My Meta-Post

I  now have two months of experience as a blogger.
Even in this short amount of time, I have learned a lot about what blogging is about, what is effective, and what interests me. My posts have somewhat evolved over time. My first real post was incredibly anxiety provoking for me, and I decided to split a large block of rambling into two separate posts. These posts, are sadly just a huge stream of consciousness. They have no true direction or point but rather house an overload of ideas in a limited amount of space.
My post's have somewhat gained purpose from that point on.
After the first initial post I began to try different methods and styles out. In my "Toasted Koran" article I experimented with sarcasm, though I am unsure as to how successfully my tone came across to my readers. I started adding personal anecdotes to blog posts occasionally. I told of my attachment to "The Story of Little Babaji," and of how many of my friends have suffered from negative self esteem and body image due to the media. I am still unsure how personal to make my posts. Pictures and links really enhanced my posts, made them more attractive to the reader and more interesting overall.
Content wise, I'm not sure whether there is a constant theme overall. All of my posts had the common goal of "continuing the conversation" from class. Therefore, many of my posts deal with various aspects of class discussions.
All of my posts could be improved upon. I believe I need to work on the conciseness and organization of each post, as well as make sure that I am making my point and a connection to American Studies clear. I wmay try to revise certain posts, but have not yet done so. To this date, the post that I believe most accurately represents my growth as as a blogger is my most recent post : Bible Exploitation. I am looking forward to another quarter to take advantage of my growing blogging skills!

Bible Exploitation

In class we are reading, "Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass." This biography has stirred many emotions within me today, and I have been downright appalled at many of the inhumane practices depicted in this book. One observation Douglass made has stuck with me. The slave masters in the South often looked to religion as an excuse for their cruelty.  Douglass notes, "I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders with whom I have ever meet, religious slaveholders are the worst" (45). I am greatly upset by this apparent truth. Douglass believed this because many religious slaveholders read the Bible literally, as fundamentalists.

The Bible is a best seller, yet it is misinterpreted to support many inhumane practices. Slave masters misused the Bible to justify slavery. There are, in fact, many excerpts about slaves, many which could be taken as pro-slavery if viewed in the eyes of fundamentalist. One in particle is  
"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished.  If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."  [Exodus 21:20-21]
Here are several others.When read literally these passages seem to permit and approve of the severe beating of slaves as long as the master did not beat them to the point of death.
It's ridiculous that the Bible was used to condone evil.

Today, the Bible is still being exploited.
Every year New Trier has a "Day of Silence" to respect homosexual students. Last year, on this day, protestors came to our Winnetka campus to show general disapproval of homosexualtiy and to "preach the word of God." They handed me a bible. Once I realized their intentions I returned it.... and hit the roof. 
I began to contradict them, stating that I believe that  homosexual people should not be persecuted or discriminated for everyone has the right to love who ever they want; in defense they started quoting the Bible... they read me a passage similar to this:
"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." [Leviticus 20:13]
among others. These exact quotes seemed to be straightforward. But I do not believe that homosexuals should be put to death.

It scares me that there is apparent "evidence" that supports slavery and discriminates all homosexuality.
But how does one dispute these passages? I honestly do not believe these scripture readings to be a proper representation of the Christian faith or morally right. I just hope that we can instead look to the plentiful Bible passages promoting peace, love and harmony.

The Color Wheel

White. What a word. It's a color. A race. A word that is pinned to a variety of words to connote a certain meaning. White is the color of innocence, purity, and cleanliness. Brides wear white.
But why? White, a simple color has become deeply integrated into our society. Why not green, or blue, or, (my personal favorite) yellow?
We had a long discussion about the meaning of whitewashing in class the other day. When you whitewash something you conceal something. It's relevant to paint, and virtually everything else involving censorship. I was shocked that I'd never noticed the connection between that term and the color. I began to think of other terms or phrases in which white is usually used.
The first term I thought of was a white lie. A white lie is deemed acceptable by society.It is used to protect someone's feelings. It is innocent. Yet it is still a lie. Does the fact that it is called white make it better, less "dark" and instead sinless?
The second term I thought of was white noise. This term is very closely related to that of whitewash. White noise covers something up as well. It is used in households around the world for a simple form of comfort. It puts babies to sleep; so it must be relaxing, welcome and commonplace. If white and black are opposite colors, would black noise be the opposite of white noise? What would black noise sound like? Would it wake someone up, would it be loud and raucous?
"Like black and white," is an everyday term...meaning opposites, two extremes. But if this comparison of colors is applicable to everything, what does that say about the black and white races? Are blacks the opposite of whites? No. Is there any connection between pure white snow and pale skin? No. They are not even the same color. Is there any connection between a bat and the skin of an African-American? No. They are entirely different. Color does not indicate internal differences. How could it if you can so easily cover color up? You can paint anything whatever color you want.

Yellow, Gender Neutral

Gender roles and steroeotypes have been imprinted on us from an early age. In class we talked about how gender roles have changed, and I would just like to note that they have improved, but still exist. New parents immediately know how to dress or decorate a nursery based on their newborns gender. Girls like pink, princesses, ponies, and purple. Boys, on the other hand like blue, baseball, football, cowboys, trucks and cars. When did these common associations become established?
I guess my main question is whether gender roles are the product of nurture or nature?
Yes, it is statistically proven that boys have a tendency to have trouble sitting still and enjoy action. This biological trait makes the sports stereotype seem to be caused by nature. However,  why is it true that most boys can sit for hours to watch a football game, whereas many girls (apparently with a higher affinity to focus and sit still for long periods of time) become bored and restless?

But then again, I am a girl. And I love watching and playing sports, as do many of my female as well as male friends do as well. Are these stereotypes all subjective? They still exist today, but they seem to be broken daily. My favorite color is yellow, not pink or girly purple. I prefer to watch a baseball game vs. the new episode of Hannah Montana, and enjoy participating in sports as well. Does this make me any less of a female?
I think not. I am very much a teenage girl. But then why do these stereotypes exist if they are so inaccurate? This makes me question the validity of any stereotype.
 Are african americans natural athletes? Are Asians technological geniuses? Some are. But the majority are not. When did these stereotypes become ingrained into society. Why is a woman expected to be the primary caregiver to her children? Why is a male expected to be tough, strong and emotionless?