I love this. I completely agree. People just have to want to work hard enough to get it done.

I feel like a lot of people would be considered anti-anti-utopian because in some ways we are all fighting for our people in what we do. We all care to make a change.

This part here! The whole world needs to change in our ways for it to make a significant differences and that is an unrealistic dream. When things get worse for humanity, more people probably wont start to care until its too late.

I agree. The stories we watch and read all have some reality put into them and then adding our social fears on top of the reality we are currently living in provides us a possible sneak peek on what life could be. People sometimes don't want to take it serious because it is technically fiction, but that doesn't mean its not unrealistic

The way the world is going is definitely way closer to dystopian than utopian. A lot of people are trying to change that but there are a lot of large main factors that are hard to get to which then continues our fears for the future.

I really like this simplified description of what an utopia and a dystopia is.

Having their homes referred to as a cage is crazy

How they determine who would be a “crow”? I have a feeling the “crows” are the homeless people that they didn't care to shelter during the plague.

This to me sounds too excessive. Comparing our experience with covid to this, I would feel like im imprisoned within my own home which feels so unsettling

This reminds me of what happened with COVID. We were in lockdown for so long it felt so dangerous to even step outside for necessities. Rules and states were shutting down one by one. Happened so fast it was kind of overwhelming

I agree with this statement. No government equals no law which equals no justice. I believe this type of society would be very chaotic. No one would have the right to tell you you were right or wrong. It would just be common sense but then there are people that like violence so in that case, no one can stop them for doing so. Then again, in the world we live in now which has both government and law, injustice is still provided to those who are guilty of breaking the law. So would the world change that much if we had no laws or government?

I am curious to why nature is capitalized here and not anywhere else. What is important about this particular nature?

So is this saying that men only want people around them that they feel they have power over?

Is Hobbes trying to say that men won't stop trying to prove their power and strength until all men have been defeated or until he no longer feels threatened by others?

It is very interesting to see that the nature of men has not changed in over 350 years. Men still act like this today. Will the male population ever evolve to something other than violence to get what they want or to stop viewing themselves as superior to everyone around them?

In this paragraph, I believe Hobbes is trying to say that no matter how equal men might be intellectually, individually they will always see themselves as superior than everyone else. Overtime all men learn more and more through experience therefore making them wise but yet it is in their nature to view themselves as stronger. It's like men feel threatened when someone shows they're equally as smart as them. Why is that? Shouldn't they feel impressed of that other persons intellect?

I understand this. Some people rather protect their feelings from rejection or disappointment from others by focusing on multiple people versus just one. It's like the saying, "Don't put your eggs all in one basket". Those people aren't ready to give their all to one person because they are afraid to get hurt.

It is interesting to think that some people today still think like this. Men haven't changed much and women are starting to get into the habit of not staying with a man just because he's the father of her children even though she's unhappy.

This makes a lot of sense. Having to suppress a need for satisfaction can be very difficult and usually people try to put that desire towards something else, which could either be good or bad. That desire must be channeled elsewhere to feel some sort of completion which is very important to our mental health.

repudiate: refuse to accept; reject

Is Freud trying to say that before technology man was weak and with technology man has become strong?

This is interesting. If the purpose of some innovations didn't fix the original problem then why were they still used instead of going to the original way? Cause at that point, the innovation is no different than the previous way. its considered useless.

Also, to the part about "difficult conditions for our sexual life in marriage" and "worked against the beneficial effects of natural selection" is he referring to the gay marriage?

For the last question, I think it is sad to think about this. I feel like life has so much to offer us but then there are people out there that feel that life isn't worth living. Sometimes I wonder why. What gets them in that negative head space?

To my understanding, I think Freud is trying to say that we can't control what naturally is supposed to happen so we just got to live with the act we can't control everything. We are limited to overpower the forces of nature.

Page 56: "Rape Crisis Center networks estimate that more than one-third of all American women experience an attempted or successful sexual assault in their lifetimes"

This is disgusting. There are about 167.5 million women in the United States. One-third of that is 55.8 million. These odds are very scary for me. i shouldn't feel unsafe in a country I call home. I am actually ashamed of this country I call home. The fact that I am a woman and I am Black makes it even worse. I feel targteted in two ways that I identify by. As I further read this passage, I saw "...dozens of incidents of severe beating, killing, or rape of Blacks by police officers on duty..." Even though I'm already aware of this, it is still unsettling. There is no way to cope the amount of violence that happens daily in this country. Even though these are frequent matters, its still very difficult to wrap your mind around this. This also goes hand and hand with powerlessness. Police have much more power than they should. They are supposed to protect us with the power they possess but instead they abuse that power. How can we be safe with a world that allows such powerful people to get away with heinous crimes?

