Never tell a STEM major that your coursework is hard.

I will never understand how STEM majors can go from saying that government majors aren’t hard at all and then complain about how writing is hard in the same breath. Government majors are difficult; you have to write a LOT and what you write typically has to be catered towards what your professor agrees with (of which you have to figure out). Yes, essays are subjective, but the subjectivity gives professors so many opportunities to critique. In science and math, there is an explicitly right or wrong answer. In government, there really isn’t.  

I think it boils down to “never tell a STEM major that your coursework is hard.” In my experience, it’s a competition to see whose life is more difficult, which isn’t a competition one wants to win anyway. 

so making Aliyah during Birthright isn’t smart bc I already paid the housing deposit and (by that time) the tuition for next year. I might as well stay here until next summer BUT then my parents will have “wasted” money for tuition for me SO I might as well wait until after I graduate, which is the smartest option? I think bc then I’ll have a degree in government and international relations, which I’m hoping will help me land a job there even tho it’s another country. Also if I make Aliyah now I have 24 months of IDF service (which I am totally fine with) and it gets smaller as I age, which I’m also fine with but I was thinking that if I join the IDF I’ll have more of a chance of landing a job, I believe… I’m trying to work all this out without telling my family members and most of my friends bc if I tell my family, they’ll get pissed bc they’ll see it as me wasting my career and most of my friends hate Israel (well one does and the rest are tired of hearing her bitch at me about it) and also I’m pretty sure my bf wouldn’t support my decision So while I’m in Israel I’m going to talk about it with my Israeli family and see what they think (my uncle married a woman who made Aliyah around my age) so then I’ll be able to get more info and I’ll probably talk to some recruiters while I’m there I also don’t want to deal with the social media backlash of moving to another country bc ppl are going to ask why and there’s so many reasons but one of the main ones is “the antisemitism and blatant Christian normativity/ superiority complex here gets on my nerves” and I feel like that’s not an acceptable answer you know, and then also people already hold me accountable for literally everything israel does once they find out I’m Israeli and I don’t want that to be multiplied by ten I’m still seriously considering making Aliyah though

Fandometrics In Depth: Feminism Edition

Tumblr has always been a place where feminists could connect and speak freely. And as Tumblr has grown, so have the allied communities and the size of the conversation. From 2013 to 2015, year-over-year growth in the number of original posts tagged #feminism increased at an average rate of 4.22%.

That changed in 2016. As Tumblr discussed the US presidential election and its impact on women’s rights, access to healthcare and the importance of consent, the rate of original posts tagged #feminism grew 20%, five times the growth of the previous three years. Looking at the entire ecosystem of Tumblr tags, original posts and reblogs about #feminism accounted for triple the amount of conversation it did in 2015.

2016 also saw a change in Tumblr’s understanding of what feminism means.

The term intersectionality describes the overlapping systems of oppression at play in society—it’s the idea that gender inequality, racism, class status, and other injustices are inseparable from one another and can’t be studied in isolation.

Between 2014 and 2016 there was a modest increase in engagement around #intersectionality. Original posts increased 13%, while searches increased 44%. But then came the Women’s March. On January 20th, 2017, engagements around #intersectionality spiked 5191% from just two days before. Since then, the whole tone of the #feminism conversation on Tumblr has changed.

In 2017 so far, people are talking about intersectional systems of oppression 21% more than they have in the last four years combined.

How does that change in tone manifest itself? Here’s a sampling of posts that have gone viral since the March:

A women-only salon catering to hijabis

Shepard Fairey’s intersectional march posters, and

So many protest photos with intersectional slogans and themes.

Continuing the conversation

If you’re interested in joining the feminist conversation on Tumblr, there are tons of places to start. In addition to the #feminism and #intersectionality tags, you can head to tags like #wage gap and #pro choice to learn more about specific issues. There are also dozens of Tumblrs that dive deep into the conversation:

Feminist Frequency (@femfreq), a place to talk about feminism in gaming

Celebrating Amazing Women (@celebratingamazingwomen), which highlights women who have changed history on their birthdays

Whovian Feminism (@whovianfeminism), which looks at inequality through a fannish lens

Empower. Volunteer. Unite. (@ucf-now), the official Tumblr of the University of Central Florida’s National Organization for Women chapter, and

Action (@action), our hub to help connect you to the resources you need to become an agent of change.

