![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Psychology 100
Article Review #1
On “Disavowal and the Culture of Deadening: Revisiting Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut”:
Dujovne, B. (2004, September). Disavowal and the Culture of Deadening: Revisiting Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 21(4), 633-637. Retrieved December 4, 2008, doi:10.1037/0736-9735.21.4.633
I respected the viewpoint that this article had and I praise her on her point of view: it was definitely refreshing in its entirety. I had seen the film “Eyes Wide Shut” but I hadn’t taken into consideration that necrophilia was at the root of it all. I suppose that’s partially because, like murder and incest, necrophilia is incredibly taboo and because of such, that area isn’t the first locale one’s mind wanders to. When referring to the word “necrophilia,” it can mean more that the implied meaning, but in the literal meaning, as well. Necrophilia not only means the love and obsession with those deceased, but as this article delineates, it can also mean adoration of morbid ideas and societies, of fascination with people with “dead”, placid personalities. The article points out that the film’s main character has a personality that is deadening and robotic in nature, is drowning in a lifeless marriage and that he’s rather content with that, but Bill is a powerful man and a person with a “necrophilous personality will take over anyone that stands in his way,” much in the same kind of way that those with type-A personalities do. I find it interesting that the author of this article focused in on this film and specifically on this character primarily because we can, in one way or another, relate to him. We can relate to Bill. We’ve all had those moments where we partake in unethical actions fueled by the desire to get ahead, even if said actions cause a little damage to others.
“…these individuals can operate smoothly in the society where the quest for money turns people into commodities, where anybody may be a potential thing to be bought, sold, or disposed of.” I didn’t necessarily agree with the author on that last bit. It’s not only a necrophilic trait to treat people like disposable objects. It’s a trait people with extremely dominant or sadistic personalities have, as well. The article also delineates how the film has a couple scenes where men are shown having intercourse with women that are “drugged out” and the author believes that this willingness to copulate with women in this comatose-like state has symbolism in necrophilia. I believe the author is taking that too far. Perhaps it has more to do with having total control and power over someone, but that person doesn’t have to be deceased for one to have control and power. Perhaps that objectification has its roots deeper in sadomasochism than in necrophilia, however, since these women are under the influence, the masochistic aspect of said sadomasochism cannot exist. One cannot partake in masochism if they’re not aware of what’s going on, so this “masochism” is more like rape than anything.
----------------------------------------
Miguel Anjel Perez
Psychology 100
Article #2
On “Pedophilia, Sexual Orientation, and Birth Order”:
Bogaert, A., Bezeau, S., Kuban, M., & Blanchard, R. (1997, May). Pedophilia, sexual orientation, and birth order. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108 (2), 331-335. Retrieved December 12, 2008, December 12, 2008, doi:10.1037/0021-843X.106.2.331
The authors of this article focus on pedophilia and the sexual orientations of said pedophiles and whether or not birth order is indicative of a higher probability in one becoming a heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual pedophile. They group bisexual and homosexual pedophiles together during conclusions and reference due to the striking similarities both groups had with each other in contrast to heterosexual pedophiles. Birth order wasn’t the only thing that was measured during the studies of these pedophiles. Also taken into account are age of parents at birth, educational level (a scale of 1-7, 1 being no formal education and 7 being university level graduates), economic status, and admission to having sexual interests and fantasies about children or minors. The participants in this study were found through the Behavioral Sexology Department of the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto. Through browsing their records, data was collected in regards to the number of brothers and sisters these patients had. This is important because the researchers needed this information to deduce whether or not they had evidence of whether or not birth order has anything to do with one developing pedophilic tendencies. What they found was rather surprising. Through statistical recording of this data they developed an index that depicts later birth order, where the higher the index number, the later the birth order. The indices for the information gathered are as follows: .42 for the heterosexual pedophiles, .56 for the homosexual pedophiles, and .55 for bisexual pedophiles when taking into consideration birth order of both brothers and sisters; .43 for heterosexual pedophiles, .54 for the homosexual pedophiles, and .55 for the bisexual pedophiles. This tells us that among the data gathered for this group of pedophiles (57 heterosexual pedophiles, 68 homosexual pedophiles, and 45 bisexual pedophiles) homosexual and bisexual pedophiles are born later amongst their brothers in relation to heterosexual pedophiles. The researchers found no evidence of correlation between the subjects’ age, total number of siblings, or education levels. The evidence is present in this study to point me toward the direction of believing this information, but I remain a skeptic. I believe that birth order doesn’t really give that strong indication of susceptibility to becoming a pedophile. Environmental factors can play a much more dramatic influence on this outcome than birth order alone. Or perhaps it’s a combination of both, but definitely not solely the latter.
----------------------------------------
Miguel Anjel Perez
Psychology 100
Final Paper
Final Diagnostic Paper
To whoever will ultimately end up reading this paper, I understand that the name Maria diPaz may not mean much to you, for the name doesn’t mean much to me either. For the subject of my paper does not go by that name, however, for the sanctity of privacy, we’ll go with Maria. I choose to write about someone that I didn’t choose out of the biography section at the library at random. Something about going about that method seems so impersonal to me as the topic of my first of, surely, many psychology papers to come. I believe someone a little closer to my heart can be a great subject for my first diagnosis.
Maria comes from a family who has very strong ties with the Roman Catholic Church and religion is very important to the family. Up until the end of high school, she wasn’t allowed to invite friends over as normal kids her age were, much less leave the house to partake in activities at the homes of those friends. Movie theaters were out of the question, as was going to the mall or restaurants for a late-night jaunt. She was allowed to hold a job as a cashier at the local Target, but this place of employment was, not unintentionally, located right across the street. High marks in school were held in high-esteem to her family, but creativity and deviance from “normal” was not tolerated. Her mother used to be in the military and at times enforced totalitarian rule to maintain control of the household. As I recall, that family ruled that home with totalitarian, Hitler-esque qualities at times.
Maria was a perfectionist of sorts. She excelled in school and was organized to a fault. The perfect student and daughter, at least that’s what the world perceived her to be. Underneath that façade was an incredibly broken girl, and it took me years to really grasp to what extent that damage reached. I recall one instance rather vividly where I realized that something was a little “off” about his girl. Maria had this planner, a personal calendar of sorts, where she wrote every detail of tasks she had to accomplish throughout the day, the English essays she had to write in perfect penmanship, the calories she’d taken in that day, along with countless other items of information. I recall taking this planner and marking on it with a black felt tip pen – a smiley face. To me it was nothing more than a gesture of silliness and friendship, but to her it was the artistic equivalent of murdering a child in cold blood. She ran out of the room to the school store downstairs and purchased a new planner, same color and size. She copied every mark, every detail from the old planner to the new one. She was that disturbed and to this day I never quite understood that. She didn’t have OCD tendencies, but that definitely seemed a little OCD. That was one instance, however, and one instance does not a diagnosis make.
The day where the pieces started to fall together was the day when she walked up to me one day and the capillaries on her eyelids had burst. One’s eyelids typically don’t burst unless there’s extensive trauma caused to the eye. There was no black eye. No erythema. No swelling. Only the capillaries that ruptured from some the pressure applied on them. She confessed to me that she’s been having some issues with food as of late and it didn’t take long for me to figure out what had been going on with her.
According to the DSM-IV, bulimia nervosa involves “both of the following: 1) eating, in a discrete period of time (e.g. within any 2-hour period), an amount of food that is definitely larger that most people would eat during a similar period of time…” and “2) a sense of lack of control over eating during the episode.” The binging is followed by purging, either by self-induced vomiting or through the abuse of laxatives. There’s also the nonpurging type (one I was unaware of until I looked bulimia nervosa up on the DSM-IV) where the affected person uses “inappropriate compensatory behaviors such as fasting or excessive exercise…” and does not go about the typical self-induced vomiting, diuretic, or laxative route. In order to be classified as bulimia nervosa, the behavior has to persist to at least twice a week for 3 months.
