"One Town's War on Gay Teens"

After reading the Rolling Stone article “One Town’s War on Gay Teens” I had a pit in my stomach and rage brewing inside of me.  It breaks my heart to know so many kids were so miserable in their lives that they would chose to end it at such an early age. I pity the ignorance of people in this town and similar ones all over the world who practice this intolerance. This issue becomes even more tangled due to the fact that most of the intolerance for GLBTQ people is tied into their religion. You cannot tell people to stop practicing their religion and you can’t tell people that their religion is wrong. This only promotes more intolerance. In this specific situation I place blame on a few parties of people, the board of education, students, parents, and the church. All of these parties contributed to nine suicides in just three years.  

When the school board was addressed by the issue and took no action the children lost hope and found self-hatred. When their parents treated the problem lightly or ignored it completely the children lost their security. When the students tormented the GLBTQ students they confirmed all of the horrible things that those students already felt about themselves. When the Church made the GLBTQ students believe that “Homosexuality is a form of mental illness caused by family dysfunction, childhood trauma and exposer to pornography.” They lost their self worth. The school did not allow an alliance club for these students. They felt like they had no one and never would. It was to unbearable living the way they were, so they took their lives.

This article makes this town out to be the center of all evil. The sad reality is that this can happen absolutely anywhere. Bullying is a current nationwide epidemic. Until the problem is resolved unfortunately suicides will continue. I believe a suicide could easily occur at my highschool, but I am confident when I say that I know drastic measures would be taken to deter this option and prevent the desperation. I think that this town went very wrong when nothing changed after the first suicide.  They made it seem like it was okay for GLBTQ students to do this because they had something wrong with them.

Segregated Church?

I live in Deerfield Illinois. We are criticized often for our lack of diversity. The overwhelming majority is white and Jewish.  There are few members of minority groups represented in our schools and town.  Being that I am also Jewish living in this town I know very little about what happens in churches here or anywhere in our nation. While browsing through the race related articles we were presented with I was alarmed by this one article from CNN. The article is titled “Why Many Americans Prefer their Sundays segregated.”  I was curious about this concept and the reactions people had to this idea. As far as my knowledge goes the Christian faith is observed by many races and ethnicities. I know that church is a place for worship. At church I know that Christians pray, ask forgiveness for their sins, learn, teach, and have many programs. It startles me that a place for worship, where all people have the same beliefs, is often segregated by the members. They are all Christians, they are all going for the same propose, why do they prefer to be segregated by race? I had to read this article to understand. The article stated “Some blacks as well as whites prefer segregated Sundays, religious scholars and members of interracial churches say. Americans may be poised to nominate a black man to run for president, but it's segregation as usual in U.S. churches, according to the scholars. Only about 5 percent of the nation's churches are racially integrated, and half of them are in the process of becoming all-black or all-white, says Curtiss Paul DeYoung, co-author of "United by Faith," a book that examines interracial churches in the United States.” Why do both parties prefer segregation in a world progressively working on integration and equal opportunities? “They say integrated churches are rare because attending one is like tiptoeing through a racial minefield. Just like in society, racial tensions in the church can erupt over everything from sharing power to interracial dating.” What is the tension composed of? Aren’t they all attending church because they have the same beliefs? Religion is such a predominant role in our individual selves. How can people with such a strong spiritual connection feel tension among one another when observing their religion? Wasn’t it the white Europeans and early Americans that forced Christianity on the black African population? Why would they influence them to follow the same religion if they didn’t wish to share it with them? The author investigated “DeYoung says he encountered many blacks who said they wanted a racial timeout on Sunday."They would say, 'I need a place of refuge,'" he says. "They said, 'I need to come to a place on Sunday morning where I don't experience racism.' ". Why did they feel the scrutiny of racism at church? Advocates for integrated churches shared my curiosity and criticism “But interracial church advocates say the church was never meant to be segregated. They point to the New Testament description of the first Christian church as an ethnic stew -- it deliberately broke social divisions by uniting groups that were traditionally hostile to one another, they say.” Although I do not practice the catholic faith I do believe that stand for respect, understanding and love. The majority population of the U.S. is catholic. I believe that this tension in integrated churches cripples our progress towards acceptance, equality, and integration. If church can be enjoyed by all, equal for all, and free of racial tension and segregation I believe the entire nation would benefit in a positive way. For anyone who is reading this do you think that church should be forced to integrate and learn to appreciate and like it? Or do you believe people should practice their religion in whichever way is most comfortable for them? I am conflicted by this question because religion is a personal choice, is it right for anyone to judge how people interoperate or practice it?

