For anyone who's interested...

My friend was texting me earlier today about how band-aids were raciest because there all TAN bandaids. SO, naturally, I came across this, which I thought was....Mildly humorous.

Band-Aids for every shade

For those who are too lazy to check the link, It's an add for skin-tone appropriate band-aids.

Then, I kept looking, and found this link to a blog that I thought was very interesting, and the main point of this entry was to share this...other...blog...with...you.

Band-aid blog

particularly this bit:

"Yes, we have a black president, no the KKK aren’t marching around anymore, however the phenomenon of “White privilege” still exists. Why is it that phrases like Latino / Hispanic-American (btw the concept of being “Hispanic” “Latino” is a creation of the United States Government) and African-American are the norm while the term European-American is never used? The pre-hyphen term essentially sends a message that this person is different. The cultural default is still “white”. “Nude” colored stalkings are the pigment of white people’s skin. In essence, being white overlaps with what it means to be an American (at least as far as consumerism is concerned)."

So, if it's true that ignoring race is more racist than admitting to it, wouldn't the Clearly marked Tiana band-aids be LESS so because it admits to having race? Or more so because It's saying African Americans need there own type of band-aids?

Last asignment of my high school career.

1. Blog about what we've covered about race so far.
a. Explain the difference between a sociological definition of race and a biological one.
The main difference is that there is a sociological definition of race, and there is NOT a biological one. Biological race doesn't really exist. It is completely a sociological aspect. It's a way for people to group others by a set of visual factors, but, biologically, there isn't a definition because race is not biological.
b. What do you believe is the purpose of using the IAT test? Were you surprised by your results? Do you believe this test is measuring what it is trying to measure?
To be honest, I wasn't surprised, but I disagree with some of my results. The purpose was, to measure if you have an automatic preference to something to another. And while some of it is valid, I feel like it's flawed. I feel like I must say I don't actually know HOW they were measuring this. But, for instance, I got a slight preference to lighter skin than darker skin. I won't necessarily deny that, I just am more attracted to lighter skin tones. However, that doesn't mean I would like the people IN that skin any less or judge them any differently. At least, for me, there are A LOT more factors into aesthetic preferences than skin color. I would probably have an automatic preference for an attractive African American than an ugly European American. I only bring attraction into it because as humans, we like things more that we think are pretty, no one will deny that. So, I also then, think it's flawed to say I prefer European people to African people when, obviously, If I am more attracted to lighter skin tones, I would get that result, because of skin tone. It doesn't mean I have a preference to the PEOPLE though. I think it more measures your aesthetic attraction to someone of a skin color rather than a preference towards an entire group of people.
c. Did you believe that African Americans were biologically superior athletes? Do you still believe that they are? Why are why not?
I wouldn't necessarily say that I believed African Americans were biologically superior athletes, although I did believe that people from Africa, living there did have a biological advantage of height and lung capacity. And I still believe that to some degree as well as people from different areas of the world. That's not to say that ALL Africans are biologically superior, or that there is a vast difference in our make up.But there are differences in people from different areas in the world that have been there a long time. For instance, the indigenous people in Peru have "high lung capacity and development of the chest, hold 2 liters more blood than the average high content of red blood cells, which gives them great physical endurance". Or that the typical Russian has a larger liver. It's not that EVERYONE in an entire ethnic grouping is physically better than EVERYONE else in a different one, and, for the most part, we are all the same, no extra muscles, or thicker bones, but, I still believe that, a strong blood line in a place were people have lived for a very long time, can create people on average who have a slight advantage in some things than people elsewhere.

2.
I have always felt I have maintained a sense of fairly adequate cultural relativism. I've traveled to places like sub Saharan Africa, and Rural Peru and tried to understand that, just because *I* think something is weird, doesn't mean it is. Like eating guinea pig, and having soup for breakfast, like in Peru. It's really good, but it won't be, and you lock yourselves up to experiencing so many wonderful things. I think, more than me gaining a better sense of world wide cultural relativism, I think I gained a sense of national cultural awareness.I think, I more understand how culture and society effects us in this country, and how important society is to how we live our lives. It's like how I view sound design: it's subtle, and most people don't notice it, but it completely dictates how we view things. It's total manipulation of feelings, without being noticed. For instance, referring to the poverty stricken people in Appalachia, and how, part of the reason they don't get out of that area is because it's considered disrespectful to your roots to leave. As someone not part of that aspect to our society, you don't think about it. I also now realize how BIG society is, in terms of how many sub-society's there are and how many things they all effect and how it all ties in together. I think I would have liked to talk about food more, but besides that, I felt like the syllabus was an antiquate overview of sociological functions. 

