Race doesn’t make me feel uncomfortable, people do. I come from a town where black, brown, yellow, tan and off white people socialize with each other because color doesn’t exist in our world. In my bubble of a town, interracial relationships are the normality whether you’re an Asian who is best friends with a Muslim or are married to each other; the racial mergence is expected. In the second grade one of my best friends were white, it killed me when she moved to France. When I moved off campus, I chose to live with a white female. Race really doesn’t exist to me because of my experience interacting with people from different races and ethnicities, so it takes a lot for me to feel uncomfortable or awkward in a room full of “different” people.
Being comfortable in diverse settings is not the same as being comfortable in settings where thee is a predominate race; this is something I learned my freshmen year of college through experiencing how other people interact with different races. As I explained earlier I come from a town where color does not exist so people judge people by other means, but before moving to that town I lived in a neighborhood where I was only surrounded by minorities. I’ve witnessed white people walk through my old neighborhood with faces of fear and concern – this could be because they are unfamiliar with the area, are scared they will a victim of a stereotypical act or a combination of both.
I think that after my experiences, I can now say that I am comfortable going to a party where the attendees are predominately from another race or ethnicity. I’ll admit that at first, it will probably make me feel awkward to be the only person of my race there but that changes as I meet people; as long as I am genuinely welcomed at a place, I will feel comfortable there. Once again, race doesn’t make me feel uncomfortable, people do.
If I ended up going to a party where I was the only female, I would feel extremely uncomfortable. Unless the men were gay, it would be intimidating to be the only girl in a sausage fest because I wouldn’t be able to let loose or let my guard down without having to always make sure my dress was pulled down, hair was intact, or that I wasn’t subliminally being provocative. I guess these constraints are due to the double standards that exist in today’s society. Anything a woman does can be misconstrued for leading a man on to execute an unwarranted action, i.e., sexual assault. These restraints would create an awkward tension within me causing to leave the party most likely.

The statistics regarding how often, or not often I should say, females have orgasms during sex in Sam’s Needy Penis lecture we’re 100% true. Being a sexually active female, these stats were not news to me but I found the male reaction to these statistics absolutely hilarious. I thought that everybody knew women don’t cum as often as men, but it seems apparent that women are also very good liars in bed.

Good sex, orgasm included, is beyond physical attraction; if I don’t trust you and at the very least like who you are as a person and where you are at in your life, there’s a good chance I probably will not enjoy the sex nor have an orgasm. This could just be a me issue though.

Males don’t seem to have this issue when they have sex, as long as their penis is stroked enough times, it is almost 100% guaranteed that a man will have an orgasm. This goes to prove the point of Sam’s lecture, that sex is centered around the male – when the penis gets hard, sex can start and when the man has an orgasm, sex ends… this usually results in the female being left hanging because her orgasms hasn’t arrived yet.
I truly believe that mastering the female orgasm is an art; we need for the male to be slow at the right times, fast at the right times, caring during the entire session and to NOT stop when he is tired. Putting this much effort towards making a female have an orgasm is mostly realistic in a relationship. During a one-night-stand there is ONE goal for the man – to think that the female is enjoying him while he works towards his orgasm.

I have been in one serious relationship and have had one one-night-stand and can vouch that sex in a relationship is MUCH better for a female. In a relationship, there is an abundance of time to have trial and error sex where both partners can try different positions, tricks, foreplay, etc to see what pleases their mate best – however, this luxury doesn’t apply when you agree to have a one-night-stand. This creates a huge chance for the female that she will not receive an orgasm, it is also one of the main reasons why I am not too fond of one-night-stands.
I am not trying to say that one-night-stand sex can’t be good or that females can’t have orgasms from it, but sex for a female is much more complex than it is for a male.
For a female sex requires the right combination of variables and it is not often that a stranger or friend will get that combination right in one night.

I think that some of the reasons why white men may not feel comfortable approaching minority women when sober is a combination of a lack of self-confidence and ignorance, but these excuses broaden themselves to approaching women in general.
Alcohol allows a person to feel that they can openly express themselves without judgment and in our generation today that is a huge perk! College is a time for boys to mature into men, hopefully, and through this transition they may use alcohol as a huge gateway drug to fill the confidence they need. Reasons why guys may need to fill this confidence void can be a fear rejection because it can be seen as a direct hit to their ego. We all know the saying, “A drunk mind speaks sober thoughts,” well this definitely applies to men approaching women.
A white male could have always had an interest in minority women but his ignorance may have restricted him from approaching them. Negative stereotypes, such as black women are loud; Hispanic women are crazy; or even that white women are submissive can cloud a man’s mind and become a crucial factor in how he decides whom to approach for a romantic relationship.
Another reason why white males may only feel comfortable approaching minority women when inebriated is their comfort level in diverse settings. If a guy grew up in an all or majority white community, then perusing white women is all he knows. He may be scared to branch out to other races simply because he is uncomfortable and that is something that should change over time. His college experience will show him that women can’t be generalized, especially by race.
A final, and important reason why white men may think twice about approaching minority women when sober is their views on the beliefs of these women. An American white guy may automatically assume that a girl from the Middle East practices the Muslim religion so she must have some affiliation with terrorist. Extreme? Maybe, but you get the point.
I guess this is another angle on the stereotype issue; these self-inflicted restrictions we choose to believe in hinder reality. In order words, guys who are scared to approach minority women sober do it to themselves.
As you can see, there can be a variety of reasons for why white men don’t approach minority women when sober. Some of the reasons can be tied to race related issues but most of them have to do with the individual male and his experience with dating and/or being in a diverse setting. All in all, I think that men have trouble approaching women in general regardless of race and when alcohol comes into play it allows them to say and do things they’ve always wanted to.

