Archive for year: 2014

The episode begins with the orange crew trying to patch things up with the guy they had stabbed in the back, but reparations were not to be made, at least not on any real level. Their creative strategy had its fallout to it and now they’ve received an enemy from it. Sometimes, being upfront and honest is more reliable than the unnecessarily cunning and underhanded play. Mainly because now, their is no love, and no trust to be had. On the other side, the gay dudes plot to relieve Jeremy from the game, but miss their opportunity due to winning the challenges all the time. The reasoning behind the specificity of their target has yet to be fully revealed, but most likely, it’s because people have discovered that he is conniving and manipulative. With that kind of insight into someone’s identity, it becomes hard to overlook that fact when everyone can’t be trusted, except your loved ones. The tribes merge, they rename themselves, and feel out people’s alliances and loyalties with one another. Jeremy and Josh are in a gridlock, probably because they both can tell that they are running the show from the sly. Jeremy believes highly in his own charm and starts sitting pretty with his belief that he’s got a crew that will be with him until the end. Seriously though, that’s crazy naive. People change their  loyalty on a minute to minute framework, and this is the wrong time to get sloppy. Josh decides to push some gears of his own, but it’s clear that they are split 5-7 in their group. Josh attempts to manipulate Bailor using guilt not realizing that she is a sociopath and a self-absorbed user. That plan will crash and burn and he will have to come up with something  better if he wants to sway the tide of war. He realizes that Bailor feigns persuading her mom and let’s the mom think she’s making the decision, when in reality, she is scared to make the hard decisions so she uses her mom as a scapegoat. It’s not that clever but it’s a strong means of pushing the blame away from her, in terms of future votes. Josh attempts to plea with the attractive couple because they are realistically, the only real fence sitters left. Josh says, there are strength in couples, Jeremy is a strong competitor and has a realistic chance of being the winner despite the game being only half over. It seems like the smart way of introducing perspective to a duo that doesn’t have the capacity to think things through. They fade off into the distance to discuss their play. Thankfully, Julie decides to become an enemy of the state by hoarding the little food that they have left. Regardless of the alliances, that crossed the line for many of them and she’s got a real big target on her back now. Realizing that you could potentially be caught, why would someone do that? The hunger must be really, really hard. The challenge begins and it is wildly uninteresting. Eventually, Keith wins. The only thing worth mentioning was the fat grin on Jeremy’s face when Josh lost the challenge. That looked downright evil. I guess I am very biased at this point or the show is pushing me to want to think in a certain way and it’s working. Keith mentions that this vote will show where the alliances stand and he is absolutely right. Julie is all ready to quit but missy tries to string her along, and not very subtly. She has enraged Julie and she has now become a wildcard. It might not matter because the frat dude still seems loyal towards Jeremy taking the numbers out of the equation for Josh. However, there are rumblings of voting off Julie, which may bear fruit. Also, Jeremy lost first, and quickly. Either he’s uncoordinated, or may have played the long con, showing that he won’t sweep the immunity challenges because he’s terrible at them. That would be amazing if it turned out that way, but I’m doubtful on his capacity to think long term strategy. He’s all about the short term, get everyone on his side, and mob rule. That kind of thing rarely works out for dictators. Josh recognizes that the only two really playing the shadow politics of this game are himself and Jeremy. There can be only one winner so whichever one gets out here sets the tone for the direction of this rag tag group of people. So WOW, what a surprise. Jon actually uses his brain and realizes the benefits of taking out Jeremy far outweigh the short term alliance of being with the single people. Let’s see how it plays out though, because deceit is the name of the game and you never know who’s out until the vote. OH DANG! Another curve ball, sort of, Julie officially quit and now it’s about to get really real for some people. Then, no tribe meeting, how anticlimactic. All it did was raise suspense, and the possibility for alliances to change over the course of the next tribal council. Jeremy is comfortable and that could be his downfall, and Josh is wary and willing to get in the dirt to succeed. It seems that for the time being, Josh has better odds, but we’ll see next time around.

In episode 8 of Survivor, decision making and problem solving techniques become the key to making effective choices within the group. Similarly to episode 7, at the beginning of the episode Josh tries to convince Baylor to side with him instead of her mother’s and Jeremy’s alliance. He tries to persuade her into voting for Jeremy because he claims that she owes it to him after he had saved her previously in the competition. By adding Baylor to his team, he hopes to solidify more numbers within his own alliance. Also, he believes it will allow him to build a consensus among his alliance members to accomplish the mutual goal of voting Jeremy out of the competition. Josh sees Jeremy as the biggest threat to him in the competition and believes that with enough power, influence, and individuals agreeing with him, everyone’s willingness to achieve the same goal will ultimately force Jeremy to leave. However, Baylor is not phased by his proposal to her and resolves to side with Jeremy’s group instead.

Jacklyn also faces a situation in which she must persuade other individuals to side with her as well. After Jon is chosen to go to Exile Island, Jacklyn realizes that the male alliance they had previously sided with did not value her opinion or input within the group. It soon became apparent that without Jon’s presence, their former alliance had no consideration for her vote at all and ignored her entirely. Her feeling a lack of respect and trust from the group caused her to try to persuade Jon to switch alliances. Jon however, felt skeptical and questioned whether her decision was the right one.

Jacklyn and Jon were then forced to use problem solving techniques in order to come to a solution. They needed to analyze the problem of deciding which alliance was better and weigh out the options. They also needed to debate on the pros and cons of each side. A pro of switching teams that they discussed would be that they would be able to vote out Josh, who was also a strong competitor and leader of their former alliance, which would give them more power. On the other hand, a con they mentioned was that siding with Jeremy may backfire when he could win the competition entirely because his story is more convincing than theirs. Jon and Jacklyn’s decision to strategize with one another ultimately led them to change alliances and vote for Josh at tribal council. In the end, it was the majority vote that caused Josh to be voted out of the competition.