It took a while for her to really open up to me, but I learned that she had been inducing vomiting rather regularly, at least a few times a week and using laxatives when she wanted to give her throat a “break.” She also admitted to drinking excessive amount of coffee throughout the day to rid her body of any excess water weight. She knew the field of biology rather well and any student of biology can tell one with a great deal of confidence that coffee is a diuretic. When she turned 18, she added cigarettes to the list of substances to abuse as cigarettes “speed up my metabolism and keep me from being hungry.” “Diet coke and cigarettes: the supermodel diet.” After a while I noticed that the episodes began to subside. There were no more ruptured capillaries and she wasn’t complaining of having a hoarse throat, but she did begin eating a lot less than usual and increasing the energy drink intake. That was around the time I went off to the university, so a couple of years had gone by since the initial day planner and capillary incidents. Maria had been going to the local technical college studying to become a surgical technician. Classes were going well and it seemed that her life was once again going to reach that desired stability. I’m not sure what happened along the way since now I’m all the way in Okinawa, so very far from the bitter winters of the Midwest, but she has relayed to me that she had gotten into the habit of pulling all-nighters to study for class and do homework, followed by days of going to class, then off to the hospital for clinical, and ending the days with a shift at Target. There would be days where she wouldn’t sleep for 3 days straight. It reached a point where she passed out in the surgical suite during a surgery and was dismissed from the surgical tech program because she posed a threat to the patient on the operating table.
I’m not sure what is in store for her in the future, but it’s pretty obvious that she needs to seek out some form of intervention, whether it be familial or amicable. On one hand, one’s family more than likely knows one best. However, can a family that rules the household with an iron first provide the best shoulder to lean on? The discipline that is required to reside within that kind of residence demands one to suppress psychological problems which can be deemed as frivolous. On the other hand, an intervention from a friend seems to be the most logical solution, for there would be no physical or mental retaliation.
Professor Plattner
English 104
Research Paper
My Essay on Habitual Drug and Alcohol Use
I recall being I seventh grade and telling myself that I would never try drugs or alcohol. That I would never even try cigarettes, for what was the point of them? They made you smell horrible and gave you bad breath. Yes, I swore I would never try alcohol, not even wine. I told myself I would never try marijuana and I would never abuse prescription pills. That all seems like a blur these days, for I've tried nearly everything under the sun. I won't mess with heroin or crystal meth, but anything else I have probably tried at one point or another. One changes a lot throughout the course of six or seven years. You see a lot in life and realize that maybe those substances that you swore yourself off from may not be so bad after all. I have been in a few interesting situations. I have been at nightclubs and ended up outside on the sidewalk, hunched over and vomiting profusely. I have taken Adderall and been so alert and sped up that I didn't even feel human anymore. The night I tried cocaine for the first time, I was so shaky and numb, and the night I tried marijuana for the first time the entire world felt as if it was spinning and pulsating through my veins for five hours straight. Alcohol, Vicodin. I have tried it all.
I'm better these days. My habits are not nearly as bad as they used to be. I guess that just comes with age. Maybe it takes growing up to realize for that fear of trying drugs and alcohol to subside, and maybe even a little more growing up to realize you could definitely do without said substances. I grew up watching all these television shows in which the characters portrayed dabbled in drugs of all sorts. I grew up wanting to be those actors. I grew up thinking that that was life was supposed to be about, that "normal" human beings lived their lives like that, day by day. It's hard to admit, but I was the most awkward-looking child growing up. I was short in stature and rather overweight. I didn't really have any friends. I came home after school nearly every day and sat in front of the television, for I didn't have any friends to go tot he park with or invite over to play Super Nintendo. All I had was me. Maybe that's why I discovered alcohol at an early age. A bottle of Corona would always be there for you. A shot of tequila would never make you cry. My mother was rather fond of Brandy, and I recall rummaging through the cabinet next to the television and taking sips straight from the bottle when I was younger. It's weird thinking about it all that right now, but back then all that made sense to me. The puzzle pieces fit and I was content. I thought everyone lived like that, turning to alcohol and other substances to momentarily dull a bit of the pain away, and with age I've come to the realization that a lot of people do.
Documenteries on drug addicts play on the television every week. I didn't even know the manner in which crystal meth was introduced into the body until a month ago; it wasn't until I saw this television show about this addict named Jason that I learned. That made me think…eighteen year olds are not the only ones that have access to all these television shows. There are sixteen, seventeen year olds throughout this country that tune into those shows out of curiousity and maybe some of them even get influenced. That maybe drugs can be a route toward numbing the pain that life causes. Maybe that drugs would be an easier way out. Teenagers, however, have more of a predisposition to getting involved with marijuana. It is the most socially accepted drug. To many people, marijuana is not even considered to be a drug. To them, and I'd have to agree, marijuana does not cause the take the same physical and mental tolls on one's body that heroin or cocaine do. I do believe that marijuana is a drug, but not a drug on the same level as the harder drugs.
I conducted an interview with my friend Julia to see what her vices were. Everyone has vices of some sort, so I conducted an interview with a series of questions to help me with dig a little deeper into her personality. To find out why her and I are so different in this aspect of our lives. The interview is as follows:
M: Have you ever used drugs of any sort?
J: No. Not even weed. I just choose not to because I am a very goal oriented person, and I believe that using drugs will hinder me from obtaining these goals. As a Christian, it goes against my moral beliefs and I don't like do things just because that's what's "in." I like to be an individual and be unique.
M: Does anyone in your family do drugs?
J: My brother smokes weed. He does it often out of his own free will, and it makes him happy. I personally don't find it "wrong." I just let that decision be made by that person. I won't do drugs, though.
M: What about your mom and your dad? Do they do drugs? I'm sure they drink, as most parents do, no?
J: Nope. Well, my dad drinks a little once in a while. Nothing too bad, though.
M: How about cigarettes?
J: No. No one in my family smokes either. I see cigarettes being in the same category as drugs. They just don't help me in any way. I don't see any benefit. I don't do it also because it decays your teeth; you're always reeking of cigarette smoke. Some people do it to stay thin, but that just seems unhealthy on its own.
M: You're 18, so obviously you've taken down a few drinks in your day, right?
J: I honestly usually don't. I usually never drink. Since I've come to college, though, it's all around me. I've taken a down a few drinks every now and then. It doesn't take much to mess me up though. A couple sips and I'm retarded.
M: When was the last time you got drunk?
J: About a month ago, actually, and my best girlfriends were getting drunk and I decided to join along so I wouldn't be the odd one out. We continued to get drunk and a lot of interesting things happened that night. I woke up the following morning, not with the feeling of regret, but wondering why I went through with all that. All that resulted was in me acting all crazy.
M: Surely you liked that feeling; otherwise you wouldn't have drunk in the first place.
J: No, I just did it because everyone else was doing it.
M: So it's easy for you to cave under peer pressure?
J: Sometimes I just think it's good to relax and let down your guard and let loose. I pride myself in being a unique strong individual who can control herself. I think drinking in general is okay as long as you're able to control it and know your limits, and people fail because they don't know or choose to follow those limits.
M: What's your limit?
J: A half cup full or something if it's mixed with something. Or two shots or something like that. I don't know.
M: Are you a happy drunk, an angry drunk, or do you just get horny or something?
J: I'm really happy when I get drunk. Boisterous. I have a lot of fun; I'm usually a very open person regardless. It allows me to further release feelings though. I guess.
M: So you're not a horny drunk?
J: No. Stop trying to imply that. I think I'm done with this interview and I hate you, Mickey.
Even though Julia is my friend, I think she was holding back on some of her responses. I do not know why exactly, but maybe she felt a bit embarrased in disclosing deeper answers, for she knew that the purpose of the interview was for a research paper and that perhaps the interview may be included in said paper. The interview just seemed a little sugar-coated.
Julia sees herself as being a strong human being, or maybe that's just the image that she emits. Regardless, she sees alcohol and drugs as being substances that only needed by the weak of heart and those with no self-control. Religion can also plays a big role in why some people choose to do drugs over others. According to Julia, the Bible states, even though not explictly, that abusing substances is wrong. I see that correlation, that if one has a strong religious background, they're less likely to abuse substances on a regular basis. Even though she has strong religious ties, she does cave every once in a while and can be found with a cup of juice made strong with a shot or two of something much stronger than juice. If you feel like letting loose every once in a while, go ahead. As long as no one faints or blacks out, why not? When one starts drinking to pass or black out, that's when drinking starts being a much bigger problem. It's one thing to drink to loosen up a bit, but it's quite another to drink to the point of a blackout.
The reason I asked her what kind of "drunk" she was was to find out if she felt that her personality changed when she consumed alcohol,and for the most part, hers didn't. She becomes a bit less uptight, but generally her personality remains the same. From the interview with Julia, I can derive that perhaps someone's alchol. The type of personality one has tends to dictate whether or not one is more apt to dabbing in drugs and alcohol.
I know someone that does, however, seem to have a harder time with drugs and I decided to interview him for this paper as well. The interview is as follows:
M: Tell me about the first time you tried alcohol
S: I was living with my Dad in Lake Geneva, and I snuck some beers from the wine cooler in the basement. I tried to be stealthy but I think eventually he caught on that I was drinking his booze.
M: How old were you?
