The people in the Capitol weren't met like peaceful protesters were. People will be upset regardless if something is changing. We have the measures to restrain those extremist groups, just because we don't seem more like an inner issue I can't hold much conversation on. I digress, debating about housing is just a civilized version of how marches led by Martin Luther King Jr were met. The people trying for positive change are met with dogs and extreme blasts of water, while the people spitting and hitting those people are coddled. Nothing is different here because the physical aspect of it. Mentally this is all exhausting. These people are having BLM protests in the same towns trying to block their prosperity. It's the idea of I want them to make it, just not beside me. Again, sad.

You can read a paragraph and see all the issues in it. The solutions aren't always easy but they can be done. People live in fear of people being upset, but the Capitol was just attacked by many people that I'm sure live in regularly mortgaged houses. The people from low income housing protest peacefully and are tear gassed, pepper sprayed, and still met with extreme measures for fighting for what's right. They are fighting for a change and the people who usually don't want it will use any means to keep things the way they want it. It's sad.

This brings thoughts of the NPR video we watched last week. The first words that came to my mind we're "detrimental influences." There is always more policing in those areas, more unnecessary arrests, and less people who have the potential to defend themselves in those situations because as the video said, the area you lived in made you a target in general. You were looked at as a criminal for just existing. When it stopped "being a race thing," which I don't necessarily agree with, it became about where you lived. That was always an excuse and still is. I've known my own friends to be arrested in our younger years walking home and just crossing through the wrong situation at the wrong time. Think of the Netflix original When They See Us being the perfect example of this. Five young black boys treated like adults in a case that had nothing to do with them. They matched the description because they were black and from a bad area.

This infuriated me. No matter where I read it or how it is said, this logic takes a lot out of me. I understand wanting everyone to be comfortable in their environment and making decisions for their own towns. I don't understand where the progression in this is. It makes me feel as if Connecticut is still live with the white and colored signs all over the place. The minute you cross over the city lines of Fairfield and Bridgeport it says more than enough. It's okay for someone to work in the town, but not live there? I want someone to explain to me where people would be without their nannies, babysitters, local daycare workers, grocery store workers, secretaries, and many others just chose to move away to a state where they could work in a town they lived in without feeling fully deprived of opportunities.

This is a proportionate view of what a lot of rich towns in Connecticut look like. Weston isn't the only town facing having lines of segregation as people avoid change in their towns. The idea is almost showing how very little the people of these towns want people who have less to experience the same things they do. Some people have the ignorant perspective that the people will less than them are living by assistance in all aspects. In actuality, the rich towns are full of rich families who have generational wealth that the country we live, in which was built on oppressing people of color and uplifting the other end, the rich towns are filled with the same families that wouldn't give people of color the opportunity before.

This was a good way to start her article. In the presence of a situation, you put the reader in it as well. You want the reader to feel frustration, but see the opportunity. For the opposing side, it may cause frustration, but it also for people to see how their negative is someone's positive. Change is uncomfortable, but being stuck in a position you didn't choose is too. Starting with a scene that displays no hope with the ending seemingly finding light is perfect for any reader to see where the article is headed. It's an opener I can build on.

A lot of people actually forget the obvious which is observation. Common sense is not necessarily common. Many people would rather pass judgement on video games and their effects on children without actually knowing the effects. On the other hand, caregivers observing how a game is played can give them an understanding of what games are beneficial to the fundamentals learning versus those that aren't.

The use of this example is very important in the time we live in. I wish they dived deeper into examples of what to speak of. The author gave in-text examples to ask. Each thing had a place in an aspect of life that is a part in the change the world is experiencing; gender, culture, etc.