For the Love of stawberries

This whole week, we have been discussing and watching a video about Class in America, which, as I believe it should, has made me start thinking about my own class in relationship to the rest of american society. And I realized: I don't know where I fit in. I think this is because, though all we've talked about is class, the video this week has failed to actually explain what class is. What makes someone in a different class? Is it money? Is it truly solely determined by what you say and how you act? Because of my own personal struggle with my place in a society where class is important, I've talked to several other people about how they define class, and what they think about it. The topic is so confusing, and difficult, I believe, because it's NOT a caste system. There is no definitive one thing that sticks you in a class. One of the people I talked to, was my mother. She is a priest and is very invested and interested in social class. When I told her about my own struggle with where I fit, she said, "Well, one of my friends once said, 'class is contacts.' It's who you know." Meaning,  If you are a peasant that saves the kings daughter, and befriend the royal family, It will seriously raise your class status, regardless of personal merit. I think that this is fairly accurate. You can be poor and loved and kind and know the right people and because of who you know be invited to the right parties and know the right people: or, you can be rich and hated and no one will return your phone calls. Personally, I think It's a combination of this, and comfort. Even if you know the right people, are fabulously wealthy, and well liked, but feel more comfortable living in a small house and going to block parties rather than a mansion in the hamptons, your not exactly in the class with those that are the opposite. You can't "fit in" with people you are uncomfortable and anxious being around. I believe class is more about who YOU FEEL you belong with, and having a way to get in to that group of people more than it is just having or working your way to financial success. And I think this is what confuses me.

Let me explain.

When I was young, I went to Pungo Virginia every week. This is it's one stoplight. For the entire town.

And every summer, The highlight was going strawberry picking and the Strawberry festival that accompanied strawberry season.

I listened to Country music, and have a distinct memory of feeding watermelon rinds to horses and square dancing. I had baggy clothes and short hair, and rode around on the kids vision of ATVs up and down the street. While watching the movie this week, I realized, I could still fit in to that rural, almost lower class life style of the rednecks and people living in rural areas down south. I still feel comfortable there, and still slip into a slight southern accent every now and then. I didn't live ever in a lower class style of life economically, but I was around it enough that I'm comfortable there.

Then I lived in Boston, where there were Projects (the government funded housing developments) that a lot of my classmates lived in. I lived in a 900 sq. foot apartment, and was a honest, city girl, and blended right in with the middle to upper middle class mixed with working class radical liberal city life.

And now I live in Barrington: the upper crust. One of the wealthiest cities in America. And I'm still in my comfort zone. I can "compete" socially with my significantly wealthier counterparts.

So, where do I fit? Perhaps, it is possible to transcend class based on your own personality. Perhaps it truly is more who you are than what you have. All you need is a way to get there.

We can't ALL be the middle class.

We can't ALL be middle class. That defeats the purpose of being *middle* class. Yet almost all americans when asked will say they are middle class, weather they are the upper crust of american society or below the poverty line. And truth be told, a true middle class is shrinking, almost out of existence.

The saying "the rich get rich and the poor get poorer" has never been more true. So why is it that everyone believes that they can transcend class lines? How is it that we believe that our place in society is given to us by our own efforts?

Because it is possible.

When, in class, we did an activity to give context to the breakdown of land and wealth in our country (via cookies) I was in the lowest of the lower class group: the ones with the least. yet, I stood firmly with both feet in my place, and actually ended up with 4 cookies to myself. Through grabbing at every opportunity possible, biding my time, and thinking, I got more than...a good portion of my other classmates. So, theoretically, the same principle can be extended to the real world: with patience, eagerness, and intelligence, you can rise the classes, or, with out these, fall down. This is not a caste system, where we are born into a place and are just...there, forever. It is possible to move up or down depending on your own merit.

But that's all. It's possible. But not likely.

Look at those people living in the mountains of Kentucky. The boy who played football had a chance to come out based solely on merit. But because of where he lived, and what he had, he couldn't. The people there are not there because they chose it, it is because that is where they were born, and where they stayed. While people in America are not socially obliged to stay in there classes like those in caste systems, they usually do because of the limited options available to them.

