Man[goes] to Suffer

The question of whether a lobster suffers while being boiled alive is truly a confusing one. Is it based on its action or scientific proof? 

I think its is more about if the being feels like it/he/she is dying. For example, if a person is drowning, that person will thrash around and suffer. The feeling of dying itself is a stimulus and isn't that feeling torturous, even though it is a stimulus. So, the argument that a lobster's thrashing is just a reaction to a stimulus and is not suffering is invalid.

Suffering is not just pain. It doesn't just have to be physical, it can also be mental or emotional. If we bring this as a factor into the treatment of animals, lobsters aren't the only ones being mistreated. What about all the animals being farmed in tight spaces? What about the lack of freedom in zoos?

In that sense, we are weak minded race that doesn't linger to either extreme. We also see this in politics. Most of us linger around being a centrist with many extremist groups being eradicated. This, I think, is the reason of the human survival and dominance. We try to adapt with change, like in the instance of climate change due to our actions. However, we need to make our adaptions faster. For this we need to be more extreme. It is ironic in a sense but it is like math. If velocity is positive then acceleration could still be negative.

Basically, it is good that beliefs of most humans are not extreme however when changing them we need to extreme (faster) to adapter faster.

Man[goes] to Reality

I would like to talk about what I think is the uncontroversial main point in Our Barbies, Ourselves and point out some flaws in the piece.

Well, I completely agree that the Barbie doll might be modeled after the creators vision of a perfect woman which pretty unrealistic. The world is imperfect and so are humans. Perfection is the ultimate desire and so the creator isn't much in the wrong. He did do his purpose of making a popular doll.

While Prager in the right to say that Barbie dolls are instilling young girls with the desire to be perfect, it is not that only women are expected to be perfect. I bet that even male dolls would be unrealistically perfect if they existed. It is naturally common for young boys to not play with dolls while girls do.

This might seem like its irrelevant according to many people, but I think to truly explore the world of seeking perfect, people should explore the library of comics (including mangas, manhwas, etc.), cartoons (including animes), movies, and novels. Many of the characters in these fictional creations are perfectionized, both men and women, be the author/director male or female.

While sexism does exist in the world, I think Prager is not right. Many might argue against me, but it is only an opinion. It may be flawed and I accept that. I am not anti-feminist or anything.

The truth is that women were treated as a valued commodity in some areas of the world. Nowadays, the situation is much better, but it is still not perfect. Gender roles are slowly being erased and hopefully they will.

However, I don't think sexism will ever cease to exist. Our subconscious will always create prejudices. That is the truth about the human brain. It is molded through experience. 

Man[goes] to Analyze

This blog entry is essentially going to be a random jumble of my experience and response to the prompts from the textbook.

To summarize my response to prompt number 4:

The internet does provide platforms with essentially true anonymity. However, the outside world can affect one's words in the chat. The trauma from an experience or something else like the way someone was brought may not allow them free themselves fully. On the contrary, I sometimes go full rage mode if something really aggravates. While this may childish, in the game Clash of Clans, people with no true knowledge about other countries, would talk crap about them and I would get really pissed, especially if it was India.

Focusing on gender roles, girls are often brought up to sweet, caring and soft-spoken. This often allows people to differentiate them from males even if anonymous. This differentiation maybe wrong sometimes, however, many times it is right.

Sometimes, I get pissed when people complain that society drives to not follow their dreams. Then what about all the gamer girls, LGBTQs, a guy who made pads for women, etc. They changed society. Man anyone can do it if they are determined and have the mental power to last. However not everyone has the mental power. I don't, which makes hypocritical. However, atleast I'm accepting it. 

Anyway back to gender roles. I would to mention the James Bond movies. James Bond is always awarding with some woman, making women seems as a trophy, a material possession. However, in this movie, a woman was secret agent or something. So the movie follows and disregards the steretypical gender roles??? I don't being a trophy is female gender role. I think I just made that up. Oh well, guess I am stupid. Man, I am excited to watch some movies with the my new headphones and then analyze gender roles.

Man[goes] to Dressing School???

The opinion that women do not an unmarked fashion choice seems false to me. Or it is that there is concept of markedness and unmarkedness that is false. I do not know.

Or maybe I do not understand the concept.

I understand the concept in 2 different ways:

i) You do not notice the person and proceed to them uniquely at first glance (Unmarked)

ii) You do not judge them after scrutinizing the person for a long time (Unmarked)

Let us look at the first one:

This one seems to be pretty obvious, at least to me. There is always a set of unmarked fashion for both genders. In India, I would say it would say the unmarked color would darker like maroon, dark blue, etc. (Even for women)

Now, let us look at the second one:

Unmarked fashion means that you can't find something about their unique selves through clothing, make-up, etc. However, Tannen ignores the men because they don't appeal to her because they are boring to analyze. Let's just look at the example we formulated in class of an unmarked Troy High male student. Airpods might show that the students follows trends and tries to fit in with the crowd and so on with the other pieces of clothing. This might seem to be exact point that Tannen is trying prove. That, the end conclusion would be that they are trying to fit in with the crowd.

However, what about the color, the haircuts, the shoes, the pants. The type and brand of these pieces of clothing can also be considered. There are basically infinite amount of possibilities. Just because a certain large group is similar in some ways doesn't mean they are the definition of "NORMAL" or "UNMARKED."

