en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/762285 Comments by tahmed http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/what-americans-fear/#IDComment145930252 This video raises some very interesting points. That being said, the video is absolutely absurd. Its purpose is to scare Americans and that is precisely what it does. It takes quotes and passages from the books of Islam more or less out of context and uses Islamist extremists as a source. It is generally an easy feat to spin things to sound the way you want them to sound and to portray a certain image. That is exactly what the creators of this video are able to do. I think that one major thing to bring up about this video is the perpetuation of stereotypes, something that is a major problem in the world today. While it is true that stereotypes sometimes have their plays and sometimes stem from things that do have some basis of truth, many stereotypes come from views or opinions held by a minority of people, yet are portrayed as the opinion of the majority. For example, the stereotype that Asian people are good at math is not necessarily untrue. When I personally look at the Asian people that I have met in my life and at the statistics about how Asian people do in math in general, there is some factual basis for this stereotype. Still the downside to stereotypes is ones that show a minority opinion as one of the majority, evident in the use of extremists in the posted video. When stereotypes like these are shown, such as in the video, they are used to instill fear. Take for example the stereotype that all Middle-Eastern people are terrorists or that all Muslim people want jihad and “death to Americans”. Obviously both of these statements are not only false, but also in fact completely ludicrous. The number of Muslim people who are terrorists and want to bring down America is a very small number in relation to the population of Muslims and Middle-Easterners. But when people are ignorant to the facts, they often fall victim to believing things that are false. This video does a good job at doing what it is intended to- spinning things in order to instill fear. I think videos like this are ridiculous and hold no real weight when one takes into consideration the facts. Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:17:04 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/what-americans-fear/#IDComment145930252 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/16/the-kill-team-tragedy-in-the-middle-east-001-blog/#IDComment143802066 This article is extremely disturbing. I know that soldiers suffer in their adaptation to be able to kill and then in their transition back to the real world. These soldiers often suffer from stress disorders and other psychological problems. Transforming into the type of person who can kill someone is extremely traumatic. The fact that these soldiers could go out with the intention of killing someone, an innocent bystander or civilian at that, is never okay or acceptable. Even in a situation where the soldiers are dealing with war and the type of fighting and stress that goes with it, the soldiers do not have the right to take life into their own hands. Furthermore, the fact that in the first killing of the innocent farm boy that the village elder clearly blamed the soldiers and was ignored and that the captain overlooked all of this even though he found it fishy shows that the army is not holding itself up to a high enough standard. We are raised to believe that those in the army are doing everything that they can to protect this great country of ours, and in doing so, they hold themselves up to the standards that are expected of any American citizen. After seeing the movie in one of our last classes, it is obvious that our army is training our soldiers to be killers. Because of this, it cannot come as a complete shock to us that these soldiers begin to kill civilians or other innocent people. They are literally being reprogrammed to go against their natural human tendency to support the proliferation of life. When these soldiers are trained to stage killings and get away with it, it should not be surprising when they use their training for their own personal entertainment and satisfaction. While soldiers who are trained to kill may be necessary and effective when dealing with terrorists and others who are trying to unnecessarily kill, they may not be the best to deal with everyday people. While there is no way to go back and prevent this tragedy from happening, it is possible to look forward and prevent something similar from happening again. I am not necessarily sure how to do this, it is something that needs to be looked into further so that something this disturbing will not plague the world in the future. Mon, 18 Apr 2011 05:36:46 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/16/the-kill-team-tragedy-in-the-middle-east-001-blog/#IDComment143802066 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/07/4827/#IDComment141142092 I think that it is shocking how the oil companies are able to pressure the government like this with no repercussions other than increased profits. While it all makes sense, it is something that is sickening to think about. While there are huge debates going on right now and the threat of a government shutdown looming, something has to give. Our budget deficit has been increasing every year and we have reached the point where it is over ten trillion dollars. Other countries have even taken the steps of lowering the credit rating on United States bonds to below triple A. While this may not seem like a huge deal, it is still shocking. The United States has been seen as the strongest, safest country in the world for some time now. The bonds that it issued have been seen