In the the previous class discussion we had a scenario where we were given a star and tearing them off or keeping the ends according to the script that was being read. I thought it was interesting to see how the people on the stars can sometimes be the ones to turn their backs on us if we tell them that we are gay. I personally had a star that had all the pieces together at the end. But it was interesting to see other people tear theirs off. I can imagine what they were thinking as they were tearing off the names of the people whom they trust the most. Also in one of the previous class we had our presentations about the chapters of the books in The Hope in the Unseen. At first I was a bit nervous of giving a presentation in front of the class, but as I kept going I was feeling less and less nervous. I think the more practice I get  the better.

For this weeks reading they were touching basis of the different gender inequalities that still exist between men and women. One of the main ones that was pointed out was the difference of men and women pursuing higher education. One of the most notable examples was how more and more women are pursuing jobs in STEM fields. Whereas before this field was only controlled and dominated by the male individual. It is good to see how women are willing to stand up to this patriarchal world and pursue jobs in a field that is being dominated by masculinity.   Another main idea that was discussed in the reading was the notion of how LGBT students are not being represented well in college institutions. These students feel oppressed because they see it as we only are accepting either males of females in our institutions and no other sex. I think institutions should take an initiative and provide help and other services to make LGBT students feel more welcomed and not feel oppressed to be proud of who they are.

1. Yes we do see more women in STEM field jobs, but how are men reacting to this notion?

2. If LGBT students do no feel welcome in college institutions, is that keeping them from obtaining an education?

3. Will colleges take the initiative  and make LGBT students feel welcomed and accepted and not just writing out propositions that show support for them?

Unethical Tweet Of The Month: Andrew Barovick

1. What would take for more people to engage in the ethical actions presented?
2. What actions are needed to change the unethical behavior into ethical behavior?

It is somewhat understandable to post something in response after a victory during elections to the opposing candidate. However, the post should not overstep boundaries, it should be considerate as to how others might take the post. Not everybody is going to see or hear what was initially meant by the post. In the article Lawyer Andrew Barovick was under the impression that he was posting a tweet that to him seemed to be somewhat funny, but not offensive. However, although his intentions where not to cause any conflict or to offend anyone, he managed to do both. Having a leadership position within the New York City Bar Association’s Medical Malpractice Committee , his comment was considered to be on a scale from 1-10, to a be a 9. Because he is seen as a leader people expected more from him, especially when they gave him the opportunity to retract from his initial post. In order to change the unethical behavior into an ethical behavior, in this case Mr. Barovick would have to apologize, to the previous post. Although he did resign from his leadership duties, his resignation is not considered to be a form of apology.

Based on your responses to the Core Values Questionnaire, what are your core values?

1. To what degree would you say that your actions align with your values?  How would you want to improve in this area? I feel like my actions do align with my values. At least for me I always try to look out for those that i consider to be family. As well as making sure that the actions that I take part of are just. The best way in which I can improve in this area would be by considering looking at the big picture without my emotions clouding my judgement. Sometimes I tend to overlook small things when it comes to those that are closest to me.
2. Do you think other people know your core values? I feel like they are aware of what my core values are.
3. Are you comfortable talking about your core values with others? I am comfortable in talking with other about my core values with others.
4. In your planning for the future (e.g. next five years), how will your values influence what you do? In the future I do believe that my core values will influence what I will be doing in the future. Personally my core values have influenced me to pursue a career of education simply because I want to have the opportunity to provide the same opportunity that I received growing up, a good education.

This week’s reading was all about gender in higher education. The articles covered an array subjects that were strongly correlated with gender, while the chapter reading was more focused on the change in higher education enrollment and completion between the sexes.

I found the reading intriguing this week because they addressed so many issues with identity that I was completely ignorant about.  For example the article about transgendered students opened my eyes to see how transgender  individuals find complications in education. Also the article presents the idea that you could choose to identify with a different gender both of these concepts are foreign to me and would have never crossed my mind. I also enjoyed reading about the hardships of the individuals in this article because they were incredibly vulnerable, and helped me understand why this is such a pressing issue.

The article about the feminist male was also very interesting because it was easy to relate too. I do not consider myself a feminist, because there are things about their position that I do not agree with, but I was raised by a single mother. Watching my mother play both roles of mother and father has helped me understand that women are more than capable of doing what most consider a man’s responsibility. I see myself as an advocate for respect, equal opportunity and treatment of women, and like the author I wonder how many times I have blotched things up with my ignorance, and behavior because I am a male. I loved the humility and desire to grow in respecting and understanding the struggle of women that the author offers as a solution in his article.

The chapter reading was also insightful. I meditated on the information for a while after reading it. I was not aware of the fact that women outnumbered men by such a large number in higher education attendance, and completion, at every level. Considering the fact that minorities attending, and completing higher education is already low, coming to terms with the fact that the majority of those minorities are women is alarming for the male minority. I had to stop reading at that moment consider the implications of this information. I was also able to see how unfair the work force is, given the fact that women are attaining degrees at a higher rate than men, and are still the minority in most of the workforce.

In short I found that the readings for this week were not only interesting, but inconceivably challenging. The challenges were not in the difficulty of text, but in the content of the text. It was difficult to read the painful memoirs in the articles. Also I was challenged to reconsider, and restructure, my position in some of the topics covered. I do not believe in respecting the values or positions that people may have, but I do believe in respecting people with those values. We may never agree on everything, but we must learn to live in peace and work towards mutual edification. Regardless of race or gender (whether assigned, or chosen) we are all people and deserve to be treated equally.