That is the problem with our sociological system, and most social hierarchies like ours. It in theory works, and therefore people says it works, but in actuality, it only rarely works. Those who are on the top believe they have gotten there from their own doing, when, usually, it's because they were born with privilege,  and those on the bottom have accepted their fate, like the untouchables in India, and believe that no matter how hard they try they can't get out of it, and so many don't try.

I think, like most things in this world, compromise is necessary. We have the right idea, but we are not there yet. The top need humbling, the bottom need hope, because the people in the middle, are probably one or the other.

Time Warp

Lets go back in time. Long ago, when I was but a young girl, staying home from school sick. I didn't get to watch T.V. unless I was sick, or movies, except for one on Sunday, or, again, if i was sick. But like all the other little girls, I loved Disney movies. I remember I would climb on the backs of the chairs in the living room and pretend to be rafiki from the Lion king. I never thought of the movies I watched as something that effected my views of myself: There was a girl on TV who was skinny and blond and that's great for her, because she ended up finding true love. That's what it was all about: Finding true love, even though you don't realize it.
Since then, I have realized a lot of parallels in the way Disney portrays it's heroes and heroines, and several of the blogs we read were about the potential connection between the "messages" in these disney movies and the way girls view themselves (and men) in today's society. They pointed out that many of the princesses were perceived as sexual idols and completely defenseless. That the messages these movies portray were that woman should just ride off with the first prince charming that fancies her, and that their salvation rested in there sexuality. They talked about how some of the themes were...let's say, not quite on point. "Advice from Disney Princesses: He's only lying about who he is because he thinks you're shallow and superficial. love him for it!" And this blog makes a point. There are some negative messages in some disney movies.

however. I think this is an extremely cynical way to look at these movies.
What about Mulan? Let's be honest, she was my favorite, and much more my role model than sleeping beauty.

And Mulan? Was anything but what society views a woman to be. She was strong, powerful, stood up to for what she believed in, and things she cared about (her family and it's honor). She Defied the law of the land to protect things she felt were important. Defiant, strong minded, passionate. And she looked beautiful while doing it. I think that's a pretty darned good role model. Not to mention how it portrays the male lead.

                                                                   This guy.

Yes, he is Big, strong, and manly. And he get's his butt saved by this chick.

Or what about Pocahontas?

Again, she defies what society tells her is appropriate (Marrying Kocomo), and ends up saving this guy, just by standing up and speaking out. She teaches the man (John Smith) all this really cool stuff about connection to nature, and not being so materialistic, and love, and changes his life. She is connected to all that's around her and respects all things. Again, I think that's a pretty good role model. Not to mention, is ACTUALLY a princess.

I don't know anyone who didn't like Mulan, or Pochahontas. And I personally thought that the girls in other disney movies were boring, and I didn't really like them that much.

The point of all this.

Media is blamed constantly for onslaughting young girls of what they should be and what they should look like.That advertisement agencies and movie stars should be blamed for all these young girls self image problems. And some of that is true. Being shown "perfect" people probably does have some impact on the way we view ourselves. But It's not there fault girls feel self contentious. Girls have had body image problems for long before the advertisement industry was even started. Remember corsets so tight they made people pass out? or the Chinese shoes that made feet smaller and led to lots of leg and feet problems. And young girls, at least from my perspective, I never looked at Disney stereotypes or billboard ads and thought "Wow, that must be how all girls should look. I should try and emulate that! I want to be just like her!" Girls like powerful woman: That's why they like Mom. I think people are blaming Disney and advertisements for things that would happen with or without there influence. Yes, they have some negative messaging.  But that self esteem issue comes from girls - being girls.

Secret Country Music Fan

It surprises many people at first when I tell them this, but I was born and raised in the south. Not the deep south, but deep enough that growing up, I listened to country music. Not everyone did, but enough so that it wasn't uncommon. Like everyone else in the US at the time, most of the people I talked to listened to Backstreet Boys or N'Sync, but most people had at least some understanding of country as well. And it is fair to say that the music someone listens to tells a lot about who they are. So, to start this blog off, I want to see how much you, the reader, knows about the country genre. 


Which one of these sets of lyrics is from a country song?


