“Two hundred fifty years of slavery. Ninety years of Jim Crow. Sixty years of separate but equal. Thirty-five years of racist housing policy. Until we reckon with our compounding moral debts, America will never be whole.”
Comment: This quote is actually the subtitle for the article. I was conflicted on choosing this as my quote specifically because it is the subtitle, but I like what the quote contains, so I figured why not. I picked this because I really liked the way that he had outlined the history of racism in America. It makes it more clear cut, emphasizing how horribly long we have been battling racism in America. I also agree with the statement. Until America can start recognizing the prejudice and racism that goes on everyday and has been going on everyday for years now, we will not see any progress. We need to acknowledge the past and what has happened in this country so that we can make a change in society and so that history doesn’t repeat itself. An example of how we could do this is by actually providing students the right materials in history classrooms. This means we should be explaining history, more specifically the history of racism and slavery in this country instead of sugar coating it or ignoring major parts of history. I had never knew what lynching was until I came to college. I have never been educated on the wars that had been going on in Iraq and Afghanistan in school. In the movie, “Freedom Writers,” which was based on a true story, Miss. Gruwell had a classroom full of minorities and not any of them knew what the Holocaust was.
Question: Why is there not more concern over the gaps and lack of correct education about history?
“Grace mentioned the glaring gap between Ansari’s comedy persona and the behavior she experienced in his apartment as a reason why she didn’t get out earlier. “I didn’t leave because I think I was stunned and shocked,” she said. ‘This was not what I expected. I’d seen some of his shows and read excerpts from his book and I was not expecting a bad night at all, much less a violating night and a painful one.’” -I Went on a Date with Aziz Ansari. It Turned Into the Worst Night of My Life
“They told us over and over again that if a man tried to push you into anything you didn’t want, even just a kiss, you told him flat out you weren’t doing it. If he kept going, you got away from him. You were always to have ‘mad money’ with you: cab fare in case he got ‘fresh’ and then refused to drive you home. They told you to slap him if you had to; they told you to get out of the car and start wailing if you had to. They told you to do whatever it took to stop him from using your body in any way you didn’t want, and under no circumstances to go down without a fight.” -The Humiliation of Aziz Ansari
Comment: I picked the first quote from the article about the interaction between Grace and Aziz. I picked this because I found it interesting and the statements and the claims being made had seemed too familiar to me. In today’s culture, it seems as though it is always the “good guys,” it’s always the ones that you don’t expect it from that sexually harass you and don’t understand what they did wrong, or maybe they do but they won’t admit it. This is what makes it tricky for women. The reason that women don’t always come forward about their stories is because of the people who say, “Him? No, he would never do such a thing. She’s just mad and is doing this in spite.” It’s those types of people that are the reason that a lot of women don’t share their stories or press charges against their assaulters because they fear nothing will even happen to him or people will think poorly of her instead of him. I chose the second quote because it really resonated with me. I am a fighter, I have always been a fighter. Thankfully, I have never been put in a situation where I actually needed to fight for my life or my body. But, my dad has been teaching me how to fight and protect myself since I was young. In high school, I had a lot of tough guy friends who I would wrestle with or fight with to practice my strength and they would also teach me how to fight and protect myself. They would always say something like, “Forget it, if anyone ever tries to kidnap or rape you, they’d give up because you don’t,” or something along those lines. I will kick and scratch and claw my way until I can break free, which has always been a strength of mine. This quote reminded me of my strengths. At the same time, I’m upset that a quote like this even needs to be said. I’m upset that women all around the world have to be told how to push men away, how to fight them, how to do whatever it takes to get them to stop… We should be telling men how to NOT RAPE OR SEXUALLY HARASS WOMEN. We should be educating men on consent and verbal/non-verbal cues. I just really wish this wasn’t a problem in society.
Question: Shouldn’t we be spending more time educating men on how to control themselves, how to not rape or sexually harass anyone, what is consent and what is not, and how to pick up verbal/non-verbal cues, instead of educating women on how to fight and prevent men from sexually harassing or abusing us?
