Prompt: Why Are We at War?
I can't help but be offended by Mailer's comments about Islam. Once again, on page 26, there is a passage that I do not agree with. "The huge freedom given to women in American culture is seen as an outrage by orthodox Muslims. American TV they fine licentious and extreme. They feel all that Islam stands for is going to be eroded by American culture." (Mailer 26)
It is not the freedom given to women that is seen as an outrage, but the way that women are portrayed oftentimes in American culture. Many people in America do not believe that women are given freedom in Islamic countries, but this just is not true. There are many television shows that feature women, but it is done in a very respectable way. They are not shown as prostitutes or strippers. This is the only problem that Muslims have with American culture. It is perfectly fine to have women in the spotlight as long as it is done in a tasteful way. They do not want something as precious as a woman's virtue to be destroyed by negative images of them. Many Muslim women feel the same way. They dislike the way that women in America dress and act becuase it shows that they have little or no respect for themselves.
I believe that to have pride in yourself, you have to know that it doesn't take skimpy clothes or a promiscuous attitude to be noticed. This is the attitude that most Muslim people have. I know that I will know what people truly think of me if I take a little pride in myself. I will not have to worry about only being lusted after or not being taken seriously. Most women in American culture that are on television with almost no clothes on are seen as a joke. No one could possibly think of them in a positive way. They are seen as objects of lust or humor.
I know that Muslims are not the only ones that feel this way. There are plenty of Christian groups that would also like to see American women portrayed in a better light throught American culture. So Mailer is wrong in thinking that Islam does not want women to have freedom in American culture. They think that freedom is a great thing. They just want o make sure that a woman's pride and virtue is preserved.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Monday, July 16, 2007
It's Hard to Deal
Prompt: Guilty as Charged, But
A situation like having a loved one with Alzhiemer's is very difficult to get through. I think that the best approach is to make the time they have left as comfortable and stress free as possible. In no way is it ok to end someone's life. Anyone that has been in this situation knows how hard it can be. I dealt with it for the last two years of my grandfather's life. We had rough times, but the good times were amazing. It was very hurtful when he didn't remember me. But, it was great when he remembered me and stories from my childhood.
In Gilbert's case, he was very wrong for what he did. I can, however, sympathize with how he felt. This is someone that he grew old with, someone that he loved. She may have, in one of her good times, said that she didn't want to live like that anymore. The bottom line is that it is wrong to take someone else's life. What he should have done was be there for her. He should have comforted her and made her feel better about the time that she had left. My grandfather had terrible times. he would not recognize any of his own family. He did not trust us. He even once called me a big ugly black woman. The next day, however, he knew who I was the minute that I walked through the door. He kissed me on the cheek, and talked about funny things that I did when I was younger. I could see how happy he was just from me being there. Just having someone there during the good times makes it better for everyone.
The law was not really sufficient when it came to this case. Murder charges are meant for people that murder with bad intentions. Life in prison should apply to only people that still pose a threat to society. Gilbert did not pose a threat to anyone. He was only doing what he felt was best for his wife. He did not deserve to spend the last bit of his life behind bars.
A situation like having a loved one with Alzhiemer's is very difficult to get through. I think that the best approach is to make the time they have left as comfortable and stress free as possible. In no way is it ok to end someone's life. Anyone that has been in this situation knows how hard it can be. I dealt with it for the last two years of my grandfather's life. We had rough times, but the good times were amazing. It was very hurtful when he didn't remember me. But, it was great when he remembered me and stories from my childhood.
In Gilbert's case, he was very wrong for what he did. I can, however, sympathize with how he felt. This is someone that he grew old with, someone that he loved. She may have, in one of her good times, said that she didn't want to live like that anymore. The bottom line is that it is wrong to take someone else's life. What he should have done was be there for her. He should have comforted her and made her feel better about the time that she had left. My grandfather had terrible times. he would not recognize any of his own family. He did not trust us. He even once called me a big ugly black woman. The next day, however, he knew who I was the minute that I walked through the door. He kissed me on the cheek, and talked about funny things that I did when I was younger. I could see how happy he was just from me being there. Just having someone there during the good times makes it better for everyone.