Odd Girl Speaks Out : 1

For my second semester outside reading book I selected Odd Girl Speaks Out , by Rachel Simmons. This book is a reflection on bullying. It is composed of individual stories of being bullied, letters from bullying victims, and advice for handling and recognizing bullying. This book interested me because cyber bullying is a prevalent issue in our current society. It has been receiving lots of media attention. It has been the topic of discussion in the media, topic of news reports, themes for television shows and movies, and a nationwide campaign. Lady Gaga, a well-respected and famous artist has been the poster child against bullying in all forms. This topic is being addressed all around me but it is also extremely relatable to me. Being a girl in high school allows one to observe bullying, be bullied, or even bully others. This is something that I am faced with every day. I chose this book to increase my knowledge of bullying, such as why and how it happens. I would also like to take away knowledge of how to handle bullying situations after completing or while reading the book.

                The first chapter “Why is it my fault that I don’t want to be her friend?” addresses the problem girls have with moving on and growing apart. Girls have a stigma for creating bffs, best friends forever.  Girls are expected and often create incredibly close relationships with other girls. The author compares these bff relationships to a romantic relationship because both are composed with deep friendship, lots of time together, trust, and a fondness for one another. She explains how break ups in romantic relationships are normal and acceptable in our culture. They are difficult to deal with, but people don’t question that they happen. Simmons believes that these break ups are composed of the same variables as friends growing apart or moving on, but our society does not accept it the same way. “Yet best friends can be just as close as a romantic couple, and we have no idea how to confront changes in the relationship, or to break up. No one prepares us for it, tells us how to do it, or what is expected. No one says it’s okay, or not. As a result, people call it bullying. Others are outraged that they’re being called bullies. Adults take their cues from the girls but don’t know much more.”(30)  I had never heard this point of view but I really believe that it is right on the dot.

This idea raises many questions with me. Why do we feel guilt for moving on? Why don’t we accept growing apart as a justification? Why isn’t it understandable like couples break ups? What  role does gender play in this issue? Why is bullying connected to this issue? Should it be?

Race in college admissions

After reading the affirmative action packet I came to the conclusion that it is not a person’s actual race or physical appearance that enhances the diversity, but the life experience that is associated with the different races.  When my group was asked to rate the applicants in order from first priority acceptance to last we looked at race as one of our criteria, but it wasn’t their actual race that we were prioritizing, rather what we assumed the impact of being that race would do to their life experience. Life experience is what seems to be the insurance of a diverse experience.  I believe that race should not be a factor in college admissions. Life experience should be a factor in college admissions. This will insure diversity in the classroom and a variety of life experiences are found among all races. Putting life experience as a factor in college admissions will achieve the school’s mission of diversity in different opinions and races found at their university.