S: 14
M: And how old were you when you first got drunk?
S: Completely drunk, i'd have to say around 17. I remember it was my classmate Matt from Algebra, and our friend Karl. We drank copious amounts of Soco and cheap wine, coupled with a few bowls of marijuana.
M: Was that the first time you tried marijuana?
S: I tried marijuana and tobacco the same night, strangely enough - I was 17. I was a habitual toker before 18.
M: They say being high varies from person to person. What does the high from marijuana feel like to you? Explain it.
S: It largely depends on the grade of weed you are smoking, also with how much you smoke. Some buds are mellower, and others have more of a head high (sativa strains) - to sum up the high, it comes on first as a giddy body buzz, and then it lulls into a decapacitating stupor at higher doses. Sometimes the high is energetic, other times it is very sleepy.
M: What would you say is your drug of choice?
S: Heroin and other opiates, by far
M: How old were you when you first shot up heroin?
S: 20... I smoked it unknowingly at 19
M: Hah, wow. And did a close friend introduce it to you? Or how did that happen? Tell me about the night you did it
S: I wanted to try it; I had a mutual friend who I met through my best friend at the time - I was told that it was a stronger version of oxycodone. So, we embarked on a roadtrip to the North side of Milwaukee to score dope. We came back to a friend's, afterwards, and shot up. I remember feeling VERY drunk, but not to the point where I was puking. I just kept stumbling and slurring my words. I remember going around back to urinate, but I couldn't. I remember being annoyed, but at the time I was so blissfully removed I didn't care. It was the epitome of chill. I felt as though I was on a high dose of valium and I just stepped into a hot tub. All the little pink fingers massaging away any physical or emotional pain you had.
M: Nice analogy. So tell me about your one of your lowest points, caused by either drugs or alcohol. I mean, have you hit rock bottom before?
S: To the point of homelessness, no. But I did lose my job to heroin. I guess in retrospect, I was on the verge of quitting a job I had been at for over two years because I was unhappy, but not showing up to work invoked my termination. Academically I have also suffered tremendously from the after-effects when I quit, mainly from depression. I had to drop out of school for a year. My personal and familial relationships have suffered more than anything, though due to the tremendous stigma surrounding Heroin.
M: So you've quit?
S: I have quit before, I was clean and sober for over 6 months... but this year I have used a few times a month. I can't say I'm proud of it, but Methadone has saved my life. It tackles the physical part of the addiction, where I have occasionally popped pills or even used dope on occasion. The hardest part, honestly is the psychological addiction to the high and the use of needles. It is said that addicts, when unable to get drugs, will inject water into their veins. The only thing stopping me from becoming a full-blown addict is lack of income, positive encouragement from my family and friends and also the will to find a new job and get back on my feet. Another aspect that I've practiced is avoiding syringes. They often lead to excessive and unnecessary drug use. It seems to have worked for me, so far.
M: Have you ever tried committing suicide?
S: No, I haven't. I have been suicidal before, but not due to illicit drug use.
M: Have you ever been to a rehab center or program of any sort?
S: I have been specifically receiving substance abuse counseling since September of last year, but I have seen various psychologists since I was 11 years old
M: Deep down, do you think drugs are wrong? If used moderately? Social stigmas aside.
S: Drugs are not for everyone. It depends on your mental, physical, emotional and spiritual health. If you are a relatively stable person who has very few problems and has strong self-discipline, then I don't see how moderate drug use can be too harmful. It's what you make of it.
M: So you're unemployed at the moment, correct? Was the unemployment caused by drug use?
S: Yes, and partly due to drug use or its after effects.
M: Would you ever sell possessions to support your drug habit?
S: If it's at a significant loss, no. That would be something I'd only do as a last resort. At this point, I wouldn't do it. I need disposable income to eat and pay bills.
M: Yeah, food's important. I've heard people need it every day to keep on going.
S: Need what?
M: Food.
I chose Steve as one of the people I interviewed because I had known about his problems with drugs of all kinds, but with heroin in particular. He and I have been friends for a couple years and I know that he wouldn't hesitate in telling me the complete truth about his addiction. He started off dabbling in alcohol at a very young age and it wasn't that much longer before he started with harder drugs, and, in this case, heroin. I've always believed that different people have different susceptabilities in getting involved with drugs. It all really depends on a person's character and their will-power or need for the drug. What I mean by that is that a person is more susceptible getting addicted to drugs if they're in a bad place in life as use drug usage as a coping mechanism. In example, if a person is at a point in life where they are severely depressed and feel as if there's no one in life for them to turn to, turning to drugs seems like that more of a feasible option. Although a person who is completely happy with life in general, there's still a chance they can become addicted to drugs of various sorts, but the likeliness of that happening is significantly lower than that of someone who is severely depressed. It is the same people who get addicted to shopping or food or sex that get addicted to drugs and alcohol more easily than those that are not. Drugs, especially drugs like heroin and crystal meth, can greatly alter one's mental condition and inhibit depression. That is why it was so hard for Steve to quit the heroin usage: the longer one uses, the more the drug messes with one's mental stability. Taking that manner of thinking into consideration, it's no surprise that severe depression is a common side-effect of prolonged drug usage. It is a cyle: one finds a drug like heroin when they're depressed, the drug makes them even more depressed, and that person turns to heroin to help combat that depression. The manner in which hard drugs affects one person's physical and mental stability really varies from person to person. There are people like me that can try something, like cocaine, and not get instantly addicted and in constant need for that drug. Then there are people like Steve that get easily addicted to substances of all sorts. His addiction got to the level where he spent days taking pills upon Methadone pills to maintain his mental stability. He did not sell his possesions when he was at one of his lowest point and I commend him for that, for he didn't, according to the rules of society, entirely hit rock bottom. Steve mentioned something in the interview that I thought was a very important piece of data-- he said that there is a social stigma that comes along with using heroin, and heroin has more of a social stigma than marijuana or even ecstasy. One of the rather obvious reasons for the social stigma of heroin is the manner in which most of the United States has religious ties of some sort, and illicit drug use is prohibited by the church. Another reason that drug usage has a social stigma and doesn't have widespread acceptance is due to drugs' predisposition in causing harm to those who use it. One's health is something that is cherished in every culture in the world; health tends to be the number one priority of most societies worldwide, and any substance that puts that health in danger is seen as a threat.
AnF Prepster 88: Have you ever gotten really drunk or high before?
Secretlyowned23: Yes.
AnF Prepster 88: Which one?
Secretlyowned23: High.
AnF Prepster 88: Off of what substance?
Secretlyowned23: Weed
Secretlyowned23: Cocaine and Adderall count?
Secretlyowned23: add those too =p
AnF Prepster 88: Yep
AnF Prepster 88: Alright
AnF Prepster 88: Tell me about your high when you smoked weed
AnF Prepster 88: What did it feel like?
Secretlyowned23: It's a sensation I can feel throughout my body. And a very good one.
AnF Prepster 88: What about the cocaine high?
Secretlyowned23: Extreme energy. Sometimes not the best feeling.
AnF Prepster 88: Is that how it feels like with the Adderall too?
Secretlyowned23: yes.
AnF Prepster 88: Out of all the drugs you've tried, which one is your drug of choice?
Secretlyowned23: Weed.
AnF Prepster 88: And why is that?
Secretlyowned23: Because it makes me feel good =)
AnF Prepster 88: Did you experience any side effects from any of the drugs?
AnF Prepster 88: Good or bad?
AnF Prepster 88: JACKIE :-)
Secretlyowned23: sorry playing rs hahahha
Secretlyowned23: yes i do. headaches, dry mouth, chest pains. And stiff muscles when I do uppers like coke and adderall.
AnF Prepster 88: Did the weed make you gain or lose weight?
Secretlyowned23: Neither.
AnF Prepster 88: How about the coke and adderall?
Secretlyowned23: those made me lose weight
AnF Prepster 88: And did you mind that as a side effect?
Secretlyowned23: I loved it, it's one of the reasons I used adderall.
AnF Prepster 88: How much weight can you say you lost when you use to take adderall?
Secretlyowned23: 80 pounds
AnF Prepster 88: Seriously?
Secretlyowned23: yes
AnF Prepster 88: So how did you lose all the weight?
AnF Prepster 88: Did you skip meals as well?
Secretlyowned23: The drugs I did controlled my hunger so I ate only one meal every few days
AnF Prepster 88: What was the longest period of time you went without eating?
Secretlyowned23: Probably just 3 days.
AnF Prepster 88: And after that third day when you finally had to eat, how did you eat? Did you gorge or eat a small meal or what?
