Its a really tricky subject. As a women who lives in america and has more rights then what I know what to do with (not really) knowing there are women out there who are not allowed to work, who are not allowed to leave their house without a man, or who aren't even allowed to show their skin, drives me crazy. But, you also have to keep in mind that many of those women have lived this way for most of their lives and they're used to it. And they don't want things to change. While other generations want to fight back and want to change everything.
I'm excited to expand on both sides. Go from extreme to extreme.
FEMEN to those grandparents who won't talk to their grandchildren because they dont approve of their choices.
I'm excited.
Friday
Implicit Bias IAT Test
At this point I have taken this IAT test twice. And both times I got the same result: "Little to no automatic preference between African American and European American" and that's great! Nothing like a day booster that reinforces that you don't prefer one type of person to another.
So, what do I do with this information? It doesn't change anything in my daily life, it doesn't change how I see the world. In fact it enhances (used lightly) those things. With the type of anxiety I have and all I have been taught, often when walking down the street and seeing someone of a different race I think that they think that I'm racist when I stare. Or that I have something against them, but then when I look away and look at my feet or whats ahead I fear the same thing because now I'm scared they're thinking "Geez, she won't even look at me" and it's a cycle that ends with me usually pretending to text or check my voicemail. So, now I can tell myself "Please, you know that's not true" and hope that I'm listening.
In reference to the documentary I Sit Where I Want that we watched in class, I don't really think it changes my views on anything. I still don't like that big white kid because he couldn't/wouldn't show the tiniest of courtesy. I still don't have a strong liking for the African American girl because she was being the biggest hypocrite and going back on all she said. And I still don't understand why they were trying to integrate the lunch room (of all places).
People do sit where they want. And that's usually with their friends. You can't tell somebody that in the half hour they get off from school a day you're going to make them sit with people they don't know and feel uncomfortable. And yes, most people would sit with others of their race but that's probably because they grew up in the same area or their parents know each other or they just found comfort in it (which isn't bad). And I know that if I was in that lunch room, I would be annoyed with the people who were trying to move me. Lunch is the time that kids get to talk about whatever they want and get a relief from the school day, it's nothing about race.
If they wanted to make a notable difference, integrate the classrooms or buses, give students the time to make other friends before their forced into it.
So, what do I do with this information? It doesn't change anything in my daily life, it doesn't change how I see the world. In fact it enhances (used lightly) those things. With the type of anxiety I have and all I have been taught, often when walking down the street and seeing someone of a different race I think that they think that I'm racist when I stare. Or that I have something against them, but then when I look away and look at my feet or whats ahead I fear the same thing because now I'm scared they're thinking "Geez, she won't even look at me" and it's a cycle that ends with me usually pretending to text or check my voicemail. So, now I can tell myself "Please, you know that's not true" and hope that I'm listening.
In reference to the documentary I Sit Where I Want that we watched in class, I don't really think it changes my views on anything. I still don't like that big white kid because he couldn't/wouldn't show the tiniest of courtesy. I still don't have a strong liking for the African American girl because she was being the biggest hypocrite and going back on all she said. And I still don't understand why they were trying to integrate the lunch room (of all places).
People do sit where they want. And that's usually with their friends. You can't tell somebody that in the half hour they get off from school a day you're going to make them sit with people they don't know and feel uncomfortable. And yes, most people would sit with others of their race but that's probably because they grew up in the same area or their parents know each other or they just found comfort in it (which isn't bad). And I know that if I was in that lunch room, I would be annoyed with the people who were trying to move me. Lunch is the time that kids get to talk about whatever they want and get a relief from the school day, it's nothing about race.
If they wanted to make a notable difference, integrate the classrooms or buses, give students the time to make other friends before their forced into it.
Wednesday
James Holmes trial (and more about gun control)
For the last couple days James Holmes, the Aurora movie theatre shooter, has been in court. Some details have been exposed in this case that I, and I'm sure many others, had no idea of. It is said in the article on Yahoo News that "In the two months leading up to the Aurora, Colo., movie massacre, suspect James Holmes purchased four handguns and nearly 6,300 rounds of ammunition online and in person" This is a perfect example of why background checks should be mandatory. Also why one shouldn't be able to purchase past, lets say... 100 rounds (preferably less) in a certain amount of time. Like two months. It's amazing, even though American citizens think that it never happens, the US averages 20 mass shootings a year. Think of how much could be avoided if there was just a standard backup check put in place. That everyone had to follow and penalties would be enforced to anyone who thought otherwise. It's just ridiculous to me that things like this don't already exist and we're just now putting these things in place (hopefully, maybe).
