Compare the patterns of Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur. What insights have you gained from reading about these atrocities?

I grew up in a rather culturally mixed neighborhood. In my neighborhood lived Islanders from different parts of the Caribbean, Latin Americans from Central/South America, African Americans, White or Caucasian Americans, and even Asian Americans. My classroom was one filled with students whose parents were from all over the world. There was always an even gradient of ethnic skin color, not one more powerful than the other, a balance of sorts. I enjoyed living in my neighborhood and attending the school there. I enjoyed the company of most of my classmates regardless where their parents were from. It was a culturally rich environment to grow up in and to learn from. When I read about genocide and ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, Bosnia, and Darfur I was faced with another question “how?” How can anyone let this happen? I couldn’t imagine an act of violence befalling my neighborhood in that manner, being separated from my friends, and possibly from my own family, being discriminated against with such detest. In hopes of some type of feasible answer I turned to my professor and friends alike and posed them this question: How could this happen? Where do people find this drive? This dark, hatred filled, obsession to annihilate a group of people different from their own. How could anyone see this as right and be able to execute a systematic death sentence? I had so many questions about human nature and moral development that my head was spinning just after reading a few articles. The one term that kept coming up was dehumanization. Most of those killings were possible thanks to the dehumanization frame of mind. The groups committing these acts of crimes against humanity don’t see that who they are hurting is indeed someone like themselves, a person. Someone with family and friends, someone who feels and can feel for, someone who laughs and cries just as they do, just as we all do. They don’t see the human they’re torturing, or the pain they’re causing another living being. They just see the differences between them, and that makes the ones being oppressed no better than the dog that gets kicked in the street, or the grass that gets trampled on, an inanimate object to be removed, if not through relocation then through extermination. I grappled with this idea for several days and even held heated discussions with friends on the meaning of it all. What I gained from reading this material and then discussing it with friends is a better insight to myself and what it truly means to be human. My own perspectives have changed drastically from when I was a child. I have come to a more appreciative view of humanity. I know we are not perfect, but life isn’t about perfection. Humans were never meant to live a life based on that concept. Haven’t you ever heard the saying, “Nothing is perfect. Life is messy. Relationships are complex. Outcomes are uncertain. People are irrational,” by Hugh Mackay? In a world where people are irrational, or at the very least not as logical as they may portray to be, how could we ever consider living a perfect life? There is no comparing the atrocities that have taken place in Rwanda, Bosnia, and Darfur. They are equally all horrid events, events that with some time and patience were planned out and executed on a group of unsuspecting victims all because of the differences that defined them. It doesn’t take a creative mind to oppress a group of people, just a methodical one.

Reflect on the Holocaust. What do you think about people who say it didn't happen?