Secretlyowned23: it depends, sometimes just one candy bar or hamburger, other times a full meal including dessert =]
Secretlyowned23: and this has nothing to do with drugs wtf
AnF Prepster 88: yeah it does
AnF Prepster 88: the losing weight was a side effect of the adderall
AnF Prepster 88: and you liked it
AnF Prepster 88: you liked losing the weight
AnF Prepster 88: which is why you kept using
AnF Prepster 88: right?
AnF Prepster 88: right.
Secretlyowned23: yes, correct.
AnF Prepster 88: Have you ever (even though I know the answer to this, BITCH) taken Adderall in any other form than swallowing?
Secretlyowned23: yes. I've snorted it on occasion
AnF Prepster 88: Was there in a difference in the way the Adderall hit you in comparison to ingesting the pill?
AnF Prepster 88: (and this is almost over, I swear)
Secretlyowned23: yes, the drug hit me faster
AnF Prepster 88: How long did you take Adderall for?
AnF Prepster 88: And what made you finally stop using?
AnF Prepster 88: come on
AnF Prepster 88: almost doooone
AnF Prepster 88: you fucking slut
Secretlyowned23: sry
Secretlyowned23: i thought i answered
Secretlyowned23: i took it for three years. I stopped doing drugs because I got pregnant.
AnF Prepster 88: Awww...that's cute.
I saw this documentary on the Discovery Channel, I believe, where they videotaped the life of a boy around the age of 19 or so named Jason who was addicted to OxyContin, a painkiller much like Vicodin, but is more closely related to heroin and morphine. Jason grew up with a father that was a cocaine addict and his stepfather, who he had been living with most recently, was a severe alcoholic. So growing up, he was surrounded by addiction and by the age of 19 he had manifested an addiction of his own, and although the OxyContin addiction had not been specifically introduced to him by his parents, one has more of a predisposition to getting addicted to a substance growing up than those with parents that are not battling addictions.
No. Not even weed. I just choose not to because I am a very goal oriented person, and I believe that using drugs will hinder me from obtaining these goals. As a Christian, it goes against my moral beliefs and I don't like do things just because that's what's "in." I like to be an individual and be unique.
2: Does anyone in your family do drugs?
My brother smokes weed. He does it often out of his own free will, and it makes him happy. I personally don't find it "wrong." I just let that decision be made by that person. I won't do drugs, though.
3. How about cigarettes?
No. No one in my family smokes either. I see cigarettes being in the same category as drugs. They just don't help me in any way. I don't see any benefit. I don't do it also because it decays your teeth; you're always reeking of cigarette smoke. Some people do it to stay thin, but that just seems unhealthy on its own.
4. You're 18, so obviously you've taken down a few drinks in your day, right?
I honestly usually don't. I usually never drink. Since I've come to college, though, it's all around me. I've taken a down a few drinks every now and then. It doesn't take much to mess me up though. A couple sips and I'm retarded.
5. When was the last time you got drunk?
About a month ago, actually, and my best girlfriends were getting drunk and I decided to join along so I wouldn't be the odd one out. We continued to get drunk and a lot of interesting things happened that night. I woke up the following morning, not with the feeling of regret, but wondering why I went through with all that. All that resulted was in me acting all crazy.
6. Surely you liked that feeling; otherwise you wouldn't have drunk in the first place.
No, I just did it because everyone else was doing it.
7. So it's easy for you to cave under peer pressure?
Sometimes I just think it's good to relax and let down your guard and let loose. I pride myself in being a unique strong individual who can control herself. I think drinking in general is okay as long as you're able to control it and know your limits, and people fail because they don't know or choose to follow those limits.
8. What's your limit?
A half cup full or something if it's mixed with something. Or two shots or something like that. I don't know.
9. Are you a happy drunk, an angry drunk, or do you just get horny or something?
I'm really happy when I get drunk. Boisterous. I have a lot of fun; I'm usually a very open person regardless. It allows me to further release feelings though. I guess.
10. So you're not a horny drunk?
No. Stop trying to imply that. I think I'm done with this interview and I hate you, Mickey.
January 30th: Oliver Stone Platoon
February 1st: Oliver Stone Platoon
February 6th: Richard Regan Just War: Principles and Cases (Part I except chapter 7, and only read Part II pgs. 136-151)
February 8th: Richard Normann Ethics, Killing, and War (selection)
February 13th: Marjane Satrapi Persepolis
February 15th: Papers; Presentations
Unit 3: Science
February 20th: Andrew Niccol Gattica
February 22nd: Andrew Niccol Gattica
February 27th: Bruno Latour Science in Action (Introduction, Part I)
March 1st: Bruno Latour Science in Action (Part II)
March 6th: Richard Lewontin (selected essays)
March 8th: Presentations
March 13th: Papers; Presentations
-Take CTA BUS # 74 FULLERTON WESTBOUND
Depart: FULLERTON & RACINE At 12:51 PM
Arrive: FULLERTON & GREENVIEW At 12:54 PM
Walk 0.3 mile S to 1441 W WEBSTER AVE
-Take CTA BROWN LINE TRAIN (BROWN LINE - COUNTERCLOCKWISE) Depart: FULLERTON CTA At 12:49 PM
Arrive: DIVERSEY CTA At12:51 PM Take CTA BUS # 76 DIVERSEY EASTBOUND
Depart: DIVERSEY & SHEFFIELD At 01:00 PM Arrive: DIVERSEY & ORCHARD At 01:03 PM
Walk E to 659 W DIVERSEY PKWY
Borders Bookstores
-Take CTA RED LINE TRAIN (RED LINE - SOUTHBOUND) Depart: FULLERTON CTA At 12:56 PM Arrive: NORTH/CLYBOURN CTA At 12:59 PM
Walk 0.1 mile E to 755 W NORTH AVE
-Take CTA RED LINE TRAIN (RED LINE - SOUTHBOUND) Depart: FULLERTON CTA At 12:48 PM Arrive: CHICAGO CTA At 12:58 PM
Walk 0.3 mile E to 830 N MICHIGAN AVE
5/2005 - 5/2006
Crew Member
-Taco Bell Kenosha/WI- 262-652-7310
Greeted people, took orders at front counter and drive-thru, helped prepare food, helped open or close the store, cleaned the dining room, bathrooms and work area.
10/2004 - 2/2005
Gap Associate (262) 857-7877 Lynn McCormick
-Gap Inc. Kenosha/WI-
Rang customers up at cash wrap/cash register, helped with stocking, put up store displays, aided customers with fitting rooms, folded clothing and put away accordingly, helped open and close the store.
11/2003 - 10/2004
Team Member 262-697-0123
-Rosati's Pizza Kenosha/WI-
Took phone orders, helped make food, aided in taking pizzas out of oven and preparing finished food for delivery, helped stock store, cleaned store at close, helped open and close store.
Religion 262: Religion & Globalization
Dr. David Wellman
January 14th, 2006
My mother has always had three main rules that she desires that my brothers and myself abide by: one, always have safe sex, two, try to not become a drug addict, and three, get enrolled at a university and refrain from dropping out. I don’t think of my mother every time I have sex, but I do keep in mind what she and my teachers in health class drilled into my brain about condoms. I’ve tried drugs, but they’re honestly not my thing. I made it to college, a very nice one at that, and I have yet to drop out. The thought has yet to even cross my mind. My mother has always been the community of accountability that I have relied on the strongest for utmost guidance. I think of her and what she would think when I’m about to make most life-altering decisions. In my mind I imagine her either praising or scolding me on the outcomes of said decisions. She, more than anyone else, has ultimately influenced the way I turned out. I have a sunny temperament and I like to think that she helped with that, and I tend to be a pretty responsible person most of the time. I have, however, picked up a few bad habits from my mother. She’s never really on time…for anything. She likes going to nightclubs and dancing the night away, a habit which definitely has rubbed off on me. I don’t think those characteristics make either her or myself bad people. On the contrary, they make us rather exciting and vibrant people.
My father has never really been around and I don’t deem him as one of my communities of accountability, even though the occasional horseback-riding sessions he took me on were rather exciting. He and I have been getting closer the past couple years, but the occasional conversation and scolding doesn’t do much to make deem him as a loyalty of mine. My stepfather, on the other hand, has been there from the start. He’s the one that I would call when I’d be sick in high school and needed a ride home and he was the first person to whom I showed my letter of acceptance to DePaul University.