The law was not really sufficient when it came to this case. Murder charges are meant for people that murder with bad intentions. Life in prison should apply to only people that still pose a threat to society. Gilbert did not pose a threat to anyone. He was only doing what he felt was best for his wife. He did not deserve to spend the last bit of his life behind bars.
Monday, July 2, 2007
They were all wrong
Prompt: The Alligator River Story
I think that everyone in this story handled the stituation terribly. It is not like the bridge would never be repaired. It was going to be repaired in several weeks. The whole situation could have been avoided by simply waiting for the bridge to be repaired. I have very little respect for any of them.
Abigail was the worst in the story. I would rate her five. I can't have respect for anyone as impatient, immoral, manipulative, and spiteful as Abigail. I don't believe that she really loved Gregory as she said she did. All that she had to do was wait until the bridge was repaired. She was so impatient and had to go right then. If she truly loved Gregory, she would have waited to see him. But, if she just had to go right then she should have sacraficed a day of work to drive to the other bridge to go see the man that she loved. She was very selfsish about that. She also should have had more respect for herself than to agree to Sinbad's terms. She was so immoral that she agreed to have sex with someone other than Gregory. She couldn't have loved him very much if she agreed to have sex with someone else. It was also very wrong of her to bring Slug into the situation. She manipulated him by telling her side of the story and making him feel like he had to do something to Gregory. And after everything that had happened, she was very spiteful and overjoyed at seeing Gregory hurt. She should have forgave and forgotten.
Gregory was not much better. He could not have really loved Abigail either. I would rate him four. After seeing all that she went through to get to him, he should have been able to forgive her for her mistake. Everyone makes mistakes. It was very wrong of him to pass judgement so quickly and cast her away.
Sinbad was definately a terrible person. I rate him three. He should not have taken advantage of a person in a tough situation. He had no respect for Abigail, Gregory, or the relationship that they were in. He should have been kind enough to take her across the river without asking anything demoralizing of her. And if he insisted on charging her, it should not have been something as drastic as sexual intercourse.
Slug was in a tough situation, but did not have to do what he did. I rate him two. I respect him in the sense that he was just trying to help a friend. However, he handle it in a very wrong way. Violence should not have been used. Simply talking to Gregory could have been just as effective. He should have had the common sense to know this and to not act on impulse.
I rate Ivan one, but do not exactly agree with what he did. A friend came to him with a problem, and he just turned his back. He should have at the least offered advice. Maybe if he put some thought into it, he could have helped Abigail come up with a better way to get to Gregory. He may have even convinced her to wait for the bridge to be repaired. By just giving some kind of input, the whole situation could have been fixed.
I think that everyone in this story handled the stituation terribly. It is not like the bridge would never be repaired. It was going to be repaired in several weeks. The whole situation could have been avoided by simply waiting for the bridge to be repaired. I have very little respect for any of them.
Abigail was the worst in the story. I would rate her five. I can't have respect for anyone as impatient, immoral, manipulative, and spiteful as Abigail. I don't believe that she really loved Gregory as she said she did. All that she had to do was wait until the bridge was repaired. She was so impatient and had to go right then. If she truly loved Gregory, she would have waited to see him. But, if she just had to go right then she should have sacraficed a day of work to drive to the other bridge to go see the man that she loved. She was very selfsish about that. She also should have had more respect for herself than to agree to Sinbad's terms. She was so immoral that she agreed to have sex with someone other than Gregory. She couldn't have loved him very much if she agreed to have sex with someone else. It was also very wrong of her to bring Slug into the situation. She manipulated him by telling her side of the story and making him feel like he had to do something to Gregory. And after everything that had happened, she was very spiteful and overjoyed at seeing Gregory hurt. She should have forgave and forgotten.
