Thursday, July 31, 2008
Quick comment on Sports
In my opinion, any game that requires physical and mental skill is what is considered a sport, and that includes golf.
Derogatory Terms
The word derogatory is a term used to demean or degrade a person or thing. To use a derogatory term on someone means that you are implying that they are below you, socially and racially speaking. Derogatory terms such as chink, beaner, terrorist, Jew, white trash, redneck, and the n-word are terms of hate; terms that cut through skin and can be more hurtful than physical pain itself. Not only are there derogatory terms for race, but also terms that are gender specific such as hoe, bitch, gay, and slut. Looking back, when those derogatory terms were created, they were created specifically to put down certain people or races. As of today, rarely is anybody allowed to shout out racial slurs in public without garnering negative attention from someone, and rightfully so thanks to the Civil Rights Movement, Feminist Movement, and other small movements that were inspired by the Civil Rights Movement.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Reflection
Just like everyone else, I was dreading this day ever since I’ve been holding off on taking this class since my sophomore year. I realized this summer would be the perfect opportunity to finally take this class so begrudgingly, I agreed.
The first day of class was very unusual. Coming from a biological sciences perspective, all of my courses have a straight path with a strict lecture schedule to adhere to. There was no freedom to voice your opinion, rather, it was writing notes or going to sleep. So when Chris said that this class would be mostly a discussion forum, I did not know how to react. On one hand, this is a change to the college norms to what I am accustomed to, but on the other hand, this change would be intellectually stimulating.
As I look back on writing the blogs, I’ve noticed several things. First, I’ve noticed an increase in quality to my posts. My first post was probably the first time I have formally written something for school in a year. It was a nice, easy topic to transition into the writing mode for this summer, and I feel that my writing and the thought process that goes with it vastly improved. The second thing that I noticed was the topics that I chose. All of the topics I wrote about were ideas that were interesting to me. I think part of the problem of other uwp101 classes is the fact that not everyone has the opportunity to choose what they want to write about, and that in turn affects their writing. Personally, my writing is better if the topic is something I am passionate and for the most part, this class has allowed me to do this effectively.
With regards to the in-class discussions, I think the fluidity of the discussions has its advantages and disadvantages. The discussions were very intellectual-stimulating, and I find myself just digesting every word Chris or other students had to say and think to myself, “Hmm…” This “forum” to discuss our thoughts on key topics raised the quality of the discussions to where I have never experienced before as a science major. In science, there is not much to question, rather just facts, but in this class, every idea we talked about was deconstructed and questioned.
On the other hand, I think the fluidity of this class has its disadvantages. I noticed during class that we seem to wander from talking about the keyword and instead talk about something else that is somewhat related. I think a better idea would be to spend half the class talking specifically about the essay I the book, then the other half the fluidity would take over.
Overall, I loved this class. I think this class is truly innovative and with a few tweaks, this class could be the writing class of the future.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Self-Perception
This past week, one of our keywords was “image”, and while reading through my classmate’s blogs, I noticed Arlen commented on image as well. In his post, Arlen states that an image is “…an image. It’s what people, who don’t know you, see you as. Only when the person really gets to know you, the image of you they see is actually what you truly are”.
Roller Coastin'
This is a picture my mom took a couple of weeks ago at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom in Vallejo. It was my birthday so I invited my cousins to Six Flags to hang out, have some fun, and enjoy the day. I have to admit, heading to this day, I was a bit uneasy since I had not been on a roller coaster in 2 years, so I completely lost the memory of how riding a roller coaster felt like. Once we got to the park, we were debating on which ride to go on first: Medusa, arguably the best ride in the park, or a “pre-ride” ride that is not as thrilling but perfect for easing the transition to more thrilling, scarier rides.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
LIVESTRONG
I remember one time in class there was a discussion about Livestrong bracelets that Danielle brought up and ironically I, just like every other day, was wearing one on my wrist. And so, I read up her post, and I found it interesting on her take on the phenomena of charitable consumerism.
I can recollect back to the summer of 2004, and I was at the Nike outlet in Vacaville. As I was checking out my purchases, I noticed a box near the cashier selling yellow bracelets for $1. I asked the cashier what it was and she told me that it was a Livestrong bracelet, a fundraiser with the proceeds going towards Lance Armstrong’s cancer research foundation. I thought to myself “Hey, if it’s for a good cause, why not?” and bought 5 bracelets that I still use today.
What was interesting about Danielle’s post was when she stated that “LIVESTRONG attracted a new type marketing to consumers; feel good about what you buy because you are donating to an organization”. I have to agree, and noticed that people buy it just to be like “hey, look at me! I’m a socially conscious person and I donate my money to charity.” On the other hand, other people are not so ostentatious and don’t have the inclination to look good for other people by visually showing via Livestrong bracelets that they care. In essence, Livestrong has almost become a status symbol for the self-conscious person; a symbol seen worn by pretentious, fake people.
However, not all Livestrong band-wearers can be grouped into that description. There are always people who wear the bracelet because they are personally affected by cancer and it reminds them of the struggle and courage it takes to overcome it. Some wear it just because they like Lance Armstrong as an athlete, and some just wear it because they use it as motivation, and that’s acceptable.
I think in these situations, one has not to be cynical but rather question the motives of the companies for allowing the commercialization of a fundraiser, because after all, Nike and Gap is in the business of making money for themselves. However, in my personal opinion, I think organizations like Code Red and Livestrong are truly honest about their intentions of helping out and are just using the extra exposure and commercialization to promote their foundations.
Finally, with regards to Livestrong bands, I’ve come to the conclusion that many people have different reasons to wear the bracelets, and I cannot judge someone on their intentions of wearing it, and rather just worry about myself and “do me”.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Street Ethics
One of my favorite shows on T.V right now is The First 48 on A&E. The basic premise of the show is a reality-based crime scene investigation where actual cases from Memphis, Miami, Dallas, Detroit, etc. are followed. In these cases, the show highlights the delicate balance between detectives, witnesses, and suspects. The cat and mouse game between the detectives and key witnesses is intriguing because it is a microcosm of the cultural differences and similarities occurring between the inner city and the suburbs.
Usually, whenever a key witness knows about the situation or knows the suspect, they are uncommunicative to the detectives. The idea of not “tattle-tailing” has been engrained since our childhood. From grade school, “tattle-tailing” is considered a bad thing and that everyone should mind their own business. Back then, there were no racial preferences and preconceived notions to who “tattle-tailed”; an Asian, Latino, African-American, or Caucasian kid were all equally liable to “tattle-tail”. However, in The First 48, this idea is conveyed to the extreme because people have died. This is not a harmless game, but rather a torture to the victim’s family because no one wants to fess up.
In essence, those living in the ghetto are living by the street code of “no snitching”. Those brought up in the inner city are afraid to come forward and speak on the crime because of the fear of being retaliated by the gangs. In this situation, there is a cultural difference because the main minority depicted on the show is African-Americans, thus providing an impression that only African-Americans living in the street culture undertake the “no snitching” code. To me, this represents the reality of the differences in cultures and how certain things (tattle-tailing) can be twisted into something more radical (no snitching).