Page 54: "In daily interchange women and men of color must prove their respectability. At first they are often not treated by strangers with respectful distance or deference. Once people discover that this woman or that Puerto rican man is a college teacher or a business executive, however, they often behave more respectfully toward her or him. Working-class white men, on the other hand, are often treated with respect until their working-class status is revealed"

I totally agree with all of this. Ive seen this happen within my life. One time when my step family and I were on the way to South Carolina for Christmas, we got pulled over. My stepfather, who was wearing scrubs, was driving. He changed everything about his speech. He was careful to seem very cheery and didn't speak with his low intimidating voice so the officer wouldn't feel threatened in anyway and the officer gave him a warning. What's funny is the officer thought he was a doctor because of his scrubs which definitely helped to contribute my stepfather's professionalism but in reality, my stepfather was a lawyer. So anyways, he really didn't have to lie about being a doctor because he actually was professional but it was better to have the officer assume rather than correct him but the fact he had to change his demeanor in a way that the officer wouldn't think he would be threatened is ridiculous to me. I also find it interesting how backwards it is when a man or women of any other race besides white is looked down upon until they reveal their "professionalism" but a white women or man is respected before knowing the class status.

Page 50: "Marginalization is perhaps the most dangerous form of oppression. A whole category of people is expelled from useful participation in social life and thus potentially subjected to severe material deprivation and even extermination"

This is very scary to think about. Just because a person is either old, young and/or Black/Latino, a single mother, mentally and physically disabled, American Indians etc, all things they can't control causes them to suffer in America. How are people allowed to have a chance in life or grow if no one is willing to give them a chance just because of something they can't control. How is that fair?

Page 47: "Does this mean that sexual and racial oppression are nonexploitative?" To answer this question, I disagree. When I think about racial oppression, I instantly go to slavery which is a great example of exploitation.

I agree with this. I don't believe it possible to eliminate groups and I don't think it is necessary. We are all unique and our uniqueness helps us identify who we are. We can't strip that away. Just the way we view other peoples uniqueness need to change. Our differences shouldn't be criticized. Some people may not agree with some differences but that doesn't mean they should disrespect it either. It is unrealistic to think people will accept everything but as long as it is respected than we can have group differences without oppression.

I agree with this statement. People shouldn't be excluded from others because of different lifestyles choices or just solely on how they look and act. In the inside, we are all the same which a lot of people don't get that. We are all living beings who deserve the same treatment. We all have something about us that makes us unique. That shouldn't be a cause to exclude us from others. However, we've been living within groups for very long time. Is it even possible to eliminate them?

For example, I have some family who are Christian and other family who are Muslim. We all identify ourselves as Black but we branch off in different directions when it comes to our religion.

I find this interesting. One person can be defined as privileged and oppressed at the same time. I really like how Young pointed this out.

I agree with this statement. In no way should oppression be seen as "casual". Something that is considered "casual" makes it an everyday normal thing. Oppression should not be seen as normal but sad to say as often as it happens it really could be termed as such.

Page 39: "The conscious actions of many individuals daily contribute to maintaining and reproducing oppression, but those people are usually simple doing their jobs or living their lives, and do not understand themselves as agents of oppression"

I don't like this statement. The "simply doing their jobs or living their lives" makes it seem like they are off the hook because it's part of their lifestyle to oppress people without knowing it. they target these groups because its part of their lifestyle? I don't think so. That isn't okay.

Page 38: One thing I noticed when Young mentioned the different groups that are being oppressed was that white people weren't part of the list specifically I wonder why (I say sarcastically). Except for Jews but I would put them in a different category as well.

Page 38: "One reason that many people would not see the term oppression to describe injustice in our society is that they do not understand the term in the same way as do new social movement"

I agree with this statement. This reminds me of the very first quote from the reading.

Page 38: "Obviously the above-named groups are not oppressed to same extent or in the same ways. In the most general sense, all oppressed people suffer some inhibition of their ability to develop and exercise their capacities and express their needs, thoughts, and feelings" I like how Young pointed this out to make clear that some groups may have it harder than others but nonetheless, we are all being oppressed and the extent of the matters should not make other issues less important. It is all one big problem that all needs to some action taking.

I don't like the use of this word. Granted, this word can be both used in a comical sense or repulsive way but this is a serious issue that happens daily and I don't think a word that could be used in a funny way and bad way should be used. There are plenty of other words, Simone Weil could've used that would fit appropriately.

I really agree with this statement. Being a woman can be very difficult and scary sometimes. Physically, we lack in strength compared to men, so it can be pretty easy for men to dominate themselves over us and believe they have the right to do these things because we physically can't do anything about it. Once it happens, it can take huge tole on our mental and emotional health. It's hard to come back from that. So I can believe this statement when it says rape is the first horror of human existence and oppression is the second.

This quote is a good way of viewing the issues of racism and inequality against all types of different races. I feel that a person in one race, only cares or can see the problems or view and understand the perspective within their own race. Other races wouldn't be able to understand as well as they could. For example, when it comes to police brutality against black people, the white people most of the time want to side with the white cops saying "They were just doing their job. It's not an easy profession." From their point of view, the police did the right thing but from a black person point of view, we think about what was really going on. What was the reason they targeted that person? It is never necessary for the first instinct to pull out a gun just because they THINK something dangerous about to happen next when they are just trying to comply. In America, we are so focused on the black and white communities the most because we make up most of the population and we are blind to the problems of other races or cultures.