Where do I begin? First, I have long heard about the Holocaust. They taught us this bit of History as part of the curriculum, something that was briefly covered, like historical figures, dates, and a synopsis of the events. But we never truly explored the topic at hand. Maybe this was done to alienate the children even further from subject matter we deemed inappropriate or maybe the wound was still too fresh to further delve into the symbolism of what innocent people, man, woman, and child, had to endure during those times. Whatever the reason, I took it upon myself to truly get into the material and to learn about this stifling part of History. What I gained from it was shock. After watching the film “Night and Fog” all I could think about was “Why?” I couldn’t wrap my brain around it. Why would anyone join a campaign to alienate a group of people? And not only alienate but at some point completely exterminate this group. As I read the material posted on various websites, I became completely consumed by the historical events that had taken place so many years ago. I held discussions with close friends to lighten my burden. Burden, what burden? I didn’t part take in this massacre and I didn’t lose anyone to this massacre. I am not German or Jewish, or even Gypsy for that matter. I wasn’t even a twinkle in my Father’s eye when this world experienced one of the most memorable time periods in History. So why was I so troubled? I was troubled because no matter how much information I acquired about the Holocaust I would never truly understand the mindset behind it. That is what bothered me the most. I couldn’t fathom that people weren’t just looking at Hitler and saying, “Are you out of your mind,” which he clearly must have been, along with the hundreds of other people following him like the children in the story of the pied piper. Hitler’s tune fogged the mind and lured anyone who would stop to listen, overrunning good sense and moral judgment. I know there were a few who were immune to his tune, helping those in trouble as best they could, and they should be commended. Thank you for seeing past the superficial differences and embracing the most powerful similarity, “if you prick us, do we not bleed?” We are essentially the same; unfortunately not many believe this to be true. This brings me to the second thing I would like to address, the validity of the Holocaust. People will always believe in whatever it is they want to believe in. We have conspiracy theorists, alien abductees, ghost hunters, and yes even at this age Santa believers. But to say that the Holocaust never happened, is to say that the Native Americans were never relocated. Their sweat, tears, and blood never stained the “Trail of Tears” they were so cruelly subjected to trek. That African Americans always lived in a society that believed in equality for all men. That they were never segregated, bullied, or even killed because of the color of their skin. To say that the Holocaust never happened, is to say that we are a perfect, open, and accepting race. But what race would that be, the human race? No, we are not like that, as you can see. And if you don’t believe that, then there isn’t much I can do to change your mind. Everyone needs something to believe in, but when your beliefs get in the way of someone else living their life in peace or at the very least the way they choose to live it, then your beliefs have gained power not only over you but over others that don’t quite fit in its equation. You have beliefs, beliefs don’t have you, so don’t let them run your life, for goodness sake they're not your mother.

Do you understand how prejudice happens?

Write a reflection on your reaction to the several articles in “Understanding Prejudices” and the section on Prejudice in “Beliefs, Values and Attitudes”.

A few days ago I expressed my own inclinations to prejudicial behavior. So I am aware of how prejudice happens. To understand the dynamics of it all one must do a little research and a lot of soul searching. Rereading the material on Prejudice in Beliefs, Values, and Attitudes just made me realize how serious of an issue this is. According to the essay, however, we are prejudice towards others (individuals or groups) when we ourselves are members of another group. Supposedly, we don’t choose to be prejudice and if left to our own devices wouldn’t behave in such a manner. What we really strive for is fulfilling the need of being able to affiliate with other people. That’s what drives us to join groups, that connection to others. But once we are initiated into the group we pick up (either on our own or with the aid of other group members) idealisms that create friction amongst our group and people from other groups. On a small scale take a look at school cliques. Usually, the school is comprised of several different groups. For example, the major division happens between the popular kids and the unpopular kids. The popular kids tend to be the jocks and the cheerleaders. The unpopular kids tend to be the nerds and the teacher’s pets. These sets of people connected because they each held similar interests, and that’s fine and dandy. There’s nothing wrong with connecting with someone that you have things in common with. But it is a rare thing to see members of each of these groups mingling with members of the other groups. And if there is interaction, sometimes it’s not for the benefit of all. A jock can exploit his physical stature on a mild mannered nerd to get what he wants, answers to the test, a good research paper, even tutoring. The jock might believe that his standing in the school hierarchy is above all other students. And that the praise from the teachers and the school administrators on his most recent win just confirm his stature in the eyes of the public. This behavior is very similar to that of a prejudging person. On a larger scale this type of behavior can be devastating, and the likes of it have been seen throughout history. Take into consideration the Trail of Tears or the Holocaust. So many people suffered due to perceived differences. In the articles of Understanding Prejudice the focus is taken off of the victims and is placed squarely on the behavior itself. In a way it victimizes the discriminators. Prejudice is seen as a personality disorder, a behavior that the person can’t help but exhibit. However, there are two different types of prejudice: unintentional and intentional. The unintentional prejudice person picks up such behavior from early learning through passive observation of the people in their surroundings, such as family members, peers, sometimes even their community. These people can be heard saying “I am not prejudiced,” and then react in the manner that is considered prejudiced due to what they may have picked up during early learning. The intentional prejudice person is one who has gone through a more active learning process later on in life. These people share certain fundamental personality characteristics, much like people diagnosed with a personality disorder. The prejudice behavior is very much integrated into one’s identity and is seen as a defense mechanism to defend said identity and even the person’s way of life. It is much more difficult to change intentional prejudices. Learning more about prejudice has helped me to learn more about myself. Unintentional as I may have been in my reaction it is still not an acceptable way to live. Thankfully, I have the resources that can aid me in becoming an individual who has multicultural awareness/consciousness.

