Atlantic City

This is Sheryl.  Atlantic City has become one of my favorite places, emphasized by a recent weekend trip there.  A couple of weeks ago, ten of my friends and I went to AC for the weekend to celebrate the 21^st birthday of one of my best friends.  Her father completely hooked us up for the weekend with an awesome suite, multiple meals at various restaurants, admission into one of the clubs, and some chips to start off with in the casino.  This was not my first time there, but definitely one of the best times I’ve had.

Every time I go to Atlantic City, I get the same giddy excited feeling when we get to the part of the Atlantic City Expressway that you can see all the hotels and casinos, especially at night when everything is lit up.  It literally is a miniature Las Vegas.  Something in the atmosphere just seems to get a whole lot better when driving into AC.

This most recent trip, we stayed at the Trump Taj Mahal.  The previous times I had been to AC, I hadn’t spent much time gambling, we mostly spent our time partying.  In fact, before this trip, I had never played roulette.  My roommate, a roulette fanatic, was appalled at this and made it very clear to me that one of the first things she would do when we got there was teach me how to play.  Well, we went down to the casino where our friend the birthday girl’s father was playing craps.  He told us each to pick a number between 4 and 10, not 7.  I said 5, the other three girls we were with at the time said 8, 4 and 6.  As our numbers hit, he gave us the chips.  When we each had $75, he told us to go play.  My roommate and I sat down at the roulette table and she explained the rules to me.  Not really knowing what I was doing, I just started off by randomly putting down chips on various numbers, doubling up some numbers, just wherever I felt like, no method whatsoever.  6 or 7 rounds later, I was already up $700.  Needless to say, roulette quickly became my favorite game.  I ended up leaving AC that weekend with eight times as much money as I went down there with.

Of course, aside from the casinos, the nightlife in AC is awesome.  My favorite club down there is The Pool at Harrah’s, where we spent our Friday night.  For anyone who hasn’t been there, imagine this:  A giant indoor swimming pool, surrounded by plenty of walking and dancing space, VIP cabanas, and multiple bars.  If you go upstairs, you can go to the sun deck, an outdoor dance area with another bar and more cabanas.  I have yet to find any place in NYC that even comes close to this place.

The Pool at Harrah's

"End the War on Pot"

This is Sheryl. I found myself completely agreeing with Nicholas D. Kristof’s article “End the War on Pot.”  Kristof discusses the possible legalization of marijuana in California, where medical marijuana is already extremely accessible.  He outlines three main reasons legalizing marijuana would be beneficial based on what he describes as “catastrophic consequences” of the current drug policy.

First, he talks about how a significantly larger amount of money is going toward prisons instead of schools.  In Oakland, for example, the state spends roughly $8,000 per child in the public school system, whereas it spends $216,000 per year on each juvenile detainee.  Over 700,000 people per year are arrested for possession of small amounts of marijuana which costs a lot of money legally. 

Secondly, he discusses the impact the current drug policy has had on the Africacn-American population and the devastation occurring.  He says that because of drug laws, the average black man has a one in three change of serving time at some point in his life.  Kristof says that this makes a large impact on the African-American communities because drug convictions make it difficult to find jobs and have flourishing families.

The third issue Kristof discusses is the gang empowerment created by the illegality of marijuana.  Violent gangs and cartels, he says, benefit because of their distribution and the profits they are able to reap.  As long as a drug remains illegal, distributing it can earn someone a lot of money, something which cartels and gangs surely want to do.

I completely agree with Kristof that marijuana should be legalized.  It makes sense for hard drugs to be illegal, but marijuana is nowhere near as dangerous as any other drug.  There have been no deaths caused by marijuana, there is no danger of overdose.  Alcohol and cigarettes are both legal, despite their potentially deadly consequences.  If you drink too much, it can kill you.  If you smoke cigarettes, you can develop any number of tobacco-related diseases which can also be deadly.  Not to mention, nicotine is extremely addictive, and alcoholism is a very dangerous disease.  So why is it that these two dangerous, potentially deadly substances are legal, but marijuana, which no one has ever died from, is not?  It just doesn’t make sense.