I am eighteen years old and like wearing ties and polo shirts, though not simultaneously, from time to time. I’m a Latino male and I’m for the most part fluent in Spanish. I was born in Chicago and I’ve lived in the States my entire life. My parents, on the contrary, were born in Mexico and lived there for the first half of their lives. Food was scarce where they were raised and I remember my mother telling me that her family would live on beans and tortillas most days. At home, we don’t waste things and frugality is, in a sense, a way of life. We save most food that wasn’t eaten at dinner time for another day and I was taught to never throw away whole tortillas. Rather, I was to split them in half or in quarters and then dispose of them. One day I asked her why she insisted we dispose of tortillas in that manner and she replied “There’s countries in which people would kill for food and I can’t bear the thought of throwing away food for that reason, let alone a whole tortilla.” These days my family has plenty to eat, but I honestly cannot tell you the origins of most of the food we eat. For that matter, neither can my parents. I’d assume that the peppers we use for cooking and for making sauces come from a Latin American country, but which country I’m not at all sure of.
I was raised Catholic, but I must say that most Catholic values and methods of thinking didn’t engrain themselves in my brain, for I did not let them. I believe that it’s imperative for a person to believe in something greater than themselves to live life more fully, whether that be a God or a worldly cause, but I don’t believe that a person needs to belong to any one particular organized religion to be seen as a just human being by members society.
My family, I believe, would fall into the category of being working class. Back home my family didn’t recycle. However, I’m not sure whether or not the fact that we didn’t recycle has much to do with our class. Sure, we’d heard of the process of recycling and the Blue Bag program, but we didn’t know much else about the program other than the fact that, yes, it was in existence. I remember moving in to my dormitory and walking past a “recycling room” on my floor during my first week at DePaul. We were instructed to put certain items in certain bins and said items would then be recycled. I have agnostic points of view when it comes to religion, but I don’t litter. I respect the world in which we live in and I try my best not to throw candy wrappers and water bottles on the sidewalk. I wouldn’t choose the extreme path of establishing an eco-friendly organization and consequently recruiting members, but I do like to think that I do contribute to a cleaner Earth in my own special way. This may not demonstrate maximum sufficiency in preventing the world from being undertaken by litter, but I like to think that my contribution is nevertheless helpful and appreciated.
Paper #4
Professor Okijutu
Section 112 / English 103
The Deaf Persons and their Social Stigmas
Most of the people that inhabit this world are hearing-able. By contrast, those that cannot hear or have hearing deficiencies are deemed as being less human than the “majority” or are thought to have disabilities of sorts. Surely, deaf people are not able to function on the same level as their hearing counterparts, socially or physically. In that manner of thinking, deaf persons cannot communicate properly, for some of them do not undertake trying to learn to speak and communicate in the ways the “typical” human communicates. What is proper communication and by whose definition? Communication exists for the sole purpose of relaying information, thoughts, and messages between two or more parties. Who’s to say that one method is better than another? Who’s to say that one method is to be considered normal and the other shunned? The hearing perceive the deaf that do not try and assimilate with the hearing world as being “encapsulated.” (Lane, 267) That group of deaf persons, the group that chooses not to assimilate, is stigmatized by the hearing community. The latter group tends to be romanticized, for their “deafness” is considered a sickness to the hearing world instead of “disease.” (Lane, 268)
Persons that are hearing-able are more likely to accept and empathize with deaf persons that try and learn the common oral language and customs in a hearing society: to inhabit a world where closed-captioning is not necessary, for a person that is assimilating into the hearing world can surely read lips. They will not be accepted fully, as fully as a deaf person can be, unless they learn to read lips and make mutual communication easier for society. Society, by definition, believes it should not be expected to learn American Sign Language to communicate with a deaf person in the same manner that society believes it should not be expected to learn Spanish to communicate with a person who can speak only Spanish.
In Representations of Deaf People, Lane writes about an actress, Marlee Marlin that won an Oscar for playing a deaf role in the movie Children of a Lesser God. Marlin went on national television on receiving her Oscar instead of using someone that signed to translate for her. The deaf community was outraged. They commended Marlin for undertaking such a role and playing it well, but condemned her for not having the “courage” to embrace the deaf person she really was. The deaf community shunned Marlin for giving into the pressures of assimilating into that “normative” world: the world where an actress communicating in sign language is not okay and the world where a hearing person should not be forced to rely on closed-captioning or an oral interpreter to understand what was being said.
When I first read this, I did not think much on the subject, but upon further scrutiny I let myself open up and really understand why the deaf community was perturbed. They saw Marlin as a sort of icon. The deaf community looked at Marlin as someone who finally represented the deaf community in a positive light, but that idea was disintegrated as soon as she spoke in public. Marlin was seen as an “imposter.” The deaf community didn’t respect the fact that Marlin could have the courage to play a role that meant to so much to the deaf community but then give into societal pressure to “fit in” and speak in public, speak like the “typical” human is meant to speak. However, perhaps Marlin did not see making a public appearance on the television and refusing to have an interpreter as anything of weakness. Perhaps she saw the event as something of strength, showing the world that she did not have to depend on someone else to communicate with the world. She was showing her independence. Having independence is usually a sign of strength. The reason that the deaf community was upset, however, had nothing to do with matters of independence. The reason they got upset had more to do with the reason that she showed to the world, in a sense, that speaking, orally, is the only “correct” method of communication. Helen Keller was praised in her representation of the deaf and blind community, for she was both. They praised her optimistic and jovial temperament. They were happy that Keller did not let such an “illness” overcome her spirits and overcome her desire to keep on living. I thought that the response Kleege gave to Keller was unnecessary and not very valid. I don’t think that Keller was living her life so that people that came after her would be destined to live up to “impossible” expectations. Keller did the best with the resources she had to work with, and that is seen as a sign of strength, not a sign of bad character.
When reading the context of Representations of Deaf People, one can make a comparison as to how deaf people struggle on the same level as a woman or a person of color. They’re all considered to be minorities and minorities are usually looked upon by the latter groups with inferiority. Minorities are, at times, seen as incapable of doing certain things correctly. A deaf person is seen as being incapable of communication and is seen as less than intelligent. For society believes that a deaf person cannot receive a proper education because said deaf person cannot hear and cannot communicate on the same level as someone that is hearing-able. Society believes that women are people that are excessively emotional and incapable of undertaking any task that requires physical strength. Society believes that Latino people may be hard-working but are only capable of holding on to menial jobs. I believe that if we want to move forward in this society and in this world, it’s imperative to overcome stereotypes. It’s imperative for society to give other groups of people a chance to speak their minds, a chance to voice what their beliefs, no matter minority they may be.
Paper #4
Professor Okijutu
Section 112 / English 103
The Deaf Persons and their Social Stigmas
Most of the people that inhabit this world are hearing-able. By contrast, those that cannot hear or have hearing deficiencies are deemed as being less human than the “majority” or are thought to have disabilities of sorts. Surely, deaf people are not able to function on the same level as their hearing counterparts, socially or physically. In that manner of thinking, deaf persons cannot communicate properly, for some of them do not undertake trying to learn to speak and communicate in the ways the “typical” human communicates. What is proper communication and by whose definition? Communication exists for the sole purpose of relaying information, thoughts, and messages between two or more parties. Who’s to say that one method is better than another? Who’s to say that one method is to be considered normal and the other shunned? The hearing perceive the deaf that do not try and assimilate with the hearing world as being “encapsulated.” (Lane, 267) That group of deaf persons, the group that chooses not to assimilate, is stigmatized by the hearing community. The latter group tends to be romanticized, for their “deafness” is considered a sickness to the hearing world instead of “disease.” (Lane, 268)
Persons that are hearing-able are more likely to accept and empathize with deaf persons that try and learn the common oral language and customs in a hearing society: to inhabit a world where closed-captioning is not necessary, for a person that is assimilating into the hearing world can surely read lips. They will not be accepted fully, as fully as a deaf person can be, unless they learn to read lips and make mutual communication easier for society. Society, by definition, believes it should not be expected to learn American Sign Language to communicate with a deaf person in the same manner that society believes it should not be expected to learn Spanish to communicate with a person who can speak only Spanish.
In Representations of Deaf People, Lane writes about an actress, Marlee Marlin that won an Oscar for playing a deaf role in the movie Children of a Lesser God. Marlin went on national television on receiving her Oscar instead of using someone that signed to translate for her. The deaf community was outraged. They commended Marlin for undertaking such a role and playing it well, but condemned her for not having the “courage” to embrace the deaf person she really was. The deaf community shunned Marlin for giving into the pressures of assimilating into that “normative” world: the world where an actress communicating in sign language is not okay and the world where a hearing person should not be forced to rely on closed-captioning or an oral interpreter to understand what was being said.
When I first read this, I did not think much on the subject, but upon further scrutiny I let myself open up and really understand why the deaf community was perturbed.