What are the most important concepts you got out of reading the article "Understanding the Self" (Hamachek)?

And out of the sections on self concept and self-esteem in Transformation: Creating Context, Part I?

Well, after re-reading the section on self concept and self-esteem in the essay Transformation: Creating Context, Part 1 I was able to really grasp the meaning of each term. Although both terms deal with the topic of self, as is evident in the term itself, it is in two different manners. Self concept deals with the way you view yourself. For example, I am a student. I label myself so because I attend Miami Dade College and take classes there regularly. While enrolled in school there are certain responsibilities that I must focus on that further define me as a student, like in-class assignments, homework, research papers, and the like. These are just a few of the things I take into consideration when defining my self concept. If I didn’t attend college and didn’t have academic responsibilities I wouldn’t see myself as a “student,” or at least not one in the conventional sense. Self concepts are just labels we give ourselves based on the type of life we lead. If you’re in a band you may consider yourself a musician. If you are athletic and majorly into sports you may consider yourself a jock. These labels just make it “easier” to define ourselves and each other. Self-esteem on the other hand defines a person’s value, or self worth. How positively or negatively you deem yourself. Continuing on my example, I am an excellent student. The emphasis is on excellent. I deem myself an excellent student because I earn good grades completing assignments, participating in class, and doing well on the examinations. I have a high self worth when it comes to defining me as a student. Like the supposed musician in a band. He may play a few gigs but realize he’s not all that talented and may consider himself to be a crappy musician, a negative view of himself and one that will lend itself to low self-esteem issues. Now, when dealing with the self the key player is yourself, or so you would think. But many other components come into play when arriving at a self concept. In the essay Understanding the Self, it is mentioned that most people find it somewhat difficult to define themselves on their own terms. People would like to think they are able to, and some might even succeed, but the fact is that there isn’t just one way to view who you are. You and the environment around you, be it another person, another species, or even your surrounding area (like your home, a park, or a bus stop), are always in a dynamic state. Always changing, growing, moving and defining you as a person. For example, let me define myself even more, I am an honest person. I don’t believe in taking or keeping something that does not belong to you. Walking around school I notice a few bills falling out of the pocket of the person walking in front of me. I pick up the fallen money. Reasoning suggests that my actions should reflect my honest statement. And they do, I follow the person and hand them what is rightfully theirs. Now, let’s say the situation changes slightly. Instead of seeing the money fall, the money is already on the floor. The area in which I was walking through has cleared up some and it seems who ever dropped it hasn’t seemed to notice that they have. What then? Well, in all honesty, I adhere to a timeless rule of “finders, keepers; losers, weepers.” If there is no one to return the item to, then I stake claim on what is now rightfully mine, the finder. How about lost and found? Well, I used to believe in those till I realized no one ever came back for the items lost and the people who were supposed to be safe guarding them were in fact helping themselves to it. I do the work of finding it, and they get to keep it. I don’t think so. However, depending on the item found, I always try my best to find the rightful owner, especially if the item lost contains any type of contact information, like a phone number or an address. And at times I have even taken it to the lost and found, adhering closely to another rule: if the item left has not been retrieved after 30 days the original person to find said item may be able to claim it as their own. Should I still consider myself an honest person? Do you still consider me one? Self concepts are not written in stone, and self-esteems can fluctuate. What really counts is the person you are at the time because that is when life happens, in the moment. The past may shape you, and the future may lead you, but the present is what makes you.

What strikes you as most important to you as a teacher in reading about Beliefs, Values and Attitudes?

What is the most important thing that you have learned?