Post Class Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
~Grace was shocked that he turned out to be so violating, which is where her hesitation to leave came from ~she didn’t explicitly say no, but she verbally said no in other ways and she used body language and other non-verbal cues to say no ~we should be educating men more on this subject and how/what to do instead of women ~men can be victims of sexual assault, not as often or talked about as women ~communication is key
~Anna: society’s culture, when you’re not looking for something you don’t see it, large percentage of communication is through body language ~Maddy: you can change your mind whenever ~Haley: you don’t have to justify yourself if you say no
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
I really enjoyed today’s class discussion. I first began contributing by sharing my quote and explaining that Grace didn’t expect this situation to happen from him because he comes off as such a good guy… because of this she was just so shocked that she didn’t comprehend completely that this was happening, which is why she hesitated to leave early. Anna brought up the fact that when you’re not looking for something specifically, you don’t see it… this and the idea that some men could be very uneducated on the subject explains why Aziz could not have understood what he was doing was wrong because he wasn’t picking up what Grace was saying. I somewhat agree with this, I think Aziz could partially have not known what he was doing but at the same time Grace was being pretty clear about it. I don’t know that one is tough. I had gone in to say that communication is key in these situations. If you don’t want to do something like that, but you don’t want to be rude and just end the night, you just need to be as clear as possible, be blunt about it while trying not to be rude. If he then continues to do what he is doing, that is when I would start to be rude and just leave. Going off of this, Anna had brought up that a large percentage of communication is through body language, so it’s important to make sure you’re giving off the right body language vibe as well. But at the same time, the fact that body language is a huge percentage of communication is a great reason to make sure you’re being explicitly clear verbally, so that you know for sure they are getting the right message. My most important comment today, I think, was what I had talked about in my QCQ about how today’s society is all about educating women about what to wear/what not to wear, what to do in certain situations, how to protect yourself from predators, but I think we should be spending more time educating men on consent and body language and most importantly what sexual harassment and assault is specifically, because I feel like this would help stop a lot of it from happening in the first place.
‘At the time? Do you mean in the heat of the act? Of course not. In the heat of the act there are no doubts.’” pg 145
“‘Hatred… When it comes to men and sex, David, nothing surprises me anymore. Maybe, for men, hating the women makes sex more exciting. You are a man, you ought to know. When you have sex with someone strange—when you trap her, hold her down, get her under you, put all you weight on her—isn’t it a bit like killing? Pushing the knife in; exiting afterwards, leaving the body behind covered in blood— doesn’t it feel like murder, like getting away with murder?’” pg 155
Comment: Context for the first quote: Bev asked David about his situation before with Melanie. They are discussing it. I flagged this quote because I saw problems with it, this was also pretty much the first time he had discussed it with a stranger. When he says he didn’t regret it even in the moment because he had no doubts… I specifically remember his doubts. He had done it more than once. He had asked himself if what he was doing was okay, if it was right or wrong. He doubted the passion that he felt, because he knew that Melanie lacked desire, but she still gave consent which makes it “not quite rape” but “undesired nonetheless.” It bothers me that he can’t admit that he had doubts even in the heat of the act.
Context for the second quote: Lucy and David are driving back to the farm after going to the police to see if he could get his car. They are going back and forth arguing about the rape. Lucy tells him that he can’t understand it and David continues to explain that he understands all too well. Then Lucy goes on talking about the 3 men and people like them and how they all “do rape.” Then she explains what they do and why they do it and how they feel while they do it, which is the quote. I flagged this because it was really powerful to me. Hard to read yes, but I couldn’t take my eyes away. She is describing rapists and what they do and why like it. I also think part of her uses the murder analogy because she may feel like they have killed a piece of her. She changes a bit after the rape which is what leads me to think this. It was just such a powerful section, I couldn’t not flag it.