Paper #4
Professor Ojikutu
Section 112 / English 103
Deaf Culture and its Stigmas
Harlan Lane put it well in her text when she spoke about the stigmas that come along with being deaf and that no one that isn’t that white, young, suburban, college educated male will actually know what it’s like to live completely free of being stigmatized in one way or another. Deaf people are stigmatized in the way that since they cannot hear or hear very little, they communicatively impaired; that by being deaf, they’re broken and considered to be less than human. In the deaf community, the deaf have a strong bond with each other. They respect each other and understand what they’re going through. It’s a sense and bond that people in the hearing world cannot even begin to understand or to analyze, for we, to them, are impaired with being able to hear. The problem that people in the hearing world have is the way we think see people that hear less than we do as having hearing disabilities. Perhaps to that person, not hearing isn’t a disability but more of a blessing. I, for one, wouldn’t like to hear what’s going on around me from time to time. Living in this world can seem like orderly chaos and it’d be nice to tune it our ever so often. Deaf people rely on their vision as being their most important tool to keeping in touch with the world, so a deaf person would, naturally, have a heightened sense of seeing than we do. They rely on their vision they way we rely on our hands and fingers. If we look at it this way, someone who is deaf is actually more “human” than the hearing person.
Deaf people, according to Harlan, even tend to shun other deaf people. For instance, a deaf person with a bit of hearing ability can be seen as an imposter. That deaf person that can hear a little can be seen as someone who is not comfortable with themselves and would rather pretend to be someone else than to embrace who they really are.
Paper # 2
Modern European History
Nancy Turpin
November 2nd, 2006
Alliances in Europe and World War I
Nationalism and alliances are two of the most important components to winning a war. Forming alliances is a great weapon in international relations and the quicker a country grasps the concept of forming alliance and grasps it well, the better off the country will be monetarily and socially. Forming alliances can also be a country’s greatest downfall; forming an alliance isn‘t necessarily the downfall, the reason would me more that of forming an alliance with the wrong country or for the wrong reasons. I consider Bismarck as being a great leader because he had great decisive and arbitrary skills when it came to international relations. In the beginning of 1870s, he knew that it would be imperative to remain any formation of an alliance with Russia or Austria or France. He wanted Germany to remain more on a neutral note, but if that wasn’t possible, he’d try other methods. In 1873 he established the Three Emperor’s League and with that Germany, Russia, and Austria were declared as allies, but the League didn’t last for long, as Russian and Austrian tensions with each other wouldn’t allow it. That’s a big problem with alliances, the more parties involved, the harder it is to reach a compromise and agree on methods of ruling. Russia served its main interests in 1877 with relations with Germany, for Russia merely wanted to gain complete control of Constantinople and the Dardanelles. In 1890, Bismarck was dismissed and that was the end of a stable diplomatic Germany.
The beginning of World War I had partial roots in Slavic issues. Nationalism was predominant in a different than usual manner in the Balkan region, for the inhabitants mainly spoke the same language and had similar cultural ties. Serbia and Montenegro were deemed Allied countries at the outbreak of war, alongside with countries like Great Britain, Russia, France, and the United States. The Balkans’ ultimate goal, however, was for Serbia to regain seize all Slavic areas, Bosnia in particular, from Austria. This ideal of nationalism is ultimately a very strong tool if used properly. Nationalism has the power to win out over strong armies and governments, for ultimately, it is the people that rule pretty much every government in the end. Society has the power to form riots to overthrow whomever they chose, and that’s why Balkan nationalism was so crucial to the beginnings of the war, with the Balkan/Bosnian crisis. Germany was in a very shaky state at this time, in 1908. It had lost its Bismarck that had been the head of most international issues and his dismissal didn’t help with international relations, foreign countries had instilled a sort of trust in him. The state of Turkey was disrupting the peace in 1913 and Turkey and Romania teamed up with Greece and Serbia against Bulgaria and won very easily. This angered the Austrians for the last thing they wanted was for the Balkans to gain control of the Adriatic sea, but the Russians didn’t allow that, for they backed the Serbians. The Serbians wanted to be free, they wanted to be their own free, independent country, but Austria would not even consider allowing that. This produced Russo-Austrian tensions for they were meant to be allies but they wanted different outcomes from this country, and this relation would have an important outcome in the next couple years to come.
Nationalism also has the power to stir up emotions in certain individuals and force them to do things they wouldn’t do otherwise, like how a Serbian nationalist, a member of the Black Hand, essentially was the brute force that commenced World War I. It seems so intense how one person can have the power and capacity to yield his mind to so farfetched resolutions. Austria wanted to enact an attack on Serbia, but Hungary rightly resisted for that would do nothing but agitate matter even more, and they also needed to conserve troops in case of an attack made on Austria by Russia, which seemed very probable at the time being. Gaining control of Serbia was one of Austria’s main goals and coincidentally one of their main feats. Austria went ahead and tried to take over Serbia and held on to their capital briefly before the Serbs attacked back with full force, sending the Austrians away. In 1914, Austria used the majority of its spare army to fight the war with Italy, and later on Austria and Germany got Bulgaria to join in the effort to attack Bulgaria. The takeover took less than a month after Bulgaria decided to join. This was key to finally taking over Serbia. If Serbia had not been taken over, Serbia would have been seen as an ultimate threat against the Central Powers. Nationalism can only go far, in some cases; the takeover of Serbia proves this. The wishes of a society can only go so far when you have countries like Germany, Austria, and Bulgaria attacking it and its resources. The wounded and beat Serbian army had to no refuge in their country after the takeover and ultimately ended in Greece. When one really thinks about it, Serbia really didn’t have any powerful allied on its side. Sure, there were the Allies, but they were nowhere to be found during trouble in the Balkan area. They wanted to play it safe and stay away for the time being; a reason the Allies may have done that was that they did not want to put themselves in an uneasy situation when they did not absolutely have to. For helping out a country like Serbia could put a strain on the economies of Great Britain, France, and the United States. Not only that, but aiding a country in war, for unnecessary reasons, can cost the lives of millions of troops, troops that may have to be used to fight the war. The Balkan War and dispute was essentially a test for the Allies and the Central Powers, and Serbia ended up in a very difficult predicament when all Serbia wanted was a little more land and to preserve their independence.
Professor Ojikutu
Composition and Rhetoric/Section 112
October 16th, 2006
We live in a world where the man is seen to be the dominant figure in society. Not just in America, but worldwide, and in some countries that dominance is definitely more prominent than others. Audre Lorde said it well when she wrote “The Transformation of Silence into Language and Action.” She explained how life is short, how we as people need to start speaking our minds. Lorde spoke of the way society has humankind programmed to fear speaking out against anything, how it’s so common for one to stay quiet out of fear than to speak out and make a difference. I believe Lorde did a great job in her text explaining the social matter at large. Her point of view doesn’t seem as extreme or inaccessible to me. Honestly, it actually hits home in a way. Sure, I’m not a woman, I’m not black, and I’m not a lesbian, but I do understand being scared of talking in front of people or even speaking my mind to one person. We’re all human, we’re all going to die someday. Lorde states how staying silent isn’t going to protect one. Staying silent may in fact harm one and hinder one’s ability of making a difference in society. Staying silent doesn’t do much of anything. We can all be superheroes in our own way. All it just takes a little initiative.
Lorde also makes a valid point that different social groups in society have made it a sort of habit to tune out others groups. In example, a white male may have been raised to seem himself as being superior and may give off that vibe or way of being to other people. A woman may be terrified of arguing a point with a male counterpart because her mother raised her to be scared of males, scared of back-talking and scared of getting yelled at.
A quote from the text, that she said to her daughter, really caught my interest: “Tell them about how you're never really a whole person if you remain silent, because there's always that one little piece inside you that wants to be spoken out, and if you keep ignoring it, it gets madder and madder and hotter and hotter, and if you don't speak it out one day it will just up and punch you in the mouth from the inside.” That made so much sense to me, that seemed so…true. One may be scared to speak out of fear of being judged. Sure, one may be judged, but it isn’t going to be the end of the world. The person that does the judging may in fact be terrified of being judged in the same way.
In the text “A Movement to End Sexist Oppression”, Hooks presents the argument that women want, in this politically correct world, to be seen as equal to men. She mentioned, however, that the definition of a “feminist” doesn’t necessarily have to do with monetary manners. I’d have to say that I strongly disagree with that remark. Women have been seen as socially inferior to men in most societies for centuries. Men have always made more money than women, and still do in some fields. I think that feminists in this day and age care about equality in a monetary sense in life. The male makes an average of 26 cents more than a woman does for doing the same job in this country, statistically speaking. At the end of the day, to the feminist, it isn’t about the mere 26 cents. It’s the thought behind that way of thinking that really matters. Why not get paid the same? Why does something like genitalia or a greater muscle mass have to mean higher pay for the same job? It seems very discriminatory, but in a way, also very American.