A. Looking back on the memory of
The dance we shared beneath the stars above
For a moment all the world was right
How could I have known you'd ever say goodbye
And now I'm glad I didn't know
The way it all would end the way it all would go
Our lives are better left to chance
I could have missed the pain
But I'd of had to miss the dance.


B. Grandpappy told my pappy, back in my day, son
A man had to answer for the wicked that he done
Take all the rope in Texas
Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys
Hang them high in the street
for all the people to see that
Justice is the one thing you should always find
You got to saddle up your boys
You got to draw a hard line
When the gun smoke settles we'll sing a victory tune
We'll all meet back at the local saloon
We'll raise up our glasses against evil forces
Singing whiskey for my men, beer for my horses!


Well, stereotypically, one would say B. Which is a fair assumption, because it is. However, so is A. A is a song called "The Dance" by Garth Brooks, and B is "Beer for my Horses" by Toby Keith, both very VERY well known names in country music. However, they are written completely differently, and have almost conflicting musical style.


The Dance, Garth Brooks


Beer for my Horses, Toby Keith


Growing up, I would listen to both these songs, so much that I can still sing every word to both of them. People stereotype people from the south, and their music, as all rednecks who like guns, beer, slavery, and fried chicken. (I do realize this is a bit exaggerated, but you know what I mean.) When people picture the south, they picture "REDNECK". And because of this assumption that people from the south are all rednecks, they assume people with southern accents are uneducated or unintelligent, because they never learned to speak "Proper English".And this assumption is true of many groups of people with specific accents. People stereotype and are prejudiced against accents. However, " a dream is like a river Ever changin' as it flows And a dreamer's just a vessel That must follow where it goes Trying to learn from what's behind you And never knowing what's in store Makes each day a constant battle Just to stay between the shores" (The river, Garth Brooks) Does not sound particularly inarticulate to me. 
Now look at the line "Seems like you lost sight of what's important with depositin' them checks into the bank account and you up out of poverty your values is in disarray, prioritizing horribly, unhappy with the riches cause your piss poor morally." Technically, this is not "Proper English". However, not only is the message relatively insightful and intelligent, but the form of english used here *IS* proper english for the demographic TI is appealing to, with it's own sets of grammatical rules. 


Basically, what I'm saying, is that groups of people are stereotyped based off of the way they speak. However, the way they speak is not indicative of anything in particular besides the way they were raised. A person with a southern accent is not necessarily unintelligent, and a person using habitual Be's are still using a form of english, just not an english we are used to. Speech is not telling of a persons intelligence. Not saying that everyone from the south or uses a Habitual Be is a genius, but they are no less of an intelligent person because of it.


And to prove it, here are some very UN intelligent people that talk all different sorts of ways.


Americans are NOT stupid!!

Debating Bottled Water

Debates have become a regular part of our society. We debate among friends over what we should do about a cute guy,we debate with our parents about curfew, and, well, we debate with anyone over politics. However, often times, we are so involved with our own perspective that we loose sight of the perspective of the other person.

We become so intent on convincing the other person that we are right, that we don't realize that we might not be, and that PERHAPS the other side does have a valid point.This leads to ego (and ethno) centrism.
However, without this debating process, the ones that keep an open mind learn a lot about other people within their own culture and people that come from different cultures and upbringings. We can learn a lot from someone who was simply brought up differently, and who has different values and morals. Not only can respectful debating help us learn more about each other and learn to respect our differences, but it could potentially change the way you see things. And this is that counteracts ego and etho centrism. Once we learn to understand and appreciate the different ways of looking at things, we can gain a better respect for different people and cultures. It can also make you think about things you believe that you may have never thought about before. A healthy debate can challenge your beliefs by making you explain them.


My best friend is extremely political.She reads the New York Times like crazy, and goes to rallies and is very strongly opinionated on everything political.So am I. And we do not always have the same opinions on things. And so naturally, we debate on a lot of things. For instance, she believes that bottled water is a crime against humanity, that we should not privatize an essential aspect to life, should be completely irradiated, and have us use tap water. I believe that bottled water is a great way to provide clean water to countries that do not have access, and are a great way for those that do to have an easy portable way to stay hydrated.But because we have debated over this, we both have a better understanding of why bottled water is both good and bad. She admitted that it is good sometimes, and I admitted that I, who do have access to clean water, should not drink it as much as I do. Debating can be very useful in understanding differences, and learning to accept different ways of thinking- if you keep an open mind.