                The University of Michigan has an inefficient way of insuring diversity. They use point systems when determining admission. Points are given justly for GPA, ACT scores, SAT scores, and other academic achievements. Points are unjustly given to applicants based on a non-reliable potential contribution to the learning environment. “Applicants receive 40 points for other factors that indicate an applicant’s potential contribution to the LSA. They may receive 20 points for one of the following: membership in an underrepresented minority group, socioeconomic disadvantage, attendance at a predominantly minority high school, athletics, or at the Provost’s discretion.”   This is completely inaccurate and unfair. “ LSA does not employ quotas, numerical targets or goals for admission or enrollment of minority students.” They claim to give no preference to minority students when admitting students for a class. It does not make sense and is incredibly hypocritical to claim this and then award students points for any being a minority or surrounded by one. These points ultimately help the students achieve admittance. Putting points on being a minority is ensuring that a certain amount of minority students are admitted. This is exactly what the University said they didn’t do.  Firstly their system operates in a way that a target number of minorities is admitted. Secondly they are assuming that being a minority will enhance the learning experience. When you assume you make an ass out of you and me. They value life experience and that is a justifiable platform for admissions.  Life experience creates a vast amount of opinions, stories, and viewpoints. This enhances the learning experience and creates a diverse environment. Life experience can come from infinite situations. To associate valuable life experience with minority students is naïve, unreliable, and unfair. When race is a contributor to admissions more qualified students pay the price. Race does not guarantee a diverse learning experience, therefore it has no place in college admissions.

Terrill Swift: Wrongfully Convicted

                After listing and participating in Terrill Swift’s presentation on wrongful convictions I was sickened. He shared with us his story and brought attention to other wrongfully convicted cases and how they occur. Terrill was in prison for 15 years and on parole for two years. He was exonerated this January! He is now thirty four; he was arrested when he was seventeen, all of those years for a crime he didn’t commit. I did not understand how this could happen. I asked many questions during his presentation. All of the evidence that was clearing his name from the case was disregarded due to his signed confession.  Terrill hadn’t even known that he signed a confession.  His entire sentence was thrust upon him by police mistreatment.

                I often find the films, articles and discussions from class compelling; but Terrill’s presentation affected me like no other one had. I spent the rest of my day talking about what I had heard. I had so many emotions. I was sad, guilty, angry, embarrassed, most of all I felt disappointed. I have always and would always like to think that the police are there to help us and keep us safe. Terrill shared the exact same thought. I feel let down and bullied. What if I was in that situation? What would they do to me? How could they deceive me into signing my own arrest? It is just disgusting. Terrill called the cops because they had been looking for him for allegedly holding someone. The issue of holding someone was never addressed, and then he agreed to go to the station and identify pictures. He got there and no pictures were laid in front of him. Instead several cops proceeded to badger him and threaten him about a murder and rape. He had no idea what they were talking about. They told him to sign a paper validating that he had no information on the case, then he could go home. What they actually had him sign was a confession and they arrested him on the spot.

                This false confession was the number one contributor to his arrest. It is the only evidence linking him to the case. Where I find the biggest fault in the justice system is that there is no way to verify that the defendant knew what they were signing. If they didn’t know they were signing a confession then they truly aren’t confessing to anything at all. All police interrogation rooms have cameras. During his trial I think a life changing bit of evidence could have been the tape from that interrogation. It would show the mistreatment of the cops. They would see that he had no idea what they were talking about. And it would be extremely obvious that he was tricked into signing the confession therefore making it irrelevant. Without the confession he is a free man. There has to be a more efficient way to certify a confession. Until that happens I fear many more people will be wrongfully convicted.

Denial

I read the chapter Denial in White Like me by Tim Wise. His message is clear and agreeable, but I am still skeptical of the severity of his examples. When Wise says “ Since we teach history as an uninterrupted string of linear progress, where things were really bad, but slowly got better, and are always improving when it comes to race, students can easily mislead into thinking that the issue of racism is so yesterday’s news.”(62) This idea is extremely agreeable in my life. Throughout my history education I learned about slavery, then the abolishment of slavery, then the civil rights movement, and so on. History is definitely taught in a linear string of progress. Almost like a spectrum going from worse to better. Where I disagree with Wise is where he says that students are being misled to believe that racism is a past problem. No one can say that there has not been progress with racism. It is apparent in our society. Our current president is half black. Even though there is a dramatic improvement in racism in America over time, I would argue that we do not deny that it still exists.  Racism is a current issue that is not yesterday’s news.  A huge problem currently in our society is bullying. It would be absurd for someone to believe that race is not a large contributor to the bullying epidemic. All schools in America are cracking down on bullying. Most schools have issued no tolerance for bullying policies. To suggest that the youth of America associates racism as a past issue is almost ridiculous. Equality and getting along with everyone are the foundations of our school system. The youth is constantly being reminded and taught how important it is to treat everyone as equals and show respect. There is a large difference between progress and concluding that the issue has been resolved. America is constantly working to eliminate racism in our society; we have not declared it an issue of the past.