Gregory was not much better. He could not have really loved Abigail either. I would rate him four. After seeing all that she went through to get to him, he should have been able to forgive her for her mistake. Everyone makes mistakes. It was very wrong of him to pass judgement so quickly and cast her away.
Sinbad was definately a terrible person. I rate him three. He should not have taken advantage of a person in a tough situation. He had no respect for Abigail, Gregory, or the relationship that they were in. He should have been kind enough to take her across the river without asking anything demoralizing of her. And if he insisted on charging her, it should not have been something as drastic as sexual intercourse.
Slug was in a tough situation, but did not have to do what he did. I rate him two. I respect him in the sense that he was just trying to help a friend. However, he handle it in a very wrong way. Violence should not have been used. Simply talking to Gregory could have been just as effective. He should have had the common sense to know this and to not act on impulse.
I rate Ivan one, but do not exactly agree with what he did. A friend came to him with a problem, and he just turned his back. He should have at the least offered advice. Maybe if he put some thought into it, he could have helped Abigail come up with a better way to get to Gregory. He may have even convinced her to wait for the bridge to be repaired. By just giving some kind of input, the whole situation could have been fixed.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Why do We Care?
Prompt: Human Rights vs. Majority Rule
I am a firm believer in "to each his own". I honestly don't think that it should matter to people, including employers, what sexual orientation their workers are. as long as the work is getting done and the people aren't trying to force their views on you, what does it matter? if we discriminate on sexual orientation or any other thing for that matter, we are abolishing the ideals that founded America. I do, however, acknowledge that it takes efforts from both sides to make this work.
The world is changing, and ideas should change with it. Just because a person may be gay doesn't mean that a gay teacher is going to teach your children how to be gay. If they work in a factory, are they going to contaminate the products or equipment with their "gayness"? No. Most gay people do not even bring their private life outside of the home, just like straight people. They are not out preaching homosexuality to anyone. They are living it in their own time.
I have a gay cousin, and it kills me to see her discriminated against because of it. She has been fired from three different jobs. The underlying reason has always been that she is gay. In all three jobs, she did not let it be known in the beginning. She eventually fought these people and became much stronger and open because of this. She realized that if you hide it, people are going to think worse of it. The more you hide it, the worse it must really be. If more gay people were just upfront about it, it wouldn't be as big of a deal.
Wth cooperation on both sides, this issue does not even have to be a big deal. Ultimatelty, it should not matter in the work place as long as the work is getting done. With more employers not making it a big deal and more gay people being upfront about it, there will be more tolerance in the workplace. This tolerance could then stem out into other aspects of life. It took work with different religions, and the same can be done with sexual orientation.
I am a firm believer in "to each his own". I honestly don't think that it should matter to people, including employers, what sexual orientation their workers are. as long as the work is getting done and the people aren't trying to force their views on you, what does it matter? if we discriminate on sexual orientation or any other thing for that matter, we are abolishing the ideals that founded America. I do, however, acknowledge that it takes efforts from both sides to make this work.
The world is changing, and ideas should change with it. Just because a person may be gay doesn't mean that a gay teacher is going to teach your children how to be gay. If they work in a factory, are they going to contaminate the products or equipment with their "gayness"? No. Most gay people do not even bring their private life outside of the home, just like straight people. They are not out preaching homosexuality to anyone. They are living it in their own time.
I have a gay cousin, and it kills me to see her discriminated against because of it. She has been fired from three different jobs. The underlying reason has always been that she is gay. In all three jobs, she did not let it be known in the beginning. She eventually fought these people and became much stronger and open because of this. She realized that if you hide it, people are going to think worse of it. The more you hide it, the worse it must really be. If more gay people were just upfront about it, it wouldn't be as big of a deal.
Wth cooperation on both sides, this issue does not even have to be a big deal. Ultimatelty, it should not matter in the work place as long as the work is getting done. With more employers not making it a big deal and more gay people being upfront about it, there will be more tolerance in the workplace. This tolerance could then stem out into other aspects of life. It took work with different religions, and the same can be done with sexual orientation.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
What it takes for me
Prompt: Right or Wrong?
