists from Iraq for destroying the country and bringing despair and tragedy, these emotions can be equally felt by the Iraqis as well. I find this sad and uncomfortable that, despite how true and simple it is to think of this logic, we often forget that these opinions can come from both groups. Why is it that Americans can be justified in going to war with Iraq for the terrorisms done by a few terrorists while the Iraqis shouldn’t think this way when a few Americans that they encounter hurt their lives too? As much as it is wrong for the Muslims to perceive all the western population as a threat and enemy to their religion and security, it is also wrong for Americans to discriminate and avoid the Muslims as terrorists. This is a struggle that I don’t think will be resolved in the near future.

From watching the two videos that showed violent and arrogant images of the American soldiers, I just thought that those are a small percentage of the soldiers in Iraq. I was not going to generalize that all American soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan were/are like that. However, my mind did focus on the Iraqi civilians who were harmed and mistreated in the videos. What would they think of the American soldiers in general through these few that they have encountered? It is equally wrong for the Iraqi civilians to generalize the country of America as violent and brutal through these few soldiers, but given that we all generalize and enlarge our experiences to account for all the people in such group, it is likely that those Iraqi civilians’ perception of America will become negative and hostile. As a foreigner myself, I have often thought of Americans as rather proud and stubborn people- this is obviously not true all the way and being proud of their country is often a good thing- but because I met a few people who boasted of the greatness of U.S. and considered it right for the U.S. to barge into other countries’ affairs because the U.S. was the superpower, I was able to associate with the Iraqis in the videos a little bit better.

From watching the two videos that showed violent and arrogant images of the American soldiers, I just thought that those are a small percentage of the soldiers in Iraq. I was not going to generalize that all American soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan were/are like that. However, my mind did focus on the Iraqi civilians who were harmed and mistreated in the videos. What would they think of the American soldiers in general through these few that they have encountered? It is equally wrong for the Iraqi civilians to generalize the country of America as violent and brutal through these few soldiers, but given that we all generalize and enlarge our experiences to account for all the people in such group, it is likely that those Iraqi civilians’ perception of America will become negative and hostile. As a foreigner myself, I have often thought of Americans as rather proud and stubborn people- this is obviously not true all the way and being proud of their country is often a good thing- but because I met a few people who boasted of the greatness of U.S. and considered it right for the U.S. to barge into other countries’ affairs because the U.S. was the superpower, I was able to associate with the Iraqis in the videos a little bit better.
As much as the Americans were shocked and enraged by the acts of a few terrorists from Iraq for destroying the country and bringing despair and tragedy, these emotions can be equally felt by the Iraqis as well. I find this sad and uncomfortable that, despite how true and simple it is to think of this logic, we often forget that these opinions can come from both groups. Why is it that Americans can be justified in going to war with Iraq for the terrorisms done by a few terrorists while the Iraqis shouldn’t think this way when a few Americans that they encounter hurt their lives too? As much as it is wrong for the Muslims to perceive all the western population as a threat and enemy to their religion and security, it is also wrong for Americans to discriminate and avoid the Muslims as terrorists. This is a struggle that I don’t think will be resolved in the near future.
As for the oil issue, I absolutely think that the war was because of oil. Politicians say that America is fighting a moral war and a war over ideologies but realistically, it is oil. As an International Politics student, I know that states do not go into war if there is not a reward or result to be awarded through this expensive event. I do realize that as a country of democratic freedom, U.S. wants to spread this ideal government ideology all over the world but this will never be the main reason; rather it is an excuse and rationalization. Can’t people act sorely for the benefit of others? Yes they can. As a Christian as well, I know people can do good for the sake of others without desiring a gain or benefit of their own; however, countries/governments do not. This may be why the Iraqis are upset with the U.S. for coming into their country despite the good things that the U.S. has done in Iraq. The Iraqis could see that the U.S. are getting the oil reserves clearly with their own eyes than us.
As Sam said in the video he showed, we just have to understand and see it through the other person’s eyes, and put ourselves in their shoes. There’s nothing we can do realistically, but understanding the other side’s point of view and thought can at least help.

Through SOC 119, I have learned many aspects of race that I did not realize that they existed. I am generally with more Asians and Whites than Blacks or Latinos so it was really eye opening to find out what the students wanted to ask in class, let alone the answers to those questions. Sometimes I see some positive outcome of this class and hope that the students and I will make at least a small difference that could result in a bigger impact in our Penn State community and in the outside society after we graduate. However, sometimes I am fed up when some people are still prejudiced and will generalize on a person based on his or her race. I am even angrier when I, who knows better not to, also make the same generalizations and discriminating thoughts inside my mind. I do not rush into conclusion that this class will magically transform our perspectives. It’s unrealistic to solve the issue of race that has stubbornly survived through history.
My thoughts are the following:
Even Professor Richards has his own thoughts and will have his own opinions on certain things. It is safe to say that since he belongs to a certain group and there is no way he can belong in other groups and accept everything. So, if everyone is like this, is there a solution to this issue of racism and prejudice? The class can teach us other people’s opinions and inform us of the different ways to approach the same issue. However, at the end of the day, it’s just listening to what others have to say without really giving up on each individual’s opinions. Learning about it is a big improvement in it of itself, but people cannot give up their school of thoughts, the environment they are in and standards. Sam challenges me with his questions directed towards Christians/ Asians to enlighten me with some of the things I would not have thought otherwise. But he can’t convince me to change my understanding of the issues. Maybe it is not even his intention to do that but it’s just unfortunate that, despite the time we spend in class talking about these issues, people will continue to think the way they do.
I do not want to sound pessimistic that this class won’t do anything and it’s a waste of time, because it’s actually very informative and thought-provoking. I am only stating that the impact the class has in the students is not significant. I will have to hope that those insignificant impacts will generate a bigger influence in the future. When a student asked Sam what was the one thing that he wanted it to happen to solve this race issue, Sam answered that he wanted people to live together and integrate. I have to agree that it is crucial that people live in diverse and mixed communities to really know the people they have prejudices against. Maybe if we also integrate and interact with one another, my dilemma could also be solved.