" If I Were a Poor Black Kid"

I think that the author of “If I Were a Poor Black Kid” wrote this essay with good intentions. I believe that he was attempting to reach out to less fortunate people and give them advice on how to succeed in a limiting life that they were born into. Unfortunately I do not find his ideas to be very helpful or realistic. Families in poverty need to work to make an income. Going to the library and school to study for multiple hours outside of school hours is an impossible task for a young individual with a job. He assumed that all of the children in poverty do nothing outside of school. I think it is naïve to assume that none of those students work to help their families.  Also he assumed that all parents would be okay with their children studying all of the time. Of course all parents want what is best for their children but there are many different circumstances that can prevent the parents from allowing their child to study.  For example the student may have many siblings and has to help out at home, or has a sick relative that needs to be taken care of. It could also be hazardous for the child to venture to the library and school alone. Parents could prefer their kids safe at home then off studding were they cannot reach them. Also there is potential for students to lie to their parents and say they are studying when they aren’t. This lack of trust could restrict one’s access to studying outside of school. I think that he overestimated the availability of resources and underestimated the amount of obstacles

A response to this essay said “If I were a middle class white guy writing on Forbes.com about being a poor black kid I’d be clueless. I’d be so clueless that I wouldn’t realize that I’m clueless” This response stuck out to me because that is how I would feel writing a paper explaining what I would do if I were a poor black kid. I am not a white middle class guy, I am a white upper middle class teenager. I have had tough times but for the most part my life has been easy and full of opportunities. I live in a nice community and always have. I have had little exposure to extremely impoverished areas. If I was told to write this essay I would be clueless. I would write my essay with no facts or examples. I would draw from stereotypes, stories, and maybe something that I saw on TV. I would do my best to consider all of the obstacles they face, but I would fail. I can assume things but I will never truly understand what it is like. I would be so clueless that I didn’t realize how clueless I was.

IAT

I found the IAT test to interesting but ultimately inaccurate and irrelevant. The test was designed to see if you have a preference to white or black people. After taking the test my result was that I showed no preference to either race. I find this result to be inaccurate in not only myself but also anyone who would receive it. I am not a racist, but I am not capable or viewing everyone the same, no one is. Whether conscious or not we all use biases, stereotypes, experiences, and prejudice. Saying that you have no preference cannot be possible because we use our observation, experiences, and subconscious to view every person in our lives. Depending on you race, religion, sex, location, and social status you will always have preferences and biases. You may not know it or realize it but you do. It is not wrong to be this way; it is how our brain works. We take in great amounts of information everyday; it would be absurd to say that one abandons all of their previous presumptions when confronted with preference to race.  I also found the test to be irrelevant because your result is either wrong or right, but either way it does not affect your life. If it is right you probably know that and will continue on with your life. If it is wrong, like mine, I will recognize the error and continue on with my life. This test does not have the ability to change ones preference if there is one. It can make one  conscious of their preference, but consciously changing your behavior to make yourself feel better does not change the preference that you had in the first place.