Bad Cats and College Drinking

Cats are very cute.

But, as anyone with a cat knows, they can be wolfs in lambs clothing.

Unlike dogs, cats are virtually un-trainable, and have a reputation for being very egocentric and "stuck up". They like to be the authority on every matter, and, you as people, are just there willing slaves to feed them and pet them when they want it. I know this, because I have had cats my whole life.

However, my cat Bob sits when he is fed, comes when he is called, knows his name, and asks to go outside.
My friends that were here over their break got much entertainment from the fact that we had successfully trained a cat. Why is this so unusual? Why should this be a shocking realization? We know cats are relatively intelligent, so why is it so strange for one to be trained?

Because they have the reputation of being stubborn, and can not be trained. For cats, this attitude and reputation is there norm, and is accepted by society even though it is not necessarily true. This is a good representation of similar things that take place within the human species as well. We have these social norms that are what dictate what we do and how we should think, and then are rewarded or punished based off of the societies understanding of the action. For instance, the norm in Barrington Society is to graduate high school.. If you don't, the repercussion of that is the idea that you are unprepared for college, and can not get in. This is an actual social norm. There is a different type of norms however, and these are perceived norms. One example is that it is normal for a cat to be un-trainable- in actuality, people just assume that and therefore, don't try. Another is that college students drink- a lot. However, a study at SMU showed that students didn't drink nearly as much as their peers perseived.

see study here

Even though these "norms" dictate what we as a society perceive as normal, they can very easily be a misconception or simply not true. We judge people based on weather or not they follow these certain set of rules, when the rules are not actually rules, we just see them as such. So why do people care so much about following these rules? They supposedly make society function but doesn't that mean society functions of falsehood?

Pet Food

When I was in third grade, we had a paraplegic class pet named Chester. Over the weekend, we would all take turns taking Chester home with us and taking care of him. Here in the United States, we call Chester’s species Guinea Pigs, and keep them as pets. In Peru, They are called Qui, and are raised and eaten for dinner. This disjoint between our two cultures takes a certain kind of Cultural Relativism to rap your head around. Usually when I tell people that I’ve eaten Guinea Pigs, they give me a weird look and say “Ew. Did it taste like chicken?”

To this I inform them that No, it does not taste like chicken, it tastes like Qui.

People also find it strange when I inform them that there, they have soup for breakfast, lunch and dinner. In America, we have such a strong sense of Ethnocentrism that the idea of eating Rodents and Potato soup at 8am is weird, strange, and kind of gross. But is simply because we do not know what it is we are calling weird, strange and gross. It’s the same concept as “don’t nock it before you tried it.” Qui is actually very good- an unusual taste, but good. And when your up in the Andes mountains, a nice warm cup of soup is welcome at any time of the day, and fits very nicely with the rest of there food palate. But we have trouble seeing things from their perspective. To us it is weird because we don’t know it and don’t care to understand, which causes us to miss a lot of truly wonderful things in life.

This disjoint doesn’t stop at their food. Something very, to us, interesting, about the culture of the Peruvians living up in the rural mountainous areas is that they always welcome travelers, and are always very friendly to everyone. While we were there, our bus broke down, near a farm where a family was building a house out of mud bricks. Our guide spoke a few words with the family, and we ended up spending the good part of an hour learning how to make mud bricks and helped them build there house. This was their HOME, the place where they were going to live. But they still allowed us to help them build it, because we were curious and they were nice. That is something you would not see here.  We were told that in there culture, you took strangers in, and were kind to everyone, and helped each other out when in need. It was common place that if there was a traveler that needed food and a place to stay, you let them in, fed them what you had and gave them the best bed (these people are very poor, keep in mind), then in the morning, point them in the right direction, and wish them luck. Here, our values are too much on our own success and well-being, while there’s are on kindness and hospitality. We can learn a lot from other cultures, and many conflicts would be avoided if we just looked at things with a bit more cultural relativism. 

Imagine the Green is Red

There are always many different ways to look at things.

In fact, it is not just possible, but probable that people will see the same thing and think of it differently. 

Sociology is no different. There are various ways that someone could look at a sociological situation, or, if you will, perspectives. These different perspectives allow a person different insight into the sociological nature of a situation based on these different ways of perception. The three main ones are Functionalism, Conflict, and Symbolic Interaction. Functionalism can be broken down into three parts: Manifest function (Why does it exist?), Latent Function (Other functions by a social structure, though not it's main one), and Dysfunction (negative "side effects" of a structure.) It's main view point is that social structure exist to fulfill vital functions for society. 