It is basically segregation in a sense.

Everyone is marked in someway or another.

For example, let's take my classmate for example. He wears what seems to be the same hoodie (to me) everyday. Then, he finally got a new one for $5 dollars at Target or something. He wore simple "off-brand" clothes. It told me he didn't care so much about his fashion that much. He never wore skinny jeans, so I thought he didn't prefer. He recently confirmed that it was true.

Maybe I am getting the whole concept wrong. Then I'm an idiot. But this is the

THE END

 

Man[goes] to 1988

While reading The Round House, it intrigued me how racism was still so big in America only about 30 years ago. Though racism still persists, even if it in a smaller magnitude, it is only natural via our human brains.(That made no sense, I think)

Anyway, we can infer that Erdrich hinting that even one of the most unfortunate of the white population looked down upon one of so deemed lower class (Red Indians in this case) who, literally, suffered the same - rape. Instead of feeling sorry for the heavily wounded Indian woman, she decides to question their authority to receive treatment from a hospital outside of their own neighborhood even if the emergency ward was "under construction" (in the notes). One would think that a victim would be more passionate towards the unfortunate and discriminated. So, if such person herself is this hostile, what about the more fortunate.

Discrimination will always exist through one difference or the other. For instance, it could be through the "greatness" of one's genes like seen in the movie Gattaca. Discrimination seems to be natural due the human tendency to be with their own - people with similar characteristics. This grouping starts from physical characteristic, then further branches down into other characteristics such as wealth, morals, and family heritage.

Discrimination in its true, untainted form is not evil. It is just recognizing the differences between two or more entities. It is humans created the misinterpretation. Discrimination can always be a blanket for an action. The villain attacks the hero because their morals differ. South Korea fought North Korea because their ideologies deferred. A tiger hunts a deer because their placement in the food web differs.

Last time I said that the Universe's and other universes' existence in relation to the human species is in form of double helix since our species is not ever living. But now seems that the final revelation I had in the blog is some what true. But I do not know if the new spiral is made of the double helix structure or if it is new spirals inside the 2 helices.

 THE END

Man[goes] to Government (Puzzle Paragraph 1)

The extents of eminent domain are very controversial. Though, they have been mentioned in the US Constitution, the profiling is very ambiguous: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." The whole policy, in itself, is not outrageous. It could in fact be beneficial. For example, fire stations need to be placed in a certain range to effective. However, the ambiguity of the eminent domain constraints have been misused by the government in the pursuit of corporatism, backstabbing the people. It has allowed big businesses cheap property with almost no liability. The government makes some verisimilitude of "public use" with promises of economic growth against the citizens' worry over the destruction of schools and numerous homes, like in the case of Detroit in 1981. While others might say that the condemnation of land for economic growth is a form of "public use," private land is "PRIVATE." Private firms have no liability to continue operating, and this has happened in many situations: Pfizer in New London, Chevrolet in Detroit, etc. A casino brings brings pleasure to the community reducing stress, so that is also of public property. NO! Property for "public use" is controlled by the government, and so such should be the case with property on the condemned land, or firm should be in the grip of the government. For instance, public utility companies are natural monopolies that earn most of their revenue through the government (taxes). I am not saying we should start marching on government offices with sticks and knives, nor am I saying that we should carry out Gandhi-like protests. We should also not each act like a Lone Ranger, targeting each and every small case where eminent domain was utilized unfairly. But, instead, the it should be dealt nationally. "Public use" and "proper compensation" need to be defined free of the Constitution's ambiguity.

THE END

Man[goes] to Path

I just wanted to visited Asagai's ideology on how reality flow in the linear path as compared to Beneatha's circular path.

To begin with I would to like to say that I believe that path for humanity is a spiral while that of the environment ( Universe - humanity = Environment ) is of an opposing spiral. It is like that of DNA. But this DNA like structure will only exist during the time period of human existence, since it is from our perspective.

I think this is why people think that the same event just repeats itself while it is in reality it is similar, but skewed in some ways. If there are 2 really similar events, then I think that if a line connects these 2 points in the spiral history, then this line would be "parallel" to whole flow of the double spiral of the universe.

The individual spirals need not to be the same size. It seems to have take a longer time in past to complete one circular spiral or in physics' terms, a longer period. I think these spirals have condensed to have shorter periods, mostly due to faster development and increased experience. But this period has probably not been decreased a lot since otherwise the period of Environmental spiral would also have to decrease its period of the spirals. However, while humanity has heavily effected the Earthly environment, it has only affected a minute portion of the spacial environment.

For example, the 2 World Wars seem to be comparable to the Napoleonic Wars more than each other, because we see political unrest in the time period between the 2 World Wars and also during the Napoleonic Wars. Both collections were also followed by a sort "Cold Wars" in their own way.

But now that I am spending more time thinking about this complex double spiral system of flow of universe, I feel like there are certain topics that developing (shorter period) than others.

Technology > Human Equality

So wait does this mean that the Human spiral path is composed of smaller spirals that average out to be the bigger spiral and this also applies to the Environmental spiral path.

I feel like I am being idiotic right now or too big brain. OOOOOF!

I mean at least I won't be made fun of by many people since I only get like 3 views.

THE END!!