When I first began to read the essay, I felt a great disconnect to the writing on the pages. The material was good, but I kept thinking to myself, “What is so important about this information?” What makes it relevant? I was concentrating so hard on answering these one dimensional questions that I didn’t give myself the opportunity to take in all that the essay had to offer. But coming home by bus one day made me realize how truly pertinent this information is to my personal life and as an educator. I was standing on the corner of 183rd street and 27th avenue waiting for the bus when a little boy approached me. Slightly thin and much shorter than me, he seemed to be of elementary school age. Hearing him speak to his mother on my cell phone confirmed that his ethnicity was that of Haitian American. But I’ve gotten ahead of myself. Well, when the young boy first came up to me I was quite skeptical of his intentions. I was standing in the middle of a notoriously bad neighborhood, dressed in formal work attire, and feeling seriously out of place. The little boy had decided to approach me in hopes I had a cell phone he could use. I looked him up and down through squinted eyes and after what seemed like an eternal pause decided to help him out. I took out my phone cautiously and dialed the number for him. I only handed him the phone once I heard a ringing on the other end. Why was I acting so untrustworthy? He was just a little boy. What I came to realize was that even though I understood this fact logically, logically wasn’t how I was seeing him or the situation. Instead of seeing a little boy, I saw a potential threat. And to make matters worse I believe his ethnicity, along with his age, may have played a prejudicial role in how I reacted. I never once considered myself prejudice. That is up until that fateful day waiting for the bus. Till I looked into the eyes of a little boy and instead of feeling nurturing towards him, I felt as if my life were being threatened. I hadn’t meant to judge him in that manner. The media has a way of getting under people’s skin. I don’t watch a lot of news, but what I am able to catch is usually riddled with misbehaving youths and new forms of breaking the law. When I first laid eyes on him I didn’t see a little boy, I saw a young hoodlum in the making. All I could think about was why come up to me? What are your true intentions? When I consciously realized my thought process, two things came to mind: 1) I was completely aghast at how I was thinking and behaving and 2) I realized how easy it is to be prejudice. I also considered how differently I may have reacted if a White or Latin child would have come up to me instead. The media covers all people, but some of the more recent coverage has dealt with unruly youths. And it always seems that the more boisterous groups are usually of African or Haitian American descent. Or maybe that is just what the media wants to portray. However, it gives me no right to see this little boy or any other person of any other ethnicity as a threat. At the beginning I tried to reason that I was just being cautious, but there is a major difference between caution and prejudice. And that is one mistake I am not willing to make again. What I learned from the reading is that our beliefs are created and fortified not only by our experiences, but also by the experiences of others that we choose to internalize. And even though there are some things in this world that we haven’t experienced ourselves firsthand, we hold to be true the accounts of others. It’s easy to be prejudice. The hard part is letting go of all of those irrational thoughts disguising themselves as truth.

Why is Freud's work on the Theory of Personality considered so important even by those who don't agree with him? What do you think about Freud?

I have come across Freud and his work several times and in different college courses. An interesting character, the majority of his work in psychoanalytic psychology is a reaction against the time period in which he found himself in, this time period being the Victorian era. So to truly take away from his work one must see what he brings to the table in an objective manner, or as objective as possible given that some of his ideas are a little radical even to our standards, for example his concept on psychosexual development. This concept roots developmental stages in sex and pleasure. One such stage and the first stage in his theory of development is the oral stage. During the oral stage, which takes place from birth till about 18 months, the infant finds pleasure in nursing making its mouth the erogenous zone. Strange, I know, but that’s not all that sets him apart. He also explores the libido, a basic psychic energy that can be compared to Chi or Parana. Chi is considered by most Eastern systems a vital energy that animates the body. Libido = Chi. Psychology defines libido as a psychic energy; Eastern Religion and the New Age define Chi as the flow of energy. Seemingly different fields of study with different terminology describing the same type of concept, a connection like that just shows you how interconnected our most valuable beliefs are. That is why Freud’s work on the Theory of Personality is considered so important. His ideas all connect to one another and to us. And the ones who don’t agree with him have the material he has helped collect which they can still use to create a more acceptable theory for themselves. Freud’s Theory of Personality is based on what drives us. Freud believes we are driven by sex and aggression, more formally known as Ethos and Thanatos. We are driven by these for simple reasons life and death. When we leave the house to go to school, or work, or just somewhere to hang out we make sure we look our best. Why is that? Simply, because if we look good it is more probable that we will attract a more suitable mate, hopefully, giving us the opportunity to procreate. To give life is one of the things that drive us to go on endless dates in search of Mr. or Ms. Right. Once we have the suitable mate, or maybe even before we find them, aggression will help us to protect the ones we have by our side or to stop the ones trying to meddle in our private affairs. In a nutshell, we are instinctually driven to survive. We are hardwired to live, procreate, and protect what is ours from those who wish to do us harm by attempting to or completely hindering these needs. Personally, I agree with this somewhat primitive and animalistic look into the human psyche.