Conflict theory states that everything is a result of conflict over scarce resources, and emphasizes the role of conflict and power, like recrutees competing for spots on a sports team. 

Interactionism is a perspective that believes social interactions are results of meanings we as a society places on aspects of our life; that social structures come about because of repeated interactions.

based off these three different view points on social interactions and social structures, we are able to look at the same situation various ways, allowing us a more holistic idea about how we as a society work.

Sociology: Governments Secret Weapon.

Sociology is a lot like oil. Why do I say this, you may ask? Because today in Environmental Science my teacher said something about oil that fits sociology perfectly.

"Oil is everywhere. It is in everything you do. If someone can tell me one thing they do in their life that has no connection to oil, I will give you an A for the class and tell you to leave. You are covered in oil, right now. The clothes on your back- they came from machines run by oil. Everything you do comes from oil."

Okay, so maybe the clothes part didn't fit exactly. But the rest of it did. 

"Sociology is everywhere. It is in everything you do. If someone can tell me one thing they do in their life that has no connection to Sociology, I will give you an A for the class and tell you to leave.  Everything you do comes from sociology."

And this, I believe, was the most important thing we learned this week. We did spend time talking about the history of early sociology, with Karl Marx, and class struggle, Emile Durkheim, and Population growth and other social forces, and Max Weber, who believed that social life is based on the accumulation of different interactions. Each with there own interpretation of how sociological forces impact us, But they all said essentially the same thing. "Individual choice is always determined to some extent by the persons environment."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA

And while all that IS important to understanding exactly what sociology is, I feel the most important aspect of this weeks lessons is WHY sociology is important to us. 

and the answer to that?

"Sociology is everywhere. It is in everything we do."

A Webcomic of Romance, Sarcasm, Science, and the Matrix

I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure. 
-Agent Smith, the Matrix

24601

Who Am I?

It’s a big question. There is an entire universe of who I am, and another universe of me that I don’t know yet.

My Bio on facebook says that I listen to Opera when I have migraines, that the sound of running water makes me relaxed, that I still like watching Saturday morning cartoons and that I drew a water monster with a fur hat on my bathroom wall.

But that’s not all of who I am.

My hero Is Joan of arc, because she was so powerful, changed the course of history at 15 and died for her beliefs.

You should never stop learning.

I like sound design because so much of the emotions TV and movies create are because of the soundtrack and no one really pays attention to that.

I have a dog named Rupert, because he reminds me of the British librarian in Buffy the Vampire slayer named Rupert Giles and has red fur like Rupert Grint, the man who plays Ron Weasly in Harry Potter. He has an under bite.

One time, in math class I didn’t want to pay attention, so I memorized pie to 36 digits for fun.

I like rap music and country music and obscure indie bands from Iceland.

My favorite two movies are V for Vendetta and Valentines Day. I like the former so much, I can recite all but one line of V’s alliteration speech.

I’m currently sitting backstage babysitting the parents running the Roslyn Road Variety show. And it makes me miss being a kid, because they all just seem so happy and full of energy and dancing and I’m really tired and doing homework. I love it.

I’m not religious, I’m spiritual, and I believe there is a very big distinction. I believe in the essential elements of the religion: peace, good will, equality, helping those who need it, finding inner peace.  But I do not believe that going to mass every Sunday and praying to Allah five times a day will guarantee these in your life. I believe that finding this is an inner journey that you can only reach by yourself, and while organized religion CAN help people find these, people too often abuse and replace it for being a good person and do not truly embrace the essentials of the religion.

There is so much to each and every one of us. I wish I could give you a quick and easy answer to who I am, but there is none, and I don’t think I should be. When I do, my life won’t be nearly as interesting.

Who am I?

Can I condemn this man to slavery

Pretend I do not feel his agony

This innocent who bears my face

Who goes to judgment in my place

Who am I?

Can I conceal myself for evermore?

Pretend I'm not the man I was before?

And must my name until I die

Be no more than an alibi?

Must I lie?

How can I ever face my fellow men?

How can I ever face myself again?

-Les Misarables

And I really like this guy.

http://www.xkcd.com/249/