Reasons Why I’m Terrified to go Outside this Week: IAW

1- I am Jewish, and it’s Israeli Apartheid week. I don’t even have to proclaim a stance; all  I have to do is wear my magen david outside and have one of the protesters see it and bam, I’m automatically an Evil Racist Zionist Jew Scum. Harrassment and mock eviction notices will be slipped under my door. It’s happened to members of Hillel in the past. 

2- I visited Israel and the Palestinian territories in 2014 and gained a new perspective. I saw what it was really like. I was leaving the airport when a missile was launched and I had to hide in a shelter. I was in Jerusalem on Shabbat when a bomb went off and people were screaming. I saw Arabs and Israelis together, and ultimately I do believe in Israel’s right to exist. However, my friends all think that I “talk about this too much” and I “get emotional,” and one of the girls that I am friends with is violently against Israel. This means that if I voice how terrified or offended I am this week or by this subject at all, my pleas fall on deaf ears. I have to go to the Hillel office, which is across campus, right in the path of the protesters. 

3- My opinions and stances are often shouldered aside because my campus is a very liberal one. There is a very big Arab presence on campus, and as I discovered in a past research paper, the left, liberal side can be very antisemitic, often shadowed and disguised as anti-Zionism. I have studied this situation my entire life, as I have family there, and know for a fact that many of the things that the protesters say and many of the information on the signs is factually inaccurate. I do look white rather than Israeli, and that’s thanks to my father, and because of that, I am written off.I couldn’t possibly have any valuable input, I’m just an annoying white Jew. This causes me to internalize all of my emotions while I’m in contact with these issues, which consequently makes me explode in tears and frustration later. Ultimately, I am forced to sit and watch a smear campaign roar across campus with people of whom I thought were my friends call for my people’s extermination and murder, and I can’t do anything about it without getting harassed and written off.  

I can’t even wear my magen david outside this week. 

I’m tired of hearing my friends and peers tell me that I talk about certain issues too much, that it’s annoying. I continuously talk about these issues because they’re important to me and because they need more attention. Swap out whatever it is that I talk about that you find annoying with something that you’re passionate about. It seems that their responses are exaggerated as well, and the examples that they bring up are ridiculous. The main one is that I always respond passionately whenever someone badmouths or says offensive things about my religion and ethnicity. Because I am Jewish and this is a very liberal campus, this is seen as me “overreacting” and “making a big deal about nothing,” yet if I make one critique of their religion and its history with minorities, I am evil. I am tired of the hypocrisy, and none of my friends, least of all my boyfriend, will stand up for me. It’s ridiculous, and I’ve started to come to expect such things from people, where they complain about me behind my back because I’m too outspoken, too passionate for their convenience. I guarantee that if what I was passionate about aligned with their own interests, they would not care- perhaps they would praise it or chime in. It’s utterly ridiculous how I am expected to tolerate them doing the same things that I do, yet when I do it, I am seen in a negative light. I really do need a break from everyone. 

“christian” and “religion” are not interchangeable when discussing politics and the first amendment

my professor: antisemitism doesn’t exist anymore in america

me: *writes a 12 page paper on why antisemitism still exists, what it is, and what groups have perpetuated it in america

my professor: i don’t believe you, what’s your counterargument

“Judeo-Christian”

It has become fairly common to lump Judaism and Christianity together under a single banner. A “Judeo-Christian” religion, “Judeo-Christian” countries, “Judeo-Christian” philosophy.

This terminology is largely incorrect and is often perpetuated with the goal of giving credence to Christian philosophy and practices by pairing them up with the older Jewish religion through an appeal to antiquity fallacy that is meant to hold up Christianity and imply a positive relationship between Judaism and Christianity that simply has existed neither historically nor in the modern era.

Christian philosophy is not Jewish philosophy. Christianity separated from Judaism two thousand years ago and practitioners of Christianity and Christian institutions have done everything in their power to separate their practices from Jewish ones, their history from a Jewish one. Their methods? Everything from the rejection of Mosaic law and established Jewish holy days to political repression and murder.

The Judaism of today is very different from the Judaism that existed at the time that Christianity first emerged. Judaism has continued to develop over the past two thousand years and so any holdovers from Judaism that Christianity may have somehow retained despite forcibly throwing off all elements of Jewish practice would be almost unrecognizable in the face of the developments that have occurred since then. Rabbinical Judaism, Kabbalah, Jewish rationalism … none of these existed in their present form two thousand years ago. None of these things are Christian.

