Now, as most of us know, there is a Women's Center on campus. Avery and I were conversing earlier this week about the possibility of starting a Men's Center. We realized, of course, that this would be considered terribly sexist.
The goals of the Women's center are allegedly to empower women and to promote equality between sexes. I thought that maybe we could start a Men's Center and give it the goals/mission statement of promoting equality between sexes and/or genders. Sadly, however, we both realized that this would still be considered sexist because it's called "The Men's Center." If that is indeed sexist, then shouldn't the women's center be considered sexist, as it excludes men? Sadly, we seem to think that all majorities are out to target minorities. This, of course, is not actually true.
I think that we should do one of two things. If there is a minority group with the goal of creating equality, then their should be a majority group dedicated to the same cause. Alternately, and more preferably, is simply starting an equality group where all minorities and majorities can join together to empower everybody equally and support equality for all people.
Do you think it would be possible to start a Men's Center/Club on campus?
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Why Don't You Just Leave
In response to Will Jones because I cannot respond to post in CMI because there is very little effort going into blogging and I have little more to say about affirmative action and so on. - let this post count as a CMI blog - full post here
I often get the same response from people: Well, if you don't like it, then leave! My response is usually something along the lines of your advice to Jensen: I will, as soon as I may. Honestly, you would be hard-pressed to argue with a harsh conservative on the ethics of certain policies. America is unlikely to change; though it is a noble goal to try to change America from within. It is for that reason that I think that progress could be better founded in other countries. You can always lead by example which I think is usually the best way to do it. So, I think it would be reasonable for him to leave.
On the other hand, I think it is also completely unfair to tell him to leave. America needs to see some obvious changes and trying to suggest that those opposed to America should leaveis essentially forfeiting freedom. Those people who choose to stay here are reinforcing freedom. Freedom is measured not in assent, but is measured in dissent because if everyone agreed all the time, there would be no need to have freedom. If Jensen wants to stay here, he should be able to stay. If he wants to leave, he should be able to leave. Nobody should tell him to do either. They can suggest it nicely, but in the end, his choice is his alone.
I often get the same response from people: Well, if you don't like it, then leave! My response is usually something along the lines of your advice to Jensen: I will, as soon as I may. Honestly, you would be hard-pressed to argue with a harsh conservative on the ethics of certain policies. America is unlikely to change; though it is a noble goal to try to change America from within. It is for that reason that I think that progress could be better founded in other countries. You can always lead by example which I think is usually the best way to do it. So, I think it would be reasonable for him to leave.
On the other hand, I think it is also completely unfair to tell him to leave. America needs to see some obvious changes and trying to suggest that those opposed to America should leaveis essentially forfeiting freedom. Those people who choose to stay here are reinforcing freedom. Freedom is measured not in assent, but is measured in dissent because if everyone agreed all the time, there would be no need to have freedom. If Jensen wants to stay here, he should be able to stay. If he wants to leave, he should be able to leave. Nobody should tell him to do either. They can suggest it nicely, but in the end, his choice is his alone.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Two Sides
This is in response to Justine's Nature of Human Nature post - wanted to post this here because is relevant and because the number of posts that I could respond to from bloggers in this class is very small - full post here
Sometimes we forget that war is two sided. We think about war with the mindset that only Americans participate in war and that the opposition is shrouded in darkness or something. We think about our poor American soldiers and their poor American families. We think about how sad it would be if our poor American soldiers die. We neglect, however, to think about the opposition. We neglect to think that our poor American soldiers are killing their alleged enemies. Enemies who also have families and children, families and children who believe that their loved ones are fighting for the right cause.
To answer your question about how I would feel if someone I loved went off to fight overseas, I would feel terrible that they thought joining the army was a good option, or feel terrible that they were misled into thinking that it would be fighting for freedom, when instead they were simply killing others because they were told to. I would miss them, and I would want with all of my heart to rewind time so that I could tell them not to be so foolish. I would always support them as people, but not as soldiers, unless there was a seriously justified cause.
Sometimes we forget that war is two sided. We think about war with the mindset that only Americans participate in war and that the opposition is shrouded in darkness or something. We think about our poor American soldiers and their poor American families. We think about how sad it would be if our poor American soldiers die. We neglect, however, to think about the opposition. We neglect to think that our poor American soldiers are killing their alleged enemies. Enemies who also have families and children, families and children who believe that their loved ones are fighting for the right cause.
To answer your question about how I would feel if someone I loved went off to fight overseas, I would feel terrible that they thought joining the army was a good option, or feel terrible that they were misled into thinking that it would be fighting for freedom, when instead they were simply killing others because they were told to. I would miss them, and I would want with all of my heart to rewind time so that I could tell them not to be so foolish. I would always support them as people, but not as soldiers, unless there was a seriously justified cause.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Title
In response to Tyler - full post here
I think you may have misunderstood the metaphor. As a small point, the house is not just a metaphor for upbringing, it's a metaphor for the gift and quality of life. Additionally, the house is not free. The house cost $200,000 and 18 years to build; though the people building the house wanted to for their own benefit. If they build a quality house, you will probably want to thank them.However, they CHOSE to build it and FORCED it upon you, they cannot expect gratitude. If they expected gratitude, they are having a child for the wrong reason. You cannot trade away your broken down house(life) for another one, your parents have given you a crappy house(life) and you are forced to fix it by yourself or with the help of others. The parents wanted to give you life, they signed a contract with the law saying that they would be obligated to take care of you. So long as you didn't ask for life, you do not owe them a debt of gratitude or otherwise for your life. If they treated you well then you owe them as much as you owe a friend.
I think you may have misunderstood the metaphor. As a small point, the house is not just a metaphor for upbringing, it's a metaphor for the gift and quality of life. Additionally, the house is not free. The house cost $200,000 and 18 years to build; though the people building the house wanted to for their own benefit. If they build a quality house, you will probably want to thank them.However, they CHOSE to build it and FORCED it upon you, they cannot expect gratitude. If they expected gratitude, they are having a child for the wrong reason. You cannot trade away your broken down house(life) for another one, your parents have given you a crappy house(life) and you are forced to fix it by yourself or with the help of others. The parents wanted to give you life, they signed a contract with the law saying that they would be obligated to take care of you. So long as you didn't ask for life, you do not owe them a debt of gratitude or otherwise for your life. If they treated you well then you owe them as much as you owe a friend.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)