I think that it is in everyone to be an absolutist when it comes to morality, but we are relativists when we actually apply it to ourselves. We as a society have put absolute right and wrong on the back burner. We all know deep down what is right and wrong, and we know what should be done. But, we find ways to justify wrongdoing when we want it to benefit ourselves. We also ignore what is right when it hinders us from doing what we want to do. We often end up having inner dilemmas about what to do.
There are many cases in which people can change absolute morality into relative morality. Apolino's arguments, especially argument four, give exapmles. Everyone knows that it is wrong, to commit murder, but numerous people do it every year. When asked, most of them actually have a reason for doing it. When people perjure in court, they do it do help keep themselves or someone close from being punished.
I do believe in absolute morality. I think that there is a set notion of right and wrong for everyone. I feel that inside, I am an absolutist. When there is any question about what is right or wrong, I know what is right. If I feel that I would benefit more from or have more fun doing what is wrong, I change things around or just ignore it to make it acceptable in my eyes. In this process, I become a relativist.
I have done many things that are wrong, but I have rationalized them to be accepted as right (at least in my eyes). For instance, I know that it is morally wrong to smoke cigarettes. It can cause a number of problems for you and the people around you. I smoked for around six years, knowing that it was wrong. I rationalized by telling myself and those around me that I did it only when I was stressed. I also recognized aloud that it was wrong and tried to make it seem ok by telling people that I was quitting soon. Eventually, I just ignored the fact that it was something wrong. I think that I conditioned myself to think that it was ok. My absolute view of right and wrong took over in the end, and I quit. Something that I still do to this day that I know is wrong is lying. I know that it is wrong to lie, but I do it on a daily basis to make things ok. If a friend gets a bad haircut, I tell them that it looks great so that they won't feel self-conscious. If someone cooks something for me, I always tell them that it tastes great so that they don't feel bad.
It is in us all to do what is right, but it is not always that simple in most situations. We have to look out for ourselves and others when making decisions, and that often leads to abandoning what is really right. We all do what is wrong at times, but I guarantee that we will all have an explanation or justification for what we did. We can turn our situations into whatever we want them to be.
I think that it is in everyone to be an absolutist when it comes to morality, but we are relativists when we actually apply it to ourselves. We as a society have put absolute right and wrong on the back burner. We all know deep down what is right and wrong, and we know what should be done. But, we find ways to justify wrongdoing when we want it to benefit ourselves. We also ignore what is right when it hinders us from doing what we want to do. We often end up having inner dilemmas about what to do.
There are many cases in which people can change absolute morality into relative morality. Apolino's arguments, especially argument four, give exapmles. Everyone knows that it is wrong, to commit murder, but numerous people do it every year. When asked, most of them actually have a reason for doing it. When people perjure in court, they do it do help keep themselves or someone close from being punished.
I do believe in absolute morality. I think that there is a set notion of right and wrong for everyone. I feel that inside, I am an absolutist. When there is any question about what is right or wrong, I know what is right. If I feel that I would benefit more from or have more fun doing what is wrong, I change things around or just ignore it to make it acceptable in my eyes. In this process, I become a relativist.
I have done many things that are wrong, but I have rationalized them to be accepted as right (at least in my eyes). For instance, I know that it is morally wrong to smoke cigarettes. It can cause a number of problems for you and the people around you. I smoked for around six years, knowing that it was wrong. I rationalized by telling myself and those around me that I did it only when I was stressed. I also recognized aloud that it was wrong and tried to make it seem ok by telling people that I was quitting soon. Eventually, I just ignored the fact that it was something wrong. I think that I conditioned myself to think that it was ok. My absolute view of right and wrong took over in the end, and I quit. Something that I still do to this day that I know is wrong is lying. I know that it is wrong to lie, but I do it on a daily basis to make things ok. If a friend gets a bad haircut, I tell them that it looks great so that they won't feel self-conscious. If someone cooks something for me, I always tell them that it tastes great so that they don't feel bad.