The United States has the largest Jewish population out of any country outside of Israel, and yet the Jewish population still makes up less than two percent of the country’s total population. This does not mirror the loving working relationship between Judaism and Christianity, between Jews and Christians, that proponents of the term “Judeo-Christianity” boast, especially when coupled with historic antisemitic discrimination in the United States. Other countries with even smaller Jewish populations certainly cannot accurately boast a Judeo-Christian history either.

Death to Israel. The Government, which kill children and the elderly and women. State that speak of human rights fully Azeri people

casual reminder that all women are beautiful no matter how much cellulite or wrinkles or acne or split ends you have, no matter how big your pant size, bra size, or thigh gap is, no matter your hair color or length, no matter your skin color or ethnicity

women should not be seen as sex objects or be commodities because your power and importance does not and should not come from how fuckable you look to a specific demographic

we should not be comparing ourselves to other women, especially supermodels that work for victoria’s secret, because they don’t even look like that in real life 

Body Commodification

The first text that was assigned, which was the first section in the book Commodifying Bodies, was focused on the “why” of body commodification. Using the sale of kidneys as an explanation, the author spoke of many different instances in which people sold their kidneys for financial reasons. The text then went on to discuss the discourses associated with body commodification- mainly, that the certain uses and utilization of any and all body parts and/or functions are (or should be) free from government meddling. Other discourses discussed are the other forms of body commodification, which includes marriage, the sale and/or grave-robbing of corpses, and the sale or acquirement of genetic materials, including stem cells, eggs, and sperm. Essentially, this text proves that while certain types of body commodification and its associated discourses are new, at its core, body commodification has been around forever and aligns with the age-old discourses of the scarcity of humans and medicine, desire, religious practices, and essentially entertainment. The next text assigned was an interview with Nancy Scheper-Hughes, an interview that focused on how Nancy became interested with body commodification, her opinions on it. Nancy originally started out researching a common fear that people in impoverished situations and places had- organ theft, of which she said she believed to be urban legend. Nancy talks about how the donation of organs (willingly) is seen differently depending on what country one is in or the culture that is prevalent. Nancy then goes on to say that she doesn’t see all organ sellers as victims (she adds that some sellers are exploited and therefore can be seen as victims), that many people will sell any organ that they have two of, either for financial reasons or cultural obligations (if someone depends on their boss, and their boss asks for an organ, that person would most likely give up that organ without thinking twice). She states that everyone has the freedom to donate, but not the obligation, and thus is against the black market and organ theft. 

In high school, we would make jokes about selling our kidneys or becoming strippers to pay for college, and now that I am aware of these types of situations and all the ramifications that come along with it, I feel guilty and ashamed. I am an organ donor, as is most of my family, and I think that if someone I loved needed a kidney or bone marrow, I would donate. I think that when someone is in that position, the morality of that choice is easy to determine. But when someone is put into a position in which they have to sell to pay the bills or simply to feed their families, I think the morality of that choice is very difficult to determine and lies within the realm of gray. I think that yes, people should be able to do what they want with their bodies, but also that they shouldn’t be put in those positions in the first place. Body commodification, in the sense of buying and selling organs, is something very convoluted and, in lack of better terms, gray.

Sex Trafficking and Prostitution

I read two sources- the first, and article on Nicholas Kristoff and his experiences with reporting, and the second, a few pages out of a book on the trafficking of migrant women and their experiences. The article on Kristoff was mostly about how the American public buys into stories that they can either relate with or cause emotion, even if said stories are fictional. For example, something stated in the article was that Americans view one death as tragic, while they view millions as a statistic (which could be due to the fact that Americans tend to dissociate and detach themselves from mass murders, and even if they become emotional, the emotion and interest only lasts for a few days, such as with the Flint water crisis). The article then talked about how some victims exaggerate their stories so that they receive more attention and a bigger shock factor, thus getting more aid. What kind of world is it that a victim has to make their terrible story even worse so that they can get help? Isn’t being raped enough to gather some sympathy? The second source seemed to focus more on the viewpoints of migrant women and how many social programs seem to ignore the mass trafficking of these women. Again, what kind of world is it where a woman is denied help and aid from being trafficked simply because she isn’t a citizen of the country that she is being sold in?