.

Countries are big, super powered organizations; they require a small percentage of people to handle all the administrative and external duties. Having been involved in multiple student orgs on campus I often hear the same complaints being recycled, these include long-term lack of communication, lack of transparency, and a need to make sure there are no internal issues before collaborating with other orgs. I believe a lot of similar issues reside within the organization we call the United States of America.
When Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005 President Bush did his best sending relief efforts to help relocate those trapped in the unsafe conditions to safety, however once the water levels dissipated so did all of the glorious federal aid. Eight years later, New Orleans is now the fifth most dangerous city in the country with a murder rate higher than the city in the number one spot.
The billions of dollar invested in foreign aid could have been invested into long-term aid plans that will help benefit cities current and future structure and not just be used to respond to state of emergencies.
The difference between helping people in other countries versus helping people in our own country is priority. It seems that all too often the United States responds quicker to foreign aid calls than domestic. This becomes unfair when the news glorifies the U.S.’s humanitarian efforts while Native Americans and Hurricane Katrina victims remain left in a dark shadow. Now there are situations where a country’s need for foreign aid is much greater than the needs of domestic issues, but even so there should be an improved balance of aid. I believe that domestic issues should be taken care of first before lending a hand to others.
This logic gets tricky when discussing issues within Native American communities because most of them have been declared as sovereign nations, meaning that the United States recognizes them as having independent authority within the borders of there land. Being recognized as a sovereign nation also means that the federal government can refuse any request for aid. Now I would like to sit here and believe that after all the terror the United States have put these people through we would not mind aiding them when asked but this is the same government that allowed slavery to play out for over 400 years; It’s hard to advocate for a super power that you don’t trust.
Now a new question stands – would it be wrong if the United States prioritized foreign aid over the aid of a sovereign nation? I vote no, because these people had the opportunity to conform to the current government and went out of their way to refuse assistance. I do think that these independent nations should be prioritized on the same scale as foreign aid is.

Americans have embarrassingly short attention spans; we care about an issue for a moment but then go back to living our first world lives without having made any effort to change a cause. Heck, we treat our very own people with the same lack of care when it comes to aiding the less fortunate. To put it into perspective, take a homeless person; some people will help a homeless person by giving them food to temporarily feed their hungry stomach instead of money that could go towards renting an apartment, buying clothes, or acquiring the necessary means to look for a job. Another example of the culture American has embraced when it comes to helping others is Hurricane Katrina; when the powerful storm hit New Orleans the government was slow to respond to the city’s SOS. So how can we really expect a first world country that is selfish towards its own people to be fair towards a third world country?
I think that the United States is making a great humanitarian “effort” to provide aid to third world countries, specifically Haiti, that are in great need of it. Without this aid many people would not be able to receive medical care, afford food, and/or have access to clean water. However, just because the United States is providing aid does not mean that we are helping these countries solve their most rooted problems. I feel as though the United States helps Haitian citizens survive within their means rather than help rebuild the shattered economy.
A sad reality is that the U.S. is actually suppressing the Haitian economy by forcing them to import our goods, such as rice, and sell it to the citizens at a cheaper price.
When I learned about this I initially didn’t see a problem with selling goods for cheap until I realized how it is taking jobs away from local farmers, thus pushing the economy into a deeper hole. Though it is sad what we are doing, I don’t feel that there is much I can do to change what is happening. No disrespect to struggling third world countries, but there are too many problems in the world to advocate for. It would have to take a devastating and personal experience for me to invest my time, money and efforts into changing the way we aid others. I am sure I am not the only person who feels this way; in fact I believe this is what would happen if Americans were educated on how we provide aid to Haiti. I think that the best approach to this situation to stop criticizing the way we aid third world countries and be happy that we are aiding them at all because at a certain point in time I’m sure people were complaining that struggling countries receive no help at all. Let’s not make a solution to a problem another problem.