It is in us all to do what is right, but it is not always that simple in most situations. We have to look out for ourselves and others when making decisions, and that often leads to abandoning what is really right. We all do what is wrong at times, but I guarantee that we will all have an explanation or justification for what we did. We can turn our situations into whatever we want them to be.
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Perception
Prompt: Perception
I like to think of myself as a person that does not have very many biases or prejudices. I am very open minded, and I like to look at boths sides of everything before passing judgment. I have noticed a few prejudices in myself though.
One in particular is my prejudice against people that dress certain ways. If I see a man in baggy clothes or a woman in very tight clothes, I can't help but think poorly of them. The words "ghetto" and "trashy" come to mind. If I see people like this, I generally don't speak. I think that working in a popular, preppy clothing store has only helped this bias along. The people that work in Hollister have developed a reputation of being snobby and judgmental. I do find myself judging everyone that walks in the store by the way that they are dressed. I even judge people that I see outside of the store.
With this being my main bias/prejudice, I'm sure that this distorts my perception the most. Clothes do not really make a person, but they do in my eyes. I know that underneath the clothing that I have labeled as ghetto and trashy, there are sometimes people with great personalities. This is a truth that I keep myself from because of the way that they are dressed.
If I think even further, it is possible that the greatest bias or prejudice that I have is the thought that I don't have very many biases and prejudices at all. I have made myself believe that I am the most liberal, open-minded and accepting person around. This in itself could be a bias. It could be me distorting the truth that I am actually very biased, prejudiced and judgmental. Maybe this is just me distorting the fact that I am, in reality, a very prejudiced and opinionated person.
I guess that I'll never know for sure what the reality is about myself. I think that Gorgias and Socrates were right. I think that I have distorted my own perception of who I am beyond the point of truth. Other people may see me for who I am, but I cannot. Because of my own opinions and biases toward myself, I cannot see what others see. I cannot see the real truth.
I like to think of myself as a person that does not have very many biases or prejudices. I am very open minded, and I like to look at boths sides of everything before passing judgment. I have noticed a few prejudices in myself though.
One in particular is my prejudice against people that dress certain ways. If I see a man in baggy clothes or a woman in very tight clothes, I can't help but think poorly of them. The words "ghetto" and "trashy" come to mind. If I see people like this, I generally don't speak. I think that working in a popular, preppy clothing store has only helped this bias along. The people that work in Hollister have developed a reputation of being snobby and judgmental. I do find myself judging everyone that walks in the store by the way that they are dressed. I even judge people that I see outside of the store.
With this being my main bias/prejudice, I'm sure that this distorts my perception the most. Clothes do not really make a person, but they do in my eyes. I know that underneath the clothing that I have labeled as ghetto and trashy, there are sometimes people with great personalities. This is a truth that I keep myself from because of the way that they are dressed.
If I think even further, it is possible that the greatest bias or prejudice that I have is the thought that I don't have very many biases and prejudices at all. I have made myself believe that I am the most liberal, open-minded and accepting person around. This in itself could be a bias. It could be me distorting the truth that I am actually very biased, prejudiced and judgmental. Maybe this is just me distorting the fact that I am, in reality, a very prejudiced and opinionated person.
I guess that I'll never know for sure what the reality is about myself. I think that Gorgias and Socrates were right. I think that I have distorted my own perception of who I am beyond the point of truth. Other people may see me for who I am, but I cannot. Because of my own opinions and biases toward myself, I cannot see what others see. I cannot see the real truth.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
This is Me
My name is Jordan Clay. I'm a 20 year old early childhood education major. I grew up in Ideal, Georgia and moved to Macon when I was 14. I graduated from Peach County High School and went to Georgia Southern University my freshman year. I transferred to Macon State 2 years ago.
My hobbies are reading, shopping and being a girly as possible. I work at Hollister Company in the Macon Mall and I love it more than any job that I've ever had.
My hobbies are reading, shopping and being a girly as possible. I work at Hollister Company in the Macon Mall and I love it more than any job that I've ever had.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