Now, prostitution is a tricky subject. I maintain my belief that one should be able to do whatever they want with their own body as long as they consent to it, but I know that it is more complicated than that. Sometimes, women are given a choice between sex work and poverty or between sex work and factory work, and while that in itself could be considered a consented choice, is that really a choice at all? Before I was as informed as I am now, my viewpoint was that prostitution was something that women did to pay the bills for school and that there was always another alternative, like working in a restaurant or something. However, this viewpoint is completely American-centric, and even though I knew that women were being raped and trafficked and such, it wasn’t really something that was on my mind.And of course, I really wasn’t aware of how often this happens. I had no idea that people were being trafficked in my own country. I knew it was happening across the globe, and I knew that was a problem, but my viewpoint was that it couldn’t happen here, not in my country. I think that was a very dangerous view, and I’m glad that I am more informed now, for I know that prostitution isn’t a black or white issue. I honestly don’t know what I can do about it, other than to inform others, but nobody wants to listen to someone talk about something depressing, especially when everyone thinks that they have their own problems that are more pressing. Nobody really wants to hear about people dying, because (in the words of my mother), “I’m trying to enjoy myself; I don’t want to hear you talk about something sad.” Yes, this is sad, but we have to talk about it. The conversation must happen in order for anyone to start any form of dialogue, for anyone to prompt the governments or NGOs to enact some sort of law or mandate to help these people, if possible. 

Globalization and Food

It is very obvious that Americans as a whole are not interested in where their food originated from. Sure, there has recently been a push for people to buy produce and meat locally, but most Americans continue to be apathetic and buy whatever products are the cheapest. Most Americans seemed totally unfazed by the idea that food and its production has transformed and connected the world. We are so easily swept up into what looks appetizing and what costs the least amount that we have all but forgotten how our food appears on our plates. It seems that we have forgotten that our food is produced often in third world countries, where the local fishermen and farmers cannot even afford to buy and eat the products that they fish or grow, that people in third world countries would rather buy products labeled from the US than buy the local fruits and vegetables. One of the examples of this that the reading introduces is that people in Belize would rather buy canned Dole pineapples from Hawaii than the fresh pineapples grown in their own country. American products have become synonymous with the idea of good quality, of being cool. A few weeks ago in my Honors 122 class, we had two Senegalese celebrities come in and talk about rap in their own country and the differences between our cultures. They said that in Senegal, people adopt American culture as the “cool” thing, while African Americans in America are trying to connect with what they perceive as genuine African culture. The reading talks a bit about this, about the rise of monoculture, and warns that with the growing spread of American culture worming its way into other countries’ cultures, ethnocide is occuring (Unless, of course, the country is also a superpower, as the reading talks about how Japan has adapted American culture into Japanese culture without seemingly losing their cultural identity, as America has done with every other country she has had contact with).

Food isn’t just what we eat; it’s a connector, the stuff that holds us all together. Countries feed each other, all dependent on one another, and if one country and product ceases to exist, then we all are thrust into hardship. While globalization and food can be seen as a bad thing, it can also be a good thing in that it connects nations with other nations and causes interdependence. 

Neoliberalism as Creative Destruction Response

Harvey defines neoliberalism as an idea that humans can advance best with free trade and the privatization of economic practices and that government interference in markets and economics must be kept to a bare minimum. Neoliberalism took place during the seventies and swept across the world, with neoliberalists in many important agencies, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization. Neoliberalism became naturalized mostly from s distrust of the government and the United States’ recurring idea that their way is the best and that they must indoctrinate everybody else. The world turned to neoliberalism after the abandonment of the Bretton Woods Conference and the increase of economic and political threats to the ruling class. Harvey describes how neoliberalism has helped the restoration of class power increase and how it has lead to privatization, financialization, the management and manipulation of crises, and state distribution. Harvey then discusses alternatives to neoliberalism, skating around the idea of “a way out.” 

Personally, I think neoliberalism can be both good and bad. On one hand, government interference can, well, interfere with free trade and hinder growth. However, on the other hand, government interference can ensure a fair environment for trade, for those who are pushed down and silenced by big corporations. While some have a deep distrust of the government, I have a deep distrust of corporations and lofty businessmen. Do I like capitalism? Of course not. I’ve visited other countries, socialist countries, and I think that a mix of socialism and capitalism is beneficial to most. So is there a way out of neoliberalism, and do we need it? There must be a way out; more government interference, perhaps? And yes, I do think that a change is necessary, for I am tired of letting big corporations headed by rich, old white men control my country’s economic and political policies. 