A taboo is a societal norm where people are restricted from associating with certain people, places or things. There are a variety of taboo subjects that hinder people from opening up their feelings and opinions. In fact, almost anything you talk about can be seen as taboo. In class he pointed out that women who don’t feel comfortable discussing their period suffer from these taboos because it restricts your freedom of speech.
The most common taboo would have to be discussing racism. It has always that big elephant in the room, especially between black and white people; white people are always worried they are going to offend a black person and black people are quick to relate a negative experience with a white to racism. We sacrifice our feelings to try to make others comfortable.
There’s a great deal of sensitivity associated with abortion; if you are pro-life then you step on the toes of women having a decision over their body but if you are pro-abortion then you have to deal with the murderer stigma.
A similar sensitivity is present when talking about homosexuality; people get so caught up in not wanting to offend gay people with their comments that they avoid the subject as a whole. I hate the people who get so wrapped up in defending their opinion, they become ignorant to accepting different views.
I believe there is also a taboo within the topic of sex, talk about herds of elephants in a room! People aren’t comfortable discussing their track record; they feel that they will be judged for the things they have done or the people that they have had relations with –but why? What’s already done is done. This fear of judgment really puts restraints on people’s freedoms. Now I see what Sam was talking about.
I believe that the best way to defeat the awkwardness, guilt, and discomfort in discussing these subjects is to... discuss them! Talking openly with others about issues that make you feel uncomfortable provides opportunity to learn more on the subject, recognize your own ignorance, and to accept different perspectives. Heck, by writing this I was able to acknowledge how sheltered societal norms make us. It is always best to create and abide to your own ideas. I was also reminded that humans aren’t perfect and we aren’t going to always agree to do the right thing. There will be times when you don’t agree with an opinion or may have offended someone because of your own, but that’s life, so what? I wish people weren’t so afraid of being judged for not agreeing with the majority opinion. Be different, stray away from societal norms because those are what strain our comfort. Taboos don’t have to exist; we’ve created and put this burden on ourselves.

I found Thursday’s lecture to be very cool for once (we know that ALL of the lectures are cool according to Sam) because he finally explained why we all die the same and for the first time I questioned my belief.
Many times throughout the semester Sam would mention that we all die the same, but I never quite understood what he meant by this. In my mind I’m thinking, “How can we die the same when there’s so many ways your body can die? There’s heart failure, kidney cancer, strokes, etc… There are so many different parts of your body that can cause it to shutdown… blah blah blah” but Sam narrowed it down to suicide vs. homicide/natural death. He explained that scientifically, those who pass away and have been resuscitated report having the same after death experience including having warm feelings, seeing a bright light, feeling completely comfortable, etc. However, those who take their own life associate their after death experience with negative and painful feelings. All in all, regardless of faith, sexual preference, race and other factors everyone had the same experience. There was no mention of heaven, hell or encountering any type of God. I found this very interesting because it reasserts the question of whether God exist.
I have a relationship with God but I am not the most religious person. I would like to consider myself more spiritual over anything because I don’t go to church every Sunday, I don’t pray before I eat every meal, read the bible or do any or practice my religion like most worshippers are expected to; my relationship with God is private.
After Sam explained what happens when you die I wouldn’t say that it shook my faith but it did introduce a new perspective about religion and death. It really made me reflect on my relationship and wonder how different my life would be if I were an atheist, if it would be different at all. However, I do not feel the need to break my bond with God due to the reports of other people. How do I know that they aren’t lying? They could’ve glorified the story to make it sounds interesting. How do I know that what happens to people who pass away and are resuscitated experience the same thing as people who die and never come back. I really believe that most things that happens to us in life is pre-planned, so if you come back from death that was meant to happen. I cannot/will not change my faith and virtuous path in life based on the stories of someone else because if I did then I have failed and disappointed my God. I view Sam’s lecture as a test of my faith.

If I woke up tomorrow morning, turned on the news and saw that ‘God Doesn’t Exist’ was the leading story, I’d roll my eyes and say, “Well duh, what else is new?” This sarcasm would come from me making fun of the literal meaning of the headline, God Doesn’t Exist. I mean, of course he doesn’t exist no one in today’s world has ever seen him, heard from him, or have even received an email from him. If he were to exist I’d think that at the very least, Oprah would have had a two hour special with him, asking questions the world has been dying to have answered. But since that hasn’t happened, I’d shake my head at the media and consider changing my major of Broadcast Journalism.

However, if I woke up tomorrow morning, turned on the news and saw that ‘God Never Existed’ was the leading story, I’d be in complete shock and then disbelief, but I’d still watch the news story. I’d need extensive explanations, sources, and evidence – hell I’d need for Oprah to do a two-hour special to explain how this controversial statement came about.