as risk-free and the standard of which to measure other bonds around the world. While oil companies do operate with the intention of making a profit, there is a point where the interests of the country have to take precedence. Even more so, they should realize that a stronger country as a whole would mean stronger profits in the future anyway. The problem stems form the fact that big oil and its money helps support the campaigns of many of the politicians who are currently in office. Even though Obama may want to cut these oil subsidies for the betterment of the country as a whole, many politicians have their own interests at heart. If they allow the subsidies to get cut, many of them will lose the very funding that got them into positions of power in the first place. This conflict of interest makes it hard for people to choose to do the thing that is best of the country, even if bettering the country is the purpose of their job in the first place. The oil industry is a very established industry as well. If the government is going to use the taxpayers’ money, they should allocate it to developing industries that may be able to offer cleaner and safer alternative energy in the future. Sat, 9 Apr 2011 02:06:19 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/07/4827/#IDComment141142092 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/30/so-what-your-take-on-those-inequality-classes/#IDComment139232623 I think that this whole debate comes down to innate human desires. People want to find happiness. Due to the invisible strings that control our lives and the socialization that we are subjected to as soon as we are born, we tend to become materialistic people. We believe that these material luxury goods will give us happiness and make our life experience more enjoyable. This is why most people want to be rich, or part of the socio-economic elite. The more money one has, the more opportunities one has to increase their happiness, or so they believe. Like Sam has discussed in class, inequality and class structure makes sense when you think about it. People want to reach the point of happiness and money. Once they achieve it, they try to make it so that their successors have the same luxuries. By both passing their money on and using the money and power they have through back doors and secret channels, they are able to create a system that perpetuates their money and social standing. Basically, once people have reached the top of the mountain, they do their best to stay their and use their advantages to help their loved ones reach the top as well. Also, I think that Sam is right in his first assumption that some people want wealth and will work harder than others to obtain it. Human psychology and behavior makes it easy to understand why the people at the top would pull strings to help their friends and family. I believe that if given the opportunity, nearly everyone would use the advantages that they are presented with. Additionally, if other people are playing the game unfairly, then they have essentially skewed the landscape. If you do not play unfairly as well, then you are at a disadvantage. This becomes a moral debate about whether people will decide to play unfairly or not, but in the end people will generally do what is in their own self-interest. Lastly, I think that the poster who said that we are all going to die anyway, so we should do all that we can to make the most of our life here on earth is completely correct. Sat, 2 Apr 2011 00:07:55 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/30/so-what-your-take-on-those-inequality-classes/#IDComment139232623 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/religion-in-the-future/#IDComment137622614 I thought that this article was very interesting. However, I do think that it was off base in thinking that religion is something that will die out. While this is a sociology course that we are taking and the article uses sociology as a basis to come to the conclusion, I think that religion is something that is more philosophical, so it should be looked at from that viewpoint. That being said, the claim that religion will become extinct, from the sociological perspective does seem valid. I agree with the idea that people want to be a part of the majority. This will cause the movement towards people not being identified with religion to increase significantly if it is able to get a good start. The fact that people who are unaffiliated compose the fastest growing group of people does not surprise me. The general attitude of apathy and laziness seems to be something that is gaining popularity in the world, and is something that I believe can further the movement towards the extinction of organized religion. One point that I thought was interesting was the fact that the utility of those who are not affiliated is higher than that of those who are affiliated. People tend to join a religion because they believe that it will increase their utility to some degree, whether it be in the afterlife or in the idea of having a large network or even in some other way. Another point that I think is very important is the reason why people join religion. People join religion not just for the possible benefits that I listed above, but also because they need a reason to reconcile how and why things in this world are. This is one reason why I think that religion is something that will never go extinct. We are always as humans going to need to have some notion about why things are the way they are. Unless people are not affiliated with a religion because they have a better understanding of the nature of the world, then I do not know how religion can die out. Sat, 26 Mar 2011 02:59:33 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/religion-in-the-future/#IDComment137622614 