kaepernick discourse

Today in class we discussed nationalism- not just how it affects countries, cultures, and minorities, but also how it differentiates from patriotism. Of course, one of the first thing one thinks about when one hears nationalism is Hitler and the Nazi regime, but one can find nationalism here, in present day America. Take Colin Kaepernick, for example. Kaepernick is a football player for the 49ers who sat during the playing of the national anthem for a football game to show his content for the oppression of black people in America. Kaepernick’s gesture was seen as disrespectful by some and admirable by others for a variety of reasons, and one of the main arguments against him is that he’s being unpatriotic. People are rallying up, screaming expletives about patriotism and condemning Kaepernick and his supporters. The issue of veterans and the military has been brought up, as it always is whenever the flag is involved. But what people don’t seem to realize is that the flag doesn’t stand for our military and the people who died; rather, it stands for freedom. And is it not written in the Constitution that we have a right to free speech? Just as his protesters are allowed to scream expletives and death threats, Kaepernick is allowed to sit during the national anthem. If one looks at the level of propaganda in America- students recite the pledge of allegiance, in which they are literally pledging their loyalty to a flag, every morning, among other indoctrination and socialization that happens in public schooling- one has good reason to be nervous. 

As the daughter of a man, recently Navy retired, that comes from a long line of people who have served in the US military, Kaepernick made me reevaluate what I thought of my country and the military that protects it. Personally, I stand and recite the pledge, I sing the national anthem, I participate in patriotic events. But I certainly am very unhappy with my country and the way it treats its minorities. As a white-passing Jew, I’ve experienced my fair share of oppression, but nothing like the experiences that black people go through. As a supporter of the Black Lives Matter movement and an avid feminist, I can understand why Kaepernick did what he did, and I am inspired. He has risked his career and his safety to bring the general populous’ attention to something that has been going on for centuries and should have been fixed a long time ago. And now that I know more about this subject, Kaepernick has inspired me to be more outspoken about the injustices around me. 

His actions make conservatives nervous and scared. With the rise of the minority majority, more and more white people have started to act more nationalistic and, simply, more racist. TL;DR, America is spiraling into the far right, and we have to remain objective and outspoken against the violence and injustice in our communities.  

Week 2 Reading- GLOA

In the first reading, Campbell discussed the dimensions of globalization and its effects on economics, politics, and culture, along with the idea of global citizenship. In the economics section, Campbell introduced with a story about a protest that brought individuals from all different backgrounds and ethnicities together. Campbell then began to discuss the historical roots of globalization’s effect on economies, explaining the origins of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Monetary Fund, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Campbell then tied in neoliberalism and how the neoliberalist movement altered economies worldwide. In the politics section, Campbell argued that politics consist of social relations and that these social relations are affected by the idea of multiculturalism. In the culture section of Campbell’s analysis on the dimensions of globalization, Campbell argues that culture is learned through both enculturation and socialization. Campbell also brings up questions concerning cultural identities and peace, asking if one culture can peacefully coexist and interact with another. Then the concept of global citizenship is brought up, backed with two models of citizenship; one saying that an individual is capable of being ruled and of ruling and the other stating that citizenship is a legal status. Stoicism is introduced, which states that universal understanding is brought upon by self-control, as with cosmopolitanism, which is a belief that all people are connected.

In the second reading, Steger analyzed if globalization is new. Steger talks about each time period and how each civilization affected another, one of the prime examples being major world trade networks. In the end, Steger argues that globalization has been around for a long time, perhaps as long as civilizations themselves.

I found the concept of neoliberalism interesting, that government control of the economy is corrupted and flawed. While I do agree that total government control is bad and that the government can be corrupt, I think that allowing the privatization of companies can be very dangerous and can negatively affect those who are in an unstable economic or financial position. Also, I found the argument Campbell made about culture and peace very interesting as well. As a Jew living in a Christian-normative society, I have found that the majority are very easily unsettled by those which are different, by those which they don’t understand. I find myself agreeing with Benjamin Barber in that he advocates for a form of government that aids communities in being more tolerant. Someone told me once that the way of nature is violence and competition and to expect anything or anyone to combat or change that is naïve. This does make sense, as animals fight and eat one another, trees and plants compete for soil, and even bacteria consume other bacteria. As depressing and seemingly true as that is, I can’t help but devote my life to trying to combat violence. And now that I’m done my philosophical rambling, I didn’t find Steger’s chapter all that interesting or controversial. Steger only confirmed my previous belief that globalization has been around as long as we have.