Enough With Me, The White House on Gun Control
The White House is deciding to broaden the gun control bans. Instead of just reinstating a ban on assault riffles, it's being discussed to take it much further. The law would include background checks and tracking of weapons and sales of weapons through a national database, also if you brought a gun near a school the penalties would be much higher, and giving a gun to a minor would have much greater penalties. President Obama has given the job of designing this strategy after Sandy Hook. Many are saying that this plan is too extreme and will never pass. The NRA has been successful with federal lawmakers and the ban on bans on guns since 1994 (when a ban on assault weapons was made, but expired in 2004).
Personally, I think this plan is headed in the right direction. it has the steps that should at least be thought over. Being fined when bringing a gun near a school I think is a great direction to be heading in. The laws are finely being looked over and refined the way they should've been years ago. I am very happy.
Personally, I think this plan is headed in the right direction. it has the steps that should at least be thought over. Being fined when bringing a gun near a school I think is a great direction to be heading in. The laws are finely being looked over and refined the way they should've been years ago. I am very happy.
Friday
The Stem Cell Divide post #2
There is a lot of controversy surrounding Stem Cell research and the use of Stem Cells (well durr) But one that I haven't really even thought of has just become the biggest issue, for me, surrounding stem cells.
And that is the fact that those stem cells have the genes that were going to form a child, which means that it could carry a potentially active and harmful disease or mutation that could then become present in the person making use of the stem cells. Or could lie dormant for the rest of their lives.
The only way that we can really know what is inside the embryos is if we inspect and test each embryo. And that would take major amounts of time and money. And is that really worth it?
And I guess that's always the question- is it worth it? Unfortunetly, there are many times where you can have this really great discovery and it could help a lot of people, but half the population is against it and half the population is undecided. And on top of that, Americans aren't too keen on the idea of the government spending more money (especially when they're unsure of whether or not they actually like it) And everyone had to ask themselves- is it worth it?
I guess we'll have to see.
And that is the fact that those stem cells have the genes that were going to form a child, which means that it could carry a potentially active and harmful disease or mutation that could then become present in the person making use of the stem cells. Or could lie dormant for the rest of their lives.
The only way that we can really know what is inside the embryos is if we inspect and test each embryo. And that would take major amounts of time and money. And is that really worth it?
And I guess that's always the question- is it worth it? Unfortunetly, there are many times where you can have this really great discovery and it could help a lot of people, but half the population is against it and half the population is undecided. And on top of that, Americans aren't too keen on the idea of the government spending more money (especially when they're unsure of whether or not they actually like it) And everyone had to ask themselves- is it worth it?
I guess we'll have to see.
Wednesday
My argument against your argument against changing gun control
Some people have brought up (Not only in school but, also my dad) that even if you change gun control, people will find ways to get guns anyway. And to that I have to say: So we're not even supposed to try? We couldn't try to make it a little harder to get a gun that for the most part, you don'te even need unless your intending to kill or seriously injure someone? We can't try?
It's just really aggravating to me that there are some people who actually just think "what's the point?" that just doesn't seem fair.
What if we didn't make heroin illegal just because people would do it anyway? That doesn't make it any less dangerous. It doesn't make it any better. It's just legal. Legality doesn't count for everything.
Here are my basic points:
1) Just because people would try to get guns anyway doesn't mean that the government shouldn't try to make it harder.
2) Maybe the fact that its illegal will turn some people away from even trying to get one (extra jail time, any jail time at all)
3) I'm not saying all guns should be illegal, but the assualt riffles and machine guns... certainly uneeded.
It's just really aggravating to me that there are some people who actually just think "what's the point?" that just doesn't seem fair.
What if we didn't make heroin illegal just because people would do it anyway? That doesn't make it any less dangerous. It doesn't make it any better. It's just legal. Legality doesn't count for everything.
Here are my basic points:
1) Just because people would try to get guns anyway doesn't mean that the government shouldn't try to make it harder.
2) Maybe the fact that its illegal will turn some people away from even trying to get one (extra jail time, any jail time at all)
3) I'm not saying all guns should be illegal, but the assualt riffles and machine guns... certainly uneeded.
The Stem Cell Divide post #1
I have been reading The Stem Cell Divide by Michael Bellomo for 45 pages and so far... eh. I feel like the book hasn't really started yet so, I don't know how to have an opinion on it yet. The first thing you read is a story of a girl who was in a horrific car accident and used stem cells to replace her pancreas. And although stem cells saved her life, she still doesn't know how she feels about them. And Bellomo says that this how much of the nation feels. They want to be OK with stem cells because they can save peoples lives quicker and easier than ever before but, you feel like you shouldn't be OK with the use of them because, as many of us know, stem cells come from unborn fetus'. This is where the problem lies. This is where the whole debate is. Everyone recognizes that stem calls are safe and effective, but, they come from babies that just didn't make it. Weather or not this is a result of an abortion is another issue entirely. So, for the sake of argument, lets say that all fetus' used for stem cell research and development come from miscarriages or ectopic pregnancy. Would it be OK then? I think so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)