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/18/m-s-story/#IDComment135941882 I think that the inmate raises a lot of interesting points. The fact that he seems to have changed, as he says himself, goes to show that the system did its job. It should be noted though that he was a boy when he committed this crime. He should have been given the opportunity to repent for his sins and serve a punishment that did not involve spending his whole life in jail. One thing that sticks out about this case is that people like this inmate are being sentenced to a life in jail when they did not commit murder or an equivalent offense. Being an accessory to murder, especially when one did not commit the murder themselves and instead were removed from the situation, such as in the case of this inmate, should not be punished with such severe sentences. It is obvious that the inmate is remorseful and has learned of his sins. He should not have that all be for nothing. He should have the opportunity to resume a normal life and be a productive member of society. Having experienced such a tragic crime is something that will stick with this inmate for the remainder of this man’s life. It is a great thing to see that he has been able to not only learn about the error in his ways, but now try to give back through this blog. He seems intent on not making the wrong choice in life again. Though we all make mistakes, it is refreshing to see that he is devoted to being a good person and making good decisions. In his position, he truly has nothing to lose. He could choose to have no remorse and continue to make bad decisions because he does not have anywhere else he can really go. I think that the discussion about “lifers” that we had in class today was very enlightening. The series of events that led the one guy who stabbed another guy for raping his girlfriend is something that potentially happened to a large number of people in our class. For this guy to be branded as “evil” is tragic and something that we really need to step back and examine. Sat, 19 Mar 2011 00:20:49 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/18/m-s-story/#IDComment135941882 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/28/the-lottery-as-a-blessing-or-a-curse/#IDComment132264820 This article raises a lot of interesting points in regards to the age old money and happiness debate. I personally believe that while money cannot buy happiness, it can make life much easier. Ultimately, we are all going to get jobs to make money so that we can pay for all of the material things that facilitate our daily lives. One interesting thing to think about is what we would do if we had enough money so that we would never have to work. It seems like society has structured life so that as soon as we are deemed educated and individual, we are immediately thrown into the workforce for the majority of our life. We have been socialized in this way that work seems like the only thing for us to aspire to. If I didn’t have to work, I think that I would get very bored after a year or two and may enter the workforce anyway. In terms of the lottery curse, I think that people who play the lottery are generally in the low levels of the socioeconomic scale. When these people are thrown into lives of wealth, they are unsure of how to react. They are overwhelmed by all of the possibilities, the greed of friends and relatives, and the investment possibilities. They are generally not well-educated enough to know how to invest the money properly and end up spending or giving away so much that they end up in debt or in a bad situation. As shown in the study, people who win the lottery do not experience a greater amount of happiness than people who did not win the lottery. This is a very interesting point and goes to prove the notion that money cannot buy happiness, at least implicitly. In order to solve the problem of the lottery curse, I believe that the payments of the sum should definitely be divided up and paid either annually or quarterly. This allows people to ease into their new wealth and adjust to their new social situation. In addition, it helps protect the winner from blowing all of their money because they receive a sum on a regulated basis, not all at once. Fri, 4 Mar 2011 03:01:36 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/28/the-lottery-as-a-blessing-or-a-curse/#IDComment132264820 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/17/how-much-government-do-we-need/#IDComment129012974 I think that the question of where to draw the line in regards to the size of the government is very interesting and prevalent in today’s society. The reason that this question seems to resonate is the idea of restricting our freedom and whether an entity should be able to control the things we do, so long as they are not negatively affecting anyone else. While on one hand, I believe that people should be allowed to do what they want as long as they are not harming anybody else, on the other hand I do agree that there has to be some sort of regulation so that chaos does not ensue. All of this being said, I believe that the government does need to concern itself with issues that are affecting the public (i.e. obesity, education, drinking, smoking etc.). This does not mean that they should create a tax that increases the price of something like a Big Mac. When they do this, they are effectively limiting peoples’ ability to make a free choice, even if it may have a negative effect on their being. Instead, I think that they should just raise awareness of the problems that the item could cause. They can use warning labels and have ad campaigns, similar to what they do in the case of tobacco sales. This issue spills over into the issue of drug regulation. I personally believe