Question: Is this a glimpse at how Melanie had felt? (second quote)
Post Class Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
~Lucy’s perspective sheds light on Melanie’s perspective ~women as minor characters is a statement from Lucy to her dad & a statement from the author
~Anna: internal vs external ~Haley: black vs whute hatred ~Maeve: conversations will go differently because David wasn’t present as a father
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
Today’s class discussion went really well. Anna first started us off by sharing her quote which was the same quote I had (second quote). It was interesting to hear what Anna had to say about it. I had mentioned that I had the same quote but I had looked at it in light of Melanie. The way the Lucy was describing this sex and the way that she was feeling made me think of Melanie and how she had felt after she had met David. David had basically raped Melanie even though that’s not exactly how it was described. We never get to hear exactly how Melanie is feeling. So to hear the other side of the rape story from a woman’s point of view lead me to believe that this could be a version of Melanie was feeling or what she may have been thinking. Haley had mentioned that the reason the rapists had hated Lucy so much was because of the hatred between blacks and whites. I believe this could be true, I also believe that David was suggesting some racism when he mentioned “ancestry.” It could be meant in another direction but I picked up just a hint of racism when I read that. When Maeve brought up how conversations between Lucy and David, especially their conversation about the rape and pregnancy, are going to go differently because David wasn’t always present as a father. Fathers who are not their for a lot of your life are going to act/react differently, especially in a conversation like this, and I completely agree. I believe David ould be holding back on Lucy a little bit 1) because she’s a grown up and on her own now and 2) he wasn’t there for all of her life.
“He does not like women who make no effort to be attractive. It is a resistance he has had to Lucy’s friends before. Nothing to be proud of: a prejudice that has settled in his mind, settled down. His mind has become a refuge for old thoughts, idle, indigent, with nowhere else to go. He ought to chase them out, sweep the premises clean. But he does not care to do so, or he does not care enough.” pg 70
Comment: Context: This was from page 70. Lucy and David are at the market because it’s market day. Lucy introduces him to Bev, the lady who runs the animal refuge. David describes Bev as, “a dumpy, bustling little woman with black freckles, close-cropped, wiry hair, and no neck.” Then he goes on to say the quote I chose. I chose this quote because it really pissed me off. David is so shallow. Not liking women for being hard-working and not caring about what they look like is so stupid and childish. David really pisses me off. You learn it a million times in books, songs, stories, movies, etc… DON’T JUDGE A BOOK BY IT’S COVER!!! Women simply should not HAVE to dress to impress males, we have bigger and more important things to worry about than what we are wearing or what we look like or what a man will think about that. Men like David are literally the reason that feminists exist, because he is shallow and has little-to-no respect for women. I am confused on the part about Lucy’s friends. Is he saying that he had resistance to seduce Lucy’s friends because of the way that they looked? I am glad that he does at least acknowledge his prejudices, but he does NOTHING about them. He just lets them sit in his mind and continues to practice these prejudices because he doesn’t care enough to get rid of them, even though now would be the perfect time to do so.
Question: Why is David so stubborn about going to counselling? Recognizing your prejudice is one thing, but isn’t doing something about it, like going to counselling, supposed to help you “chase them out”? Is counselling a reliable source of help?
PostClass Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
~quote from pg 70 ~women shouldn’t have to dress to impress men ~connections between Lucy’s friends and David ? ~he recognizes his prejudices and second guesses himself when he is doing something wrong, but he does NOTHING about it/them
~Maddy: recognizing that you’ve done something wrong but not doing anything about counteracts each other, this does not change what happens to the victim ~Cripps: gender & race ~Anna: actions speak louder than words
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
Today’s class discussion strengthened my thoughts about the reading for today. I discovered through this class discussion that my classmates had similar thoughts as I did. Haley was discussing her quote when she tied in another quote from the story which was the quote that I had used for my QCQ. I shared the quote and explained how aggravated I am with David. He pisses me off. He is very shallow and expects women to share themselves with him if they are beautiful, but only if they put in effort to be attractive. It angers me so much. Women are not obligated to share their beauty with anyone that they don’t want to. We also don’t have to dress any certain way to impress anyone, we can dress however we please and we shouldn’t have to worry about people like David who put us down for being who we are instead of getting all dolled up, just so men can observe us and fawn over us. David also really aggravates me because he specifically recognizes that what he is doing is wrong and he clarifies his own prejudices, but then refuses to act on it and do anything about it. He is not going to grow or make anything better if he continues to know that what he is doing is wrong but refusing to do anything about it and just continuing to do what he is doing. Like Anna said, actions speak louder than words. He can say a million times that he knows what he has done was wrong, but it’s a completely different thing if he actually stops doing it. He is a hypocrite and a creep and I really don’t like him. *mic drop*