React to the article: Teaching for Inclusion.

Well, after reading the general strategies for Inclusive Teaching, I found I knew more about the topic than I thought. I also realized why it is so important to create an inclusive environment. Throughout my time in the educational system I have come to experience firsthand what an exclusive teaching environment can feel like. I was a shy child growing up and didn’t opt out for much class participation. Although, some teachers made it very clear that participation would hold a significant portion of the grade. I always felt obligated to participate and it always added unneeded pressure and stress. Instead of focusing on learning the material, I would stress out about what we would have to do in class, in front of everyone. During those classes I realized I never really felt connected to the material and once the material was actually learned it wouldn’t quite stick. My nerves would get the better of me and I wouldn’t remember a thing, I’d blank out. It was unnerving and for a long time I felt I wasn’t academically proficient. I got good grades, but the fact that I would freeze up in front of the entire class would just make me doubt myself, even when the response I was formulating was the correct one. As a future educator, I know I wouldn’t want any of my students to feel that way. That is why it is important to understand the concept of teaching to the individual. Students aren’t cookie cutters of one another or even of the students that came before them. Yes, they may share similarities being students, but that doesn’t mean that they have lost their individuality. Their individuality as a student is based on their personality, their ethnicity, and sometimes even their religious beliefs. Their families have reared them a certain way, and it is your job as an educator to level the playing field because each student will be coming into your class with a set of preconceived notions. Some of these notions may be negative, so it is important to set up ground rules. These ground rules will create a positive atmosphere for the students to be able to discuss certain themes, no matter how controversial. Also, if these ground rules are introduced early in the course, one can go through them with the students for further explanation of each rule and if need be additions can be made to the list. Now, returning to the concept of teaching to the individual. Although, a great concept, there are many pitfalls to look out for when changing your teaching style. Pitfalls that traditional teachers make without knowing the faux pa they are walking into. For example, if the classroom is working on an assignment which looks into the ethnicity of a people and there just so happens to be a student in that class from that ethnicity, the teacher may feel prone to ask the student to answer questions on behalf of his/her people, in turn singling them out. The student may not believe in what his/her people believe in or may feel it too personal a topic to talk about. But the table could easily turn if the teacher decides not to put the student on the spot like that, and instead chooses to ignore the student, even if the student is willing to share his/ her views on the subject. Talk about a double edged sword. By the way, it is also not a good idea to ask the student to be a spokesperson for his/her group, given that they may not feel comfortable with that title. Another pitfall to look out for is one that deals with the teachers personal preferences, like humor. Jokes are a great way to break the ice, but not everyone shares the same taste in humor. Personally, I have a dark sense of humor. But I’m not going to go into my classroom and tell them this joke:
Q: Why was the Egyptian boy confused?
A: Because his daddy was really a mummy.
I find the little joke funny and quite witty, but it’s still inappropriate. This joke maybe thought of as offensive by a student who is homosexual or who has same-sex parents. Unfortunately, many teachers don’t see where the harm lies when making light of a specific situation or sharing a giggle at the expense of others. I have heard my share of offensive jokes in a classroom setting, whether it was shared by the teacher or even amongst the students themselves. As you can see, creating an effective inclusive teaching environment will make you look at your teaching style a little more closely. And unfortunately, isn’t something that can be put into effect immediately. It takes time, hard work, and dedication to the cause, the cause being one that will bring the students and teacher closer together to create a community within the classroom walls.