People look to God when they have no one else to look to, when times get rough and when they are unsure of what step to take next. God is the one who is consulted to, he lead us in the right direction. God always has an answer and a plan. So if God never existed, then… whom have we been confiding in for so long? Who has been guiding me? Is there some other god? This uncertainty would hurt a great amount of people and I’d be nervous of riots starting or something as extreme as a crusade to occur. Overly religious people are crazy!

This controversy would also raise our unemployment rate because churches would close, leaving ministers and other workers of the church shit out of luck; Jehovah’s witnesses wouldn’t have a purpose anymore – it would just be bad if this ever happened. But if you have strong faith in God then you’d see this crisis as a test of your faith and wouldn’t even let it faze you.

Even though I don’t claim to be religious and rather call myself spiritual, I do have a personal relationship with God, and for someone to try and take that relationship from me is like ethical robbery. Up until I was about 17, I had a hard time believing God ever existed due to the lack of evidence, but personal experiences help me turn that attitude around
Like many others, I chose to believe in God because I think that he was a great leader during his time and I have recognized that certain events have occurred due to his blessing; therefore I think that the most appropriate thing for me to do would be to pray and wait.

After watching the video of the Iranian people, I was pleased to see that their culture did not seem to differ much from the American culture, like at all. The people our aged partied just as wild as Americans, dressed like Americans, hell if it wasn’t for the girls having such exotic faces I could’ve assumed the video was shot in America. I really saw no difference, between Iran and America, and because of this, the video did not make me want to get out of my seat, research how to get “invited” into the country and hop on the next flight. It did not make me want to add another bullet point to my bucket list nor did it make me feel inspired to learn the more about the country or culture. Nothing against Iran or the people, but nothing stood out enough for me – I’d waste money going to another country to do what I can at home. Sorry.
What the video did do was prove that people from Iran are the same as people from America, which is important because of the extreme stereotypes that exist today. This lesson shouldn’t only be limited to the negative connotations associated with Iran, it should be applied people from all over the world. Not every person has the luxury of being open-minded and being able to differentiate a solid fact from a silly stereotype.
One prime example is last Thursday’s class; it still bothers me that the Iranian girl felt so uncomfortable about admitting her race that she claimed another, Persian. I could not imagine what it feels like to call myself Dominican because I did not feel socially accepted being black. I wonder if black and brown people had to deal with this post-slavery, during the civil rights movement. Even though it’s hard to have brown skin and claim you have no African blood in you, I wonder if lighter skinned brown people claimed to be White but with a tan. Either way, the video that we were showed did help breakdown judgment barriers. Another win for Sam.
I remember watching the video and hearing the whole row of guys behind me drool over every hot girl that appeared on the screen, fighting over which one they wanted to claim. I’m sure the video made that whole row want to go to Iran because now they know that there are hot girls there. Even though the reasoning behind them visiting the country is a bit skewed, the fact that they were able to look past all of the bad publicity and find something good about Iran gives me hope that MAYBE someday we will be able to erase these stupid stereotypes and think with common sense.

I really appreciated when the Iranian student shared her discomfort in her identity at Penn State with the class. It really opened my eyes about race on an international political level versus the repetitive black and white level.
Being born and raised in America shelters too many people from international empathy. I think we feel that we have enough issues domestically so we carry this, “Why should I care?” attitude towards “foreign” races. For example, as a female minority I have always felt that no matter where I succeed my plate of disadvantages will always be the fullest. I have been so consumed and brainwashed with focusing on empowering the progress of African Americans and Latinos that I contradict my efforts by excluding non-domestic minorities – international people. While I understand that there is nothing that can really be done on the larger scale, I do feel that Penn State University can take steps forward towards making all students feel welcomed on campus.
I type this blog response after having attended an open student forum with President Erickson that focused on the topic of diversity. I actually brought the Iranian student situation to his attention after he made a reference about how Sam Richards courses is one of the leading cultural awareness courses at the university, and he later agreed that Penn State needs to strengthen its welcoming characteristics.
It is a hard task for to do for such a large university; some may even say it’s impossible but we have to start somewhere. It is not fair to place a pretty “Welcome All” mat outside of our door to attract students, just to disappoint them with pitch-black hallways and minimal guidance. That Iranian girl should NOT have to feel uncomfortable revealing her race on a university campus because the country she is being educated in is having major disagreements with her native country. She tackled a very important point when she reminded us that the conflict is with the government, not the people – yet the people are the ones feeling all of the wrath. Penn State can relate to this 100%, it’s called the Sandusky Scandal.
As students, we really need to check ourselves and think about how our reactions affect others, especially during times of war. Our insensitivities towards international students are the same insensitivities minorities have been feeling for hundreds of years. We are all the same. We have to stop labeling these students as if they are the representatives of their country – clearly she and her family doesn’t have any negative feelings towards America or else she wouldn’t be here. They are not in the political dispute, neither are us – what WE ARE are students who are all on the same team, trying to win the same game.