“‘But in my experience poetry speaks to you either at first sight or not at all. A flash of revelation and a flash of response. Like lightning. Like falling in love…’ Do the young still fall in love, or is that mechanism obsolete by now, unnecessary, quaint, like steam locomotion? He is out of touch, out of date. Falling in love could have fallen out of fashion and come back again half a dozen times, for all he knows.” pg 12
Comment: Context: He had just met Melanie and they were together in his apartment for the first time. They were discussing the types of material that he teaches in the class, she is explaining what she likes/doesn’t. She expresses that she thinks Wordsworth will grow on her by the end of the semester and he replies with that. I picked this quote because I liked the way that it was written, it grasped my attention. But, it also got me thinking about how dating and falling in love works in today’s society and how it has changed throughout history. “Dating” today is nothing like it used to be. Dating used to be exclusive and people who actually go out on dates to get to know each other and if you liked each other, you would go out again and eventually “go steady.” Today, usually people only go out on dates if they are already in a relationship. People get to know each other through social media platforms such as snapchat, instagram, and dating platforms like tinder. Falling in love today seems a lot harder than it used to be because not everybody is serious about being in a relationship, so it’s harder to decipher who is dating for love and who is dating just for sexual pleasure. I think that David could find love again, but not if he keeps practicing and doing things like prostitution and searching after young girls and students.
Question: Can counseling actually help David change his ways so that he can fall in love again and be happy?
Post Class Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
~Melanie’s perspective ~David’s perspective is creepy ~David second guesses himself, but doesn’t stop ~Melanie could be confused, conflicted, scared
~Cripps: you don’t have to say no to say no ~Haley: perpetrator’s perspective is new
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
Today’s class discussion helped my thoughts grow. While reading, I felt disgusted and distrubed and it was nice to know that my fellow classmates felt the same way and it was nice to be able to hear their thoughts and reflect off their thinking. I brought up the point about Melanie’s perspective because I was interested in it, even while I was reading. I was wondering what she was thinking and how she felt. Haley brought up the point about how seeing things from the perpetrator’s perspective is new, but it is pretty creepy. It is also complicated because Melanie seems to come off as conflicted or unsure if she wants to do all this stuff with David or not. Melanie comes off as confused, conflicted, and maybe even scared to say no to him. Professor Cripps brought up the point between saying yes or no in these types of situations and how you don’t have to actually say no to be saying no. I feel like not saying yes or no, should be a no regardless. If I say yes, that is consent, but I still have the right to change my mind. If I said no, it’s no. Period. If I’m conflicted and I’m not saying yes or no, it’s a no until you hear a yes. I brought up the point about how David second guesses himself and his actions as he is doing them, but he doesn’t stop. Yes, he has that doubt in the back of his mind, but it not strong enough to get him to realize that what he is doing is wrong and he should stop, which makes him even creepier.
“South Africans found yellow South Africans—they realized what we had been at such pains to tell them, that they shared a common humanity, that race, ethnicity, skin color were really irrelevant. They discovered not a Colored, a black, an indian, a white. No, they found fellow human beings. What a profound scientific discovery that blacks, Coloreds (usually people of mixed race), and Indians were in fact human beings, who had the same concerns and anxieties and aspirations. They wanted a decent home, a good job, a safe environment for their families, good schools for their children, and almost none wanted to drive the whites into the sea. They just wanted their place in the sun.” pg 7 paragraph 2
Comment: I picked this passage because it made my heart really happy. Life has been kind of dark and gloomy since the global pandemic went into place and this passage just seemed to remind me of the light and community in the world. Especially because of the racist connections that have been made with people of Chinese descent and the coronavirus, it was nice to read something about how communities, races, differences, etc. can come together in a way and create peace. People from Chinese descent are being beaten, murdered, assaulted, etc. daily because of the racist connection with the coronavirus. It makes me have some hope for this crazy, messed up world that we live in. History repeats itself, and this made me have some hope that hopefully a connection like this will happen again soon in the world and we can all be at peace. As I was reading this text, I couldn’t help but make connections to “Between the World and Me” and “Stacey Abram’s Fight For a Fair Vote.” I didn’t make specific connections, like quote to quote, but I did make the connection from text to text.