Conclusion on Eating animals

After finishing the book Eating Animals I have made changes in my awareness and eating habits.  So much of the information I learned is very important to me, but at the same time makes me outraged. There was a ton of graphic upsetting information but nothing sticks out in my mind more than the free-range information. “To be considered free-range, chickens raised for meat must have “access to the outdoors,” which, if you take those words literally, means nothing. (imagine a shed containing thirty thousand chickens, with a small door at the end that opens to a five-by-five dirt patch- and the door is closed all but occasionally.)” (61) There are so many people who would rather remain clueless on where their meat comes from, because they will feel guilty. Then there are those who do care and want to be conscious of where their meat comes from. My family does their best to make conscious choices. We buy cage free eggs and free range meats. It made me so angry to find out that we are ultimately being deceived. It is so irritating to find out that myself and others who are trying to make good choices are given false promises. I never imagined free-range in the way that the author described it. So I went on the Internet and searched it and the description in the book was accurate. I feel puzzled because I am trying to do the right thing, but I’m still supporting cruel, unsanitary living conditions for animals. What is the best way to eat meat ?

Chapter 5: Influence/speechlessness

When the swine flu epidemic was raging I was absolutely terrified. I stayed in a lot, over used antibacterial soaps, and overall acted like a germaphobe. Although this epidemic was dramatically over hyped it was still something to fear. When this was all going on my freshmen year I thought about the illness. I thought about being home sick, missing finals, getting others sick, and what the worst circumstance for me would be. I was not thinking about food. I associated contracting the illness from other people and animals (mainly pig), not from food. While reading Eating Animals I came across information that I never knew, and that makes me sick…literally. “The same conditions that lead 76million Americans to become ill from their food annually and that produce antimicrobial resistance also contribute to the risk of a pandemic.”(141) At first I did not understand this information, but it sounded bad. Then I thought about biology and what I knew. I remember learning that antibacterial soaps are not helpful but harmful to us. They do kill all of the bacteria on our hands, but that includes the good bacteria that we need. It makes us more susceptible to disease. Antibacterial soaps are human made witch chemicals. It freaked me out to think that the food I eat is making me more susceptible to dangerous diseases, and its natural. The example used in the book was H5N1, the bird flu, this disease is fatal in 60% of human cases. The food that I eat to stay healthy could contribute to my death?! Why isn’t this well known knowledge? I know plenty of people who would be terrified by this information and switch to vegetarianism or be more careful with the meats that they do choose to eat. While reading the book a common theme has been lack of public knowledge. There is so much that outrages me that would outrage many others. There is a mask on the face of the meat industry and below it lays a hideous face. If information about meat was regularly on the news I believe a huge movement would start to better the conditions of the meat industry and of vegetarianism. For anyone reading this….how do you feel about eating meat after hearing that it produces antimicrobial resistance?

Chapter 3: Words/ Meaning

    What do I consider myself? I am a person, a daughter, a friend, a sister, a cousin, and a human. Am I an animal? While reading chapter three words/meaning, of Eating Animals I came across a thought provoking conundrum. “In the first sense, humans are members of the animal kingdom. But more often, we casually use the word animal to signify all creatures-from orangutan to dog to shrimp- except humans. Within a culture, even within a family, people have their own understandings of what an animal is. Within each of us there are probably several different understandings.” (45) I believe in evolution. I believe that we evolved from primates. When I think of primates I imagine gorillas, chimps, and orangutans. I would consider all of those primates animals. If we evolved from them and they are animals, why don’t I think I am one? When I think of animals I think of the zoo, the aquarium, pets, and creatures I see on a daily basis. I would say that I consider an animal as a creature without speech. But then I realize that plenty of the creatures that I consider animals have means of speech. Dolphins, whales, and many other animals have distinguished ways of communication. So then I thought that animals are creatures that are “wild”. But I could not find justification in that. Animals have specific characteristics because natural selection selected those traits for survival. They are not acting wild. They are acting in a way that ensures survival. Isn’t that what humans do? Humans give money great importance. Having money insures that one can provide shelter, food and water. That is all we need to survive. Our obsession with money has extended past basic necessity to a craving for luxury items. Maybe this is why we consider ourselves different from animals. Animals do what they need to survive. We do what we need to survive and what makes us happy. Do we think that going above and beyond what we need makes us more civilized? I would argue it makes us more primitive because we are forgetting our basic instincts of survival for instincts of greed and envy. For anyone who reads this…do you consider yourself an animal or something else?