I do agree with what Hooks had to say about the word “feminist”, though. That word has a really strong connotation. Women go through all different kinds of ways to avoid themselves being seen as or called feminists. It seems as if it has a connotation on the same level as the word “Nazi” and “communist.” When one says the word “feminist”, often the image that pops into one’s mind is that of a radical lesbian in support of meaningless matters. One of the reasons that that word is shunned in modern America is because we live in a patriarchal society. The male is seen as king and no one wants to disagree with the king. The feminist, however, does. Society has a big problem in accepting a group of people that is in fact trying to take over a “monarchy.”
Both documents have one thing in common. One, no matter their sex, social status, or what they fear, must rise up and conquer their fear of the unknown. It’s not enough to think it, for any person can think. Thinking is but a form of hoping; one has to take those though and manipulate them into one’s life if they want to make a difference. How else does one know they’re alive if one is meant to keep their thoughts bottled up inside? The matter of importance is making a better life for oneself and for their offspring and future generations. That all begins with one step, that all begins with rising up against a force or group or political figure.
Modern European History
October 12th, 2006
Paper #1
Things Fall Apart Paper
We live in the United States. We’re seen as this major world superpower and have major influence on the people of the world around us, both politically and economically. The British have had a status for centuries as being a major European powerful force not to be messed with. The main concept of this story, however, is that governments and high officials tend to get greedy with power and want to conquer as much land as they can, worldwide. In our world, land equals power. The more land one owns, the more powerful they are seen. This is where the missionaries play in important part. In a sense, religion is being used, in Things Fall Apart, as an excuse, in a “we’re conquering this land because that is God’s wish” kind of manner.
The Igbo tribe, for their time, actually had a productive and efficient way of ruling their land and people. They had certain rules and guidelines by which the people of Umuofia lived by and punishments for those that disobeyed the laws of the land. Their way of life may have been considered as primitive by European and British standards, but who defines primitive anyway? The Igbo tribe revered itself as being in touch with the land and nature and would apply harsh punishment to any who treated the land in bad manner. This aspect of the book made sense to me, for nature and planting crop are the essences of life. It seems rightly so to treat respecting the land and respecting crop as the Igbo’s tribe religion. Who’s to say that a culture needs to be technologically advanced not to be considered primitive? White men have a history of assuming themselves to be rather superior to those of other races, to those of dark color in particular. They enforce their laws, government, and religion onto the people of the Igbo tribe. Why? For what reason?
A greater and spread influence of British customs, religion, and government, in theory, equals a greater overall success for Britain. If they manage to set up colonies that reflect the economy and customs of Britain, Britain can use said colonies for whatever their heart desires. I can’t help but believe that the conquering of Umuofia and Mbana has an ulterior motive, rather than just to conform the Nigerians into Christians. Slavery was rampant at this time in history. It would be no surprise to me if the plan was to turn Umuofia into a slave colony if all went well, if this was all, in the end, for profit. Umuofia had a stronghold in the palm wine business. When the missionaries conquered the colony, they began distributing the palm wine internationally and making profit. The colony has great soil and they have a strong work ethic, what with the vast amount of yams harvested each yeah. This Nigerian colony may have been seen as a great resource and investment by the English.
I can completely understand why the people of Umuofia feared the white men. Society has a tendency to fear what it doesn’t understand or is foreign to. They’ve heard of white men in stories, even though “white skin” is considered leprosy by their standards. The first white men they see comes riding a bicycle, so out of fear they kill him and tie his bicycle up to a tree. They killed them because they didn’t understand, for this comes down to basic primal instincts. It’s about killing before one gets killed. It’s about keeping their loved ones guarded and well. When word gets out to Great Britain of the killing of the white man on the bicycle, they send more men to the locale and open fire killing the majority of the people who inhabited the locale. What produced fear for the Umuofians was the vast number of guns and other weaponry that the English missionaries possessed. They feared revolting for they’d be shot on the spot. Even though the people of color greatly outnumbers the white missionaries, a revolt seemed like ludicrous, for the white men were ultimately deemed as superior. Some members of the tribe, however, welcomed the religion, not quite with open arms but definitely with less hesitation. The English convinced the members of the tribe that their form of government had major flaws. They built jailhouses to lock up tribe members as the white men saw fit. I had trouble trying to grasp that concept. The tribe members, in time, began to conform to the ways the English wanted them to, but why would a person conform to a society that only wants to tell them their way of life is wrong and lock them up for it? Something that I also saw as shocking was the fact that the white missionaries were using tribal members as the people that would fetch those that committed “crimes” and would be the ones to toss them in jail. That seemed rather intense.
The main character in the story Things Fall Apart is Okonkwo. Okonkwo is a tough man of strong nature. He despises failure in any form and tends to be a very stubborn person. To me he is as a rather arrogant person; during the week of peace that is highly revered, he beats his wife. It seems like he believes he is above the tribal laws and that it’s completely alright if he breaks them. He accidentally shoots one of the tribe’s elders’ sons and he gets exiled for 7 years. During this time, he hears stories of the missionaries that are taking over Umuofia and Mbaina, but he refuses to believe that it’s as bad as they say. Okonkwo may have been stubborn and arrogant, but what he also was was a dedicated warrior, ready to fight for any just cause. When he came back from exile, he learned that things were in fact as bad as he had been told. He goes back to Umuofia and plans on having life go back to how it used to be, life where Okonkwo was seen as a powerful figure in society.
To his surprise, most of the culture that had previously existed in Umuofia had vanished. His culture had essentially turned into Christianity. Not all hope was lost though. There were, of course, tribal members that were not at all convinced by this “newfound” Christianity. Okonkwo joined with these tribal members. One day, these members of the tribe burned down the church, for they said it was the cause of all the problems and hardships they were going to. A meeting got initiated later on to talk about matters and the problems that were going on in Umuofia due to the white men. Okonkwo killed one of the men that had orders to stop the meeting and this led Okonkwo to take his own life by hanging himself.
To me, this was seen as a strong action on Okonkwo’s part, for his pride and hope had been shattered and there was nothing left. He wanted to be a warrior and fight for the cause of keeping and bringing back his tribe’s culture, but failed to do so, for he didn’t have all to great of numbers on his side. He’d rather die a warrior than be killed because he betrayed a “law.” That to me is seen as strong.
The theme of this story is intense. People fear that which they don’t understand, in this case, black men fear the white men. Though one thing is certain, no matter how many missionaries or white men try and take over a tribe, there is definite strength in numbers. When these numbers are broken down, that is the time when things fall apart.
Modern European History
Media Log #1
September 28th, 2006
I read this article online on why mental health services are failing in England. Most people with mental health problems don’t go to hospitals for treatment these days, but are rather treated in their people in their own communities by general practitioners, social workers, and nurses. About one in 10 mental healthy teams was rated as outstanding, which leaves 9 out of 10 with just mediocre or below mediocre care. They also found that out of the people interviewed on this subject, only 49% had the phone numbers of someone they could call if needed or after the work day was over. Fifty-nine percent of the health care teams or LITs scored below average when it came to dealing with a crisis or heavy problem after work hours. BBC gave the following statement: “The Healthcare Commission rated 9% of LITs as excellent, 45% as good, 43% as fair and 3% as weak.” Schizophrenia is a very serious mental condition and treatment is below average with this health issue. Counseling is lacking in this area and treatments and medications are being deemed as being below average. The big problem right now, though, is the fact that it’s getting harder to get treatment for an emergency with mental health out of office hours. Citizens are complaining because mental health issues don’t only happen during set hours of the day. The first step being taken is an attempt at an increase for more and more readily available behavioral therapy and counseling, which are essentially the backbones of a good mental health.
Composition & Rhetoric
Grouping & Stereotypes
We all have a tendency to judge and stereotype a person when we first meet them. Seeing a homeless person on the street can bring one to believe that the homeless person in front of them may have fallen into drugs earlier on in life, and drugs led this homeless man or woman to the point of their lives they’re at right now. One cannot fully know a person’s story unless they begin asking questions. We as human beings, however, make snap judgment on everyone upon first encounter. We do it as a means of protection; we do it so we can avoid or run away from people we may see as threats. If I were to be asked to classify myself into a series of categories and classifications, I’d “label” myself as being a young Latino male, average height, and being a pretty personable person. I typically don’t classify myself as being Catholic on when meeting someone for the first time, for I find that to be rather irrelevant in getting someone to really get to know me.