Question: How do we help the average citizen see that we, as human beings, share the same ideals and common desires? Specifically with those from Chinese descent, who are being put in a racist light because of COVID-19?
Post Class Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
~same quote as Haley and Jill ~connected quote to the racist connections with people from Chinese descent and COVID-19
~Haley: same quote, connections with immigrants and refugees ~Jill: same quote, connections with principles of justice ~Sinead: acknowledge problems in country to move forward, connections with the US
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
Today’s class discussion helped me extend my thoughts and connection making. Haley, Jill, and I all had the same quote but we all made different connections. I made the connection between people of Chinese descent and the racist connections that have been made with them and the coronavirus. Haley had taken it a different route which I really liked, she made connections with immigrants and refugees. Jill had made the connection with the principles of justice. It was very interesting to me to see how my classmates had taken the same quote as I did and had taken a different approach and made different connections. Immigrants, refugees, people of Chinese descent, blacks, white, indians, latinos, etc. are all human beings and that is the common ground. A lot of people believe that immigrants and refugees are bad people just because they are fleeing their country, when in fact they are fleeing their country because their country does not treat them like proper human beings, so why should we do the same to them? We should treat them better than their country did, because they are human beings and they deserve to be treated like it. A lot of people today are making the stereotype that coronavirus is connected to all Asians… this is so ignorant and unjust. Just because someone is Asian does not mean that they automatically have COVID-19 and they are being treated very poorly because of this. A lot of Asians are being beaten, assaulted, and even killed because of this disgusting stereotype. WE ARE ALL HUMANS! All humans deserve to be treated like a human!
“A problem of rational decision has a definite answer only if we know the beliefs and interests of the parties, their relations with respect to one another, the alternatives between which they are to choose, the procedure whereby they make up their minds, and so on.” pg 16
“To present the desired restrictions one imagines a situation in which everyone is deprived of this sort of information. One excludes the knowledge of those contingencies which sets men at odds and allows them to be guided by their prejudices. In this manner the veil of ignorance is arrived at in a natural way.” pg 17
Comment: I chose these two quotes because they relate back to some of the conversation that we had in last week’s class. These quotes are discussing the idea of rationality and how that can affect the process of choosing what is just and what is unjust. In the first quote, he is describing the factors that go into deciding what is considered “rational,” which was a question that was proposed last class, so this really caught my eye. The second quote comes right after he gives the example of the wealthy man vs the poor man and how they propose opposing principles because they both want/need opposite things. The second quote reminded me of what Professor Cripps had said in class where he proposed a scenario where we all didn’t know who we would be or what qualities we would assess so that this way we could create a fair society with fair principles of justice. For example, if I was super strong and this were to happen, I would not know that I am super strong. This would blind out any possible biases that people may have that would create an advantage in their own life. This way we would have created a fair society with fair principles of justice.
Comment: The one bit that I am confused on is how the manner of the veil of ignorance would occur in a “natural way.” What makes it natural/ How does it occur in a natural way?
Post Class Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
~quotes from pages 16 & 17 ~social contract theory~veil of ignorance ~difficulties of putting others interests ahead of your own
~Maddy: practice & research, self interest vs. selflessness ~Jill: self interest becomes a problem because of inequalities ~Haley: shoes analogy
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
Today’s class discussion helped me grasp the ideas that Rawl’s was presenting in this section. The idea that was discussed that most resonated with me was the shoe analogy that Halye had mentioned and expanded upon. It kinda went along with my quotes about the veil of ignorance and knowing the beliefs, values, etc. of the parties that are included in the decision making. Haley had made a point about wearing someone else’s shoes vs. wearing no shoes. We discussed this matter and Cripps put it into a different light: we have all the shoes lined up in front of us, we don’t know what shoes we’re getting… We need to know the right amount of information under the veil of ignorance to make decisions but also not enough information to be able to privilege ourselves and our own interests. I had touched upon the difficulties of putting others interests ahead of your own. It is very difficult to put our own interests aside and vouch for other’s interests instead, especially when it comes to making informed decisions that involve the principles of justice. I’m still not sure about how the veil of ignorance can occur in a “natural” way?