that we should be able to put whatever we want into our body, again as long as we are not harming other people. I don’t think that the government should be able to tell us that we cannot do a drug if we so choose. The government should merely serve as a means of warning people what the harmful effects of using these substances are, but they should not be able to flat out make them illegal. The actions that the government is taking to promote breast-feeding are overstepping their bounds, at least in my opinion. Again, even for something positive, they should only be able to promote it, rather than giving a tax break for breast-feeding equipment. The government is definitely necessary, but I am an advocate for small government. Sat, 19 Feb 2011 03:24:22 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/17/how-much-government-do-we-need/#IDComment129012974 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/06/empathy-might-be-our-natural-drive/#IDComment126617653 I thought that this sociologist took a very interesting stance on the world and the direction that it may be headed. His main assertion is that humans have the natural inclination towards connecting with one another and becoming a part of something bigger than themselves. The development of technology has helped foster this, as people were able to move from only being able to communicate with those within shouting distance to now being able to communicate with people across the world. One interesting point that the sociologist does make is the advent of organizations stems from the innate human desire to belong. While it does boil down to small, specific organizations, it also is apparent in the largest ones we as humans see, countries (nation states) and religious groups. One thing that I think impedes our ability to belong is the human desire to be the best (greed). This desire though is just a less developed form of wanting to belong. The reason people want to be the best, the richest, the smartest, etc. is because they want all of the luxury and happiness that stems from having these characteristics. This happiness comes from being completely accepted. I though that the idea that everyone in the world must belong with each other, as in a single organization is more or less correct. The competition and war between the countries of the world evident in the past and likely to continue in the future only serve to hurt the world. I am a full believer that if a general human acceptance cannot be agreed upon (whether that means no separate countries is uncertain) then humanity will eventually self-destruct. The development of weapons in the future and the ability of the few to have control over the majority will eventually lead to some nutcase destroying the world, unless we as humans change. Changing the way that we live our lives will be an extremely difficult process because even one person dissents, the whole process could be impeded. In the end, I think it comes down to one’s faith in humanity. I personally believe that we have the power to save ourselves but have no doubt it will be a difficult process. Tue, 8 Feb 2011 04:44:23 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/06/empathy-might-be-our-natural-drive/#IDComment126617653 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/27/americans-gone-wild/#IDComment124937469 This story is fascinating, yet completely absurd at the same time. The real problem is that a five-year-old child had access to a gun, and if the stepfather was negligent in this aspect, then he should held accountable. Under no circumstance is a five-year-old child able to understand the dangerous repercussions that bringing a gun to school can carry. Most likely, the child did not even understand that a gun could truly take another person, or even his own life. Rather, this was likely just a product of the child’s curiosity. Fortunately, this situation was held under control because things could have been much worse. Had the gun discharged, this would not be just another news story, rather a national headline story. This story really proves the state that the country is in today. Arresting a five-year-old as a suspect is not only utterly ridiculous, but also an unfortunate incident. This child is now likely to be scarred for life. Like Sam talked about in class, this is now an invisible string that will be attached to the child for his entire life. He will be more likely to possess a gun as an adult and probably have a higher chance of becoming a real criminal himself. Additionally, I would like to agree with the point that another student made. Parents of other children are not going to let their children anywhere near this kid because they will think that he is dangerous. This will have major implications in how a seemingly normal child will be outcaste and this will shape the person that he develops into as an adult. All of this being said, I think it is important to look at this from the police’s viewpoint. For all they know, the child may have had intentions to use the gun, and even if he didn’t understand the severity of the situation, another student could have been injured or even killed. The legal system has to take a stern stance so that situations like this do not have worse results in the future. Furthermore, just as Sam said that the 350 word limit for these responses is stern, in that it cannot be 349 or 348 words, the law must be the same way, or people will abuse it. Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:29:55 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/27/americans-gone-wild/#IDComment124937469 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/23/how-free-are-these-90-students/#IDComment123470003 I thought that the fact that 90 teens, 11 percent of this high school, are pregnant is shocking. At first this seems like an unbelievably high number, but after watching the video and hearing about all of the factors affecting this school, this number does not seem so absurd, rather just an aberration. In this school of 800, almost 100 percent of the students receive free or reduced rate lunches. I infer from this that many of the students here are not very financially secure. While this may seem like a generalization, statistics do support the assertion that schools with such high rates of poverty have higher rates of drug use, crime, and pregnancy. That is not to say that the sheer number of people pregnant in this school is not high, but it is something that should be taken into account. Another factor that should be addressed in this story is pregnancy itself. There is a lot of luck that goes into getting someone pregnant. While I am sure that the vast majority of the students at this school were not trying to get pregnant, the fact that so many did is shocking. Couples often have to try for months or years to get pregnant, so the luck that plays such an important role for them seems to be almost artificially skewed in the case of this school. Additionally the statistics shown in the article mentioned in the blog seem to support the fact that so many students are pregnant. The statistics show that many of the teens in public schools are not sufficiently taught about sex education and those that are often not taught about abstinence as an effective option. Because there is not federally regulated program for sex education, there are no standards for what all students should know, and uneducated students are more likely to make decisions that lead to pregnancy. Lastly, the invisible strings that we have been discussing in class do seem to be playing a role in the situation because these students all seem to become from similar walks of life and are ending up in the same situation. The strings influenced the situations that they were placed in and eventually had a part to play in the decisions that they made, though they were free will choices, that led to such a high number of pregnancies. Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:26:48 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/23/how-free-are-these-90-students/#IDComment123470003 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/15/what-does-it-mean-to-be-free/#IDComment121949000 I think that this inmate brings up some very interesting points. After Sam’s lecture, about freedom, I began to think about what it really means to be free and was particular fascinated by the immense individual freedom that an inmate possesses. When one loses their outer freedoms and are confined to a life in jail, at a certain point they must look inward. They have the freedom to be exactly who they want to be without fear of the constraints of the outside world. While this is in no way an equal freedom to being part of the outside world, it does allow one to become who one truly is. This is something that the inmate echoes in his blog and seems to be something he personally has experienced. This inmate does address the fact that people take for granted the freedoms that they are allowed in their every day lives. Even the things that may seem miniscule become very apparent when they are taken away. For example, just having the ability to shower when I want to and use whatever soap or shampoo I want to is something that I often overlook. I hope to take some of the things that this inmate has expressed and become more conscious of my freedom so that I can appreciate it more. Having to live vicariously through others, as the inmate mentions, is something that I thought was interesting. Knowing that his family and loved ones have their freedom must give him at least some solace. Additionally, the freedom of choice that he talks about is something that can never be taken away. One thing that Sam mentioned in class that relates to this is the freedom of life. One choice that the inmate has that no one can ever take away is the freedom to choose to live. At any point in time he can commit suicide and end his own life, the most individual freedom one has in life. By choosing to write this blog, this inmate has provided much insight into freedom and has inspired me to be more conscious of my freedoms in my life. I wish him good luck in the rest of his endeavors. Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:08:50 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/15/what-does-it-mean-to-be-free/#IDComment121949000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9ca%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment120796365 SOC 001 Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:31:07 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9ca%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment120796365 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/300000-whats-it-mean-to-us__trashed/#IDComment69430516 I think that this girl brought up a very interesting point. One thing that she does not really talk about is how people are constantly dying. I am talking about maybe two people every second. So, while yes we need to take a step back and think that 300,000 people dying is a big deal, we must also take this with a grain of salt. I do not mean to sound inconsiderate or as if I don't care at all, as this is not my intent. I am merely trying to say that people dying and tragedies are a fact of life and we must consider this. We cannot take time off for every tragedy that takes place in the world. When someone in our family or that we knows dies, we are directly affected, and this is different than when people that we do not know dies. I just want to reiterate that I do not mean to sound like a jerk, I am just trying to make a point. Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:53:15 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/300000-whats-it-mean-to-us__trashed/#IDComment69430516 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/were-being-educated-for-stupidity-and-conformity-really__trashed/#IDComment68918270 I thought that a lot of the stuff that he says is very true. Though it may not seem like it at first, if we look back on our grade school experience, many of the things that he says become apparent. For example, teachers really do seem to give meaningless assignments. The entire educational system, though it is praised for its liberal nature, is really extremely structured. This structure causes a very rigid curriculum in most classes and little free will. For example, if we do not obey exactly what our teachers say, then we are reprimanded, punished, and generally receive worse grades. These grades, though seemingly not that important, dictate what happens in our future. If we receive a very high GPA, we can go to higher quality colleges, make more money, and obtain a generally higher quality of life. Similarly, if we attempt and exercise our creativity in classes, we often receive low grades, go to worse colleges, and end up in jobs making much less money than those who went to better colleges. Of course, there are many exceptions to this, but all in all, this is generally the nature of the educational system. Teachers make the rules, and the students are expected to follow them. If the students do not follow them, then they suffer the consequences. If a student follows a line of thinking or has new ideas that the teacher does not like, they suffer, even if they are being obedient. The education system in the United States is generally a system of conformity. Those who can adapt and conform the most are rewarded, and those who do not suffer. However, I think that one caveat in the system is that maybe it does ready us for society. Not only is the real world all about conformity and adapting, but conformity is virtually a requirement. I think that grade school prepares us to really have a free will and unique ideas, and we are expected to exercise these in college. Following college, we can really do whatever we want, but generally, those who conform, end up in a better position overall. I think that Chomsky made some good points about the science and engineering fields as well. These are fields that require innovation rather than obedience. If we are not independent and do not come up with new ideas, then society will remain stagnant and breakthroughs will never be made. The school system, the way it is set up, is not very conductive to these new thoughts and ideas. Maybe, if we changed the school system and education, a lot of change could be made in our country and we could progress to new levels that we have never even imagined. The system is not bad how it is presently, but it has the potential to be great and thought-provoking. Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:49:35 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/were-being-educated-for-stupidity-and-conformity-really__trashed/#IDComment68918270 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/the-tyranny-of-radical-muslims__trashed/#IDComment68915548 I think that people blow the whole situation out of proportion. There are many Muslim extremists, but there are just as many Christian extremists. People make a bigger deal about the Muslim extremists, such as Osama Bin Laden, because the news and media seem to publicize them more. The media never seems to make any commotion over Christian and Jewish extremists. Additionally, the majority of Muslim people are not extremists, rather they are purely following their religion much like those who are Christian. Furthermore, the God that Muslim people believe in is the exact same God that Christians believe in, they just know him by a different name. Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:24:43 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/the-tyranny-of-radical-muslims__trashed/#IDComment68915548 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/women__trashed/#IDComment68287387 I thought that this woman brings up some good points. A lot of the things that she says relate to what was portrayed in the play. I think that one must realize that attractiveness is a measure of both personality and looks. While we can alter our looks to an extent, we have free-reign with changing our personality. While this girl does state that all women are "beautiful" no matter how they look, not all women are attractive to every man. Men generally are looking for women that fit that glamorized body type or those with pretty features. This is what spurs attractiveness most often. Attractiveness is measured on a more balanced scale and takes personality into a great degree of consideration. Thu, 15 Apr 2010 23:19:41 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/women__trashed/#IDComment68287387 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-are-we-doing-here-really__trashed/#IDComment68286823 This guy raises a very interesting question, but at the same time one that is very difficult to answer. This is because race relations has common end goal that everyone strives for. No two people want the exact same thing for race relations. However, I think that those who are interested in learning about race relations do have at least a common purpose in become more enlightened and more educated. This is there really is no fixing society and its tie to race relations because there is no single right answer. One may want equality for all races, while others may feel like things are good just the way that they are. This is a very subjective question. Thu, 