A person meeting me for the first time may not see me the exact same way, though, as that young Latino, personable male. That person may see me as being stuck-up or as a person lacking in intelligence. If I were having a bad day and hadn’t shaved and had on a baggy sweatshirt, I may be seen as being an unhygienic person or someone with time management problems. First impressions are essentially in the eye of the beholder, no matter how much one person can try to make that first impression a great one. I would, thought, introduce myself as being Mexican rather than Latino to someone of Hispanic descent. I will typically tell a Puerto Rican or Cuban person that I’m Mexican rather than Latino. There’s a stigma, if you will, with Latino people and assuming they’re from a certain locale. Puerto Ricans get perturbed if you refer to them as Mexican and vice versa. In a way, it’s all about pride. I remember an occasion where I was in the car with my father at a drive-thru at McDonald’s and he had Mexican music blaring pretty loudly from the speakers and the windows were rolled down. I turned the stereo down and he immediately turned it the volume up again. He turned up the volume even higher than it had been before. “Don’t be ashamed of who you are and where you come from. Don’t be scared of your roots. We‘re Mexican. Be proud,” my dad told me. People find joy in where they come from and can get deeply offended if one mistakes their “identity” for another. To an outsider, it may seem like no big deal to confuse two different types of Hispanic identity, but to a Puerto Rican or a Mexican, it would be like confusing an apple with a papaya. When I was younger, the first language I learned was Spanish. Later on in life I learned that Spanish was taught at school to people whose first language was English. I recall being perturbed by this fact, that a language should and only should be reserved for the people in that group or society. Nowadays, that way of thinking seems rather naïve and hypocritical. In high school, I studied Mandarin Chinese for four years. Chinese class actually taught me a lot about Chinese culture. It actually turns out that Mexican and Chinese culture aren’t as different as I thought they would be. Both cultures are known for having a strong work ethic and one of the things they both believe in immensely is the fact that younger generations should cherish and respect their elders. Also, in these two cultures, when one’s parents become elderly, it’s common for their offspring to help maintain them by providing monetary compensation or helping out with living quarters. In American culture, the customary “norm” is for the offspring of a parent not to help parents out as they age. It’s also the norm in Mexican culture for kids not to pursue higher education or for their parents to push them to go. I got lucky in that aspect, however. My mother knew that the only way that I would ever become “someone” in life was to go off to college and do my own thing. My father, on the other hand, lives by a set of more traditional rules. He didn’t approve of me attending a university and instead desired that I learn a trade that would that would provide me with money right from the start. I have had dreams to become a doctor for as long as I can remember, but that, too, is uncommon in the Hispanic culture.
In a way, I’m seen as a sort of minority even in the Latino community. I’m here, at DePaul University, indicating that I plan on being here for the full four years and obtaining a degree. A big problem in the Latino community is the fact that if parents actually want and strive for their children to go to a university, it’s usually more of an idea and less of an action. The reason behind this is that most Mexican families belong to the middle and lower-middle classes and college is seen as an unnecessary expense. To the typical Mexican family, it makes more sense for the 18-19 year-old in question to get a job to help support his or her family.
Even though I may be seen as an outsider at times and that I may be different than most of the Mexican people I know, I’m proud of who I’ve turned out to be. Label or no label, we are who we are. There’s no changing all the little pieces that make one the person he or she is, no matter how many stereos one turns down.
Composition & Rhetoric
Grouping & Stereotypes
We all have a tendency to judge and stereotype a person when we first meet them. Seeing a homeless person on the street can bring one to believe that the homeless person in front of them may have fallen into drugs earlier on in life, and drugs led this homeless man or woman to the point of their lives they’re at right now. One cannot fully know a person’s story unless they begin asking questions. We as human beings, however, make snap judgment on everyone upon first encounter. We do it as a means of protection; we do it so we can avoid or run away from people we may see as threats. If I were to be asked to classify myself into a series of categories and classifications, I’d “label” myself as being a young Latino male, average height, and being a pretty personable person. I typically don’t classify myself as being Catholic on when meeting someone for the first time, for I find that to be rather irrelevant in getting someone to really get to know me.
A person meeting me for the first time may not see me the exact same way, though, as that young Latino, personable male. That person may see me as being stuck-up or as a person lacking in intelligence. If I were having a bad day and hadn’t shaved and had on a baggy sweatshirt, I may be seen as being an unhygienic person or someone with time management problems. First impressions are essentially in the eye of the beholder, no matter how much one person can try to make that first impression a great one. I would, thought, introduce myself as being Mexican rather than Latino to someone of Hispanic descent. I will typically tell a Puerto Rican or Cuban person that I’m Mexican rather than Latino. There’s a stigma, if you will, with Latino people and assuming they’re from a certain locale. Puerto Ricans get perturbed if you refer to them as Mexican and vice versa.
Composition & Rhetoric
September 17th, 2006
Journal #1
When one walks into a shopping mall, one can see so many different kinds of women strolling down the halls and walking from store to store, buying anything and everything. Girls in miniskirts and revealing dresses. Girls in tight, form-fitting jeans and heels. In places like South Beach, Miami, girls peruse the town in bikinis, bathing suits, heels, and the latest designer sunglasses. Society has deemed dressing in this manner as accepted and commonplace. What we don’t typically think about is the fact that women did not always get to dress in the manner that they saw fit or were allowed to do more than clean a home or dust the kitchen. Decades ago, women were looked upon as domesticated creatures and incapable of making their own decisions. It was “improper” for them to do so. It was improper for women to be free thinkers and free writers. Free writers in the context that their work would not be taken as seriously or read with the same respect that a man’s work would be. Virginia Woolf tackles this subject right on with her story “A Room of One’s Own.” She writes about how it’s unfair that she not be allowed to attend the prestigious Oxbridge University because she lacks certain genitalia. She speaks on how women were allowed an education, but how a woman’s education and the fact the she was being taught always rendered inferior to the fact that a man was being educated. She was a smart woman, a woman with drive and ambition. A woman with a myriad of examples of how it feels like to be a woman in a society where the man is always right and the man always comes out without a scratch in the end. A woman was not even allowed to go to the library without the accompaniment of a male suitor. “That a famous library has been cursed by a woman is a matter of complete indifference to a famous library.” To me, this idea seems like absolute ludicrous. If a woman is not allowed to be taught at the university she so chooses, it seems like a natural right that that woman be allowed to teach herself in the manner so chooses. Teach herself with the books she is not allowed to obtain without a male counterpart by her side. We start off life in this world as infants. We learn how to speak, how to walk, how to talk our way out trouble, how to deal with the obstacles and tragedies that come with living. It seems inhumane that a woman should be forced to stop learning new things at a certain point of her life because and only because she’s a woman. It is only with the continuance of learning and furthering education that this world can keep growing and can we reach the ultimate goal that we strive for called “equality.” In another story, “Orlando”, Woolf touches on another very important point. She writes about how women have to obtain this rather materialistic and superficial ideal for men day after day. The hair-dressing, the powdering and preparation the face with make-up and rouge, making sure they’re properly attired at all points of the day. Women were deemed as property and the typical man wanted to make sure that his property, his trophy, would look it best so he could show it off to whomever he wanted to. He’d make sure this trophy was shiny and polished and kept it at close proximity washing dishes, dusting and cleaning the house, and doing laundry. In a sense, an aspect of the 30s, 40s, and 50s remains to this day. Society established the rule that women, if they want to get married and have the typical “perfect” life, have to dress just so, style their hair just so, and act in a certain manner. God forbid that a woman breaks that rule of society; she may ultimately end up an old widow. Honestly, sometimes the rules we all live by, on how and what it takes to be properly attired and presentable for society seems so vapid and shallow, like a pool of water that is 3 inches deep.
"The Gay Kama Sutra...you've got good taste" He said
"I...at the...saw you...." I stuttered
"I know, I saw you following me" He said " And I saw you following me"
"Um, that wasn't me. Must've been some other guy"
"Really? Aw, too bad."
"I have to go"
He grabbed my hand as I was about to leave and said "Hey, you want to come into my place and help me install blinds? I caught some weird psychotic guy peering at me through his window on a couple of occasions...even naked. It was kind of cute though. Do you know this psychotic guy?"
"Homer Simpson...Matt Damon...Michael Jackson. yes, it must've been Michael Jackson."
"Hah! You're a riot! Hurry up, come in. It's freezing out in this stupid hallway. And grab my copy of "The Gay Kama Sutra" on your way in."