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
-Anna: definition of justice -Sinead: collective vs. individual, inequality is inevitable -Cripps: social contract theory, society as a cooperative arrangement
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
I did not give many contributions in today’s class discussion because I used a freebie on my QCQ. I was interested in everything my classmates had to say today, it really helped me gain a better understanding of the reading. Anna’s comment about how everyone’s opinion of justice could be different really interested me, I extremely agree. Everyone has different opinions and worldviews. My definition of justice could be different from everyone else in the world. Professor Cripps mentioned the social contract theory which really intrigued me and got me thinking because I had never heard of it before. If we had to create a new society, how do we decide the rules and what is just/unjust? I also agree with Sinead about how inequality is inevitable. Everybody is different, everybody is always going to recognize differences which could potentially lead to inequality. Not everyone is going to recognize differences as a good thing, a lot of people view differences as a bad thing.
“Off-hand it hardly seems likely that persons who view themselves as equals, entitled to press their claims, upon one another, would agree to a principle which may require lesser life prospects for some simply for the sake of a greater sum of advantages enjoyed by others. Since each desires to protect his interests, his capacity to advance his conception of the good, no one has a reason to acquiesce in an enduring loss for himself in order to bring about a greater net balance of satisfaction.” page 13
“Thus it seems that the principle of utility is incompatible with the conceptions of social cooperation among equals for mutual advantage. It appears to be inconsistent with the idea of reciprocity implicit in the notion of a well-ordered society.” page 13
Comment: Context: He had just brought up the idea of the principle of utility and when it should be recognized, “…once the principles of justice are thought of as arising from an original agreement in a situation of equality, it is an open question whether the principle of utility would be acknowledged.” These few sentences really grabbed my attention because of the mention of the principle of utility. I remember reading about the principle of utility in Mill’s reading, so when I saw that the author had mentioned it here, I wanted to see how I could relate the two. Mill’s reading made me learn what the principle of utility is, this reading helped me grasp a deeper understanding of it in a way. When Rawl’s mentions it here, I thought of “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas,” because they are talking about one person enduring loss for himself so that there is greater satisfaction for everybody else. His pain leads to everybody’s happiness, just like the boy from Omelas. The second quote confused me a little bit more than the first, so I picked it because I wanted to dissect it like I did with Mill’s reading. I learned that a “notion” is a conception of or a belief about something. I previously learned that “implicit” means not plainly expressed. I believe he is saying that the principle of utility does apply to the concepts of social cooperation and it does not reciprocate the belief of a well-ordered society. I do agree that the principle of utility does not reciprocate the belief of a well-ordered society, although, I’m still a bit confused on the connections he makes with social cooperation among equals for mutual advantage.
Question: How/why does the principle of utility not apply to social cooperation? I am confused.
Post Class Reflection:
My spoken contributions today (bullets, fragments, keywords)
Helping Hands Today (up to 3) – Name & Briefly Describe Contribution to Class (bullets, fragments, keywords)
-Cripps: what you are born with can’t be justified as deserved, social contract theory, agreements of justice need to be fair -“Rationality”-? -Haley: justice as fairness, justice as fairness refers to compromises -Anna: equity vs. equality
Today’s class discussion altered my thoughts about today’s text(s) in the following ways (link to your QCQ and/or to other ideas):
Today’s class discussion really helped me breakdown the ideas that Rawl’s had presented. I didn’t get to share my quotes today so I didn’t have many contributions, but I was just so focused on what my classmates had to say. To me, the most interesting idea that was brought up was when Anna mentioned the idea of equity vs. equality. Fair does not me the same. We learn about this a lot in my education courses. I had never seen the image of the 2 kids with the boxes and the fence, but it is a perfect example of equity vs. equality. I feel like equality refers to (in the fence case) the same materials, but equity refers to the same opportunities. The kids were given the same size box, which is supposed to mean they’re equal, but they can’t both see over the fence. If you adjusted the size of the boxes, both kids would have an equal opportunity to see over the fence. This is equity, this is fair. All of this was brought up when Haley mentioned justice as fairness, which I thought was very interesting. Justice is not going to be “fair” for everyone unless there has been a compromise or agreement. When someone doesn’t follow the agreement, that is unjust.