15 Apr 2010 23:14:01 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-are-we-doing-here-really__trashed/#IDComment68286823 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-the-men__trashed/#IDComment68286335 I think that men do feel pressure to conform to the norms of society. This may not be to the extent that women feel pressure, but men do feel pressure nonetheless. Women feel more pressure than men because the pressure is more visible. Good-looking women populate the main stream. They appear in television shows, movies, commercials, and are often even those with other talents. They are often high-profile singers or perform in other occupations at the center of the public's eye. Men often first judge a women on how they look. It is a plain and simple fact. No matter how much people may debate this matter, it most often comes down to looks. That is not to say that personality cannot make a female more desirable as a potential mate, however, for the initial interest to be shown, looks are often the most important factor, as looks are the most visible factor. For women, men are attractive based on a blend between looks and personality in much more of a balance. With men, looks tip the scales significantly, however for women, it is often a very even split between the two factors. This is very apparent in contemporary society. If one looks around, they will find a much higher proportion of attractive women dating unattractive men than unattractive women dating attractive men. This is due to the nature of males and females. To get back to the question of whether men feel pressure to conform, one should just look at the current styles. Back in high school, when a trend was started that a "popular kid" started to follow, slowly but surely the vast majority of males would soon follow in suit. This can be seen from the trends of preppy clothing, to popping one's collar, to wearing Vans shoes. Another example can be found here at school itself. When going to one's first party at school, one might not know how to dress. However, after attending a couple of parties, it becomes apparent that most males wear jeans and a t-shirt or a button down shirt. This causes one to adhere to this norm so that one does not stand out. One can also see this by talking to women. Men generally want to dress in a way that attracts a women, so if women like a certain clothing style or a certain body type, then men are going to try and obtain those things. For example, in today's society, it is evident that women tend to like athletic men with toned muscles and flat abs. This spurs men to go to the gym and to work out. While it is true that many men work out just to get into better shape, it is also apparent, at least in part, that men try to get into good shape so that they will become more attractive to women. This is an interesting topic. Thu, 15 Apr 2010 23:09:10 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-the-men__trashed/#IDComment68286335 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66917469 I think that this kid poses a very good question, though he does come off a bit rude in his speech. The question of whether or not anything that we learn in this class makes a difference to us is a difficult question to answer. Personally, I believe that we take in all of the information that Sam gives us and are often shocked or surprised by it. However, at least for the most part, I think that once we leave the class, we continue on in our everyday, normal lives and are not really changed by what we learned inside. One thing that Sam frequently mentions is how he has really been changed and now views race relations and things of this nature in a completely different way. However, one thing he does not mention as frequently, though he does talk about it once in a while, is that it was a very long process for him to change his perspective. Looking at and internalizing the six steps that we have been going over recently in changing our views is one thing, but actually being able to go through that process is a completely different variable. One thing that I think that is important to note is that I don't think Sam's class changes our minds unless we are ready and have the motivation to change our minds. By this I mean that those who have to motivation to pursue a change of opinion, much like Sam did in his past, will be influenced by Sam's class and change their opinion. One must know though that these people likely would have changed their opinions anyway and Sam's class merely offered them a venue to do so. On the other hand, those who come into class merely expecting it to be an interesting class will most likely not change their opinions. They will be fascinated by the new view points and statistics and even post their thoughts on a blog post, much like I am know, but the class will most likely not cause them to change their opinion. Another thing that Sam talks about in class is the idea that he does not care about our grades or what our opinions are. He truly wants us to just think. If we think, then he will be happy. He does not want us to necessarily change our opinions, rather he just wants to stimulate our thinking and allow us view things from a different perspective. This is something that one needs to consider when going into the class. What we do is really up to us and based on our wants. If we really want to change, then it will happen. Sam's class is very fascinating and offers incredibly different viewpoints on topics that are ever relevant in contemporary society. The class is not guaranteed or expected to change your opinion, but if you give it a chance, it will likely enlighten and educate you to many truths of society. Sat, 10 Apr 2010 02:01:00 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66917469