I live in Massachusetts where marijuana was recently decriminalized.  This means that if someone is caught in possession of marijuana – unless it is an unusually large amount – worst case scenario, they receive a $100 ticket.  Ever since this was put in place, there has been a significant decrease in tension between the police and the teens, at least in the suburbs around where I’m from.  It used to be that the teens always dreaded running into police anywhere because chances are someone has pot on them.  That’s what happens when you live in a boring small suburb.  But now it’s so much more relaxed.  I noticed it the first time I went home to Massachusetts after the new law was put into effect.

I think that the government could definitely benefit from legalizing marijuana nationally, especially with the current economy.  If marijuana was legalized and taxed by the government, they would make a remarkable amount of money.  If the purchasing of marijuana didn’t have to be done under-the-table, the government could definitely benefit from it.

It’s time the government eased up, rolled a blunt, and enjoyed.  Legally.

Apartment Envy

Niya here: As a senior in college, it is becoming dangerously close to the time in life when I have to think beyond a dorm room and towards an actual apartment of my and my inevitable fourteen roommates own. This concept, one of the major milestones in officially becoming separated from ones childhood past has consumed my mind in these past months. I spend hours watching real estate shows on televison, and have become an addict for apartment listings in local newspapers.



My Fantasy: Photo Courtesy of Google



This past week, as a part my internship this semester, I was able to attend an event help in a gorgeous Upper East Side apartment. While a great deal of my evening was spent attending to “intern tasks”, I took every possible opportunity to gawk at my surroundings. Despite the horrible weather outdoors, once I past though the entranceway it all seemed to be a fantastical location. The floors, nicer than any fixture in my dorm building, almost made me feel guilty for dirtying them with my rain soaked pants and shoes. The walls and the painting almost served as an instrument to mock me, for things I will never be able to afford.



In my four minute search for the elevator, I stumbled upon a fountain. Yes, a water fountain. While I cannot image this has any purpose other than to help locate lost friends and family or perhaps a search and rescue team because it is that possible to be that lost in this building.  After trying four of so incorrect elevators, I leaned the system that each elevator corresponds to certain floor numbers, and only three apartments per floor. The ten or so minutes spent searching for the correct elevator was completely worth the shock and awe I received as I made my way into the apartment.



My Reality: Photos Courtesy of Google



            The real estate envy only furthered as I walked on the hardwood floors through the two bedrooms, den, living room  (complete with baby grand piano), and kitchen. In fact, thinking back, I refuse to believe this was an apartment. What this place was, was simply a source of jealous and envy for all those individuals who know that even if such a palace does exist in their future, it not foreseeable in any near future.  I must admit, the greater part of my evening “working” was spent sneaking glances at the full wall built in library, trying to figure out what gods I would need to please in order to have such great fortune. I will now spend the next few months erasing this apartment out of my memory. Unless someone in that building is looking for a poor recent college grad roommate, I imagine my next home will not look too much different than my current dorm.



Nature vs Nurture

This is Niya.In the third chapter of Daniel Bergner’s The Other Side of Desire: Four Journeys into the Far Realms of Lust and Longing, we are introduced to a man named Roy. Roy along with his penchant for flying kites has a deep sexual longing for young girls. Very early in his description Bergner parallels Roy’s story to that of the infamous Lolita. The 1955 novel details the story of a middle aged man, Humbert Humbert, who becomes sexually involved with a 12-year-old girl named Dolores Haze. The analogy for Roy however, deals with his first sexual childhood experience. As Humbert Humbert had Annabelle, Roy had is mother’s sister, a young girl only two years his senior.

The thrill Roy experienced from this first sexual experience is what he hoped to find in all of his subsequent lusting after young girls The "trembling childhood thrill" which he experienced with his aunt, would remain the goal in all other sexual activities (Bergner, 102). In later years, this search would place Roy lurking through the computer for sexual attention from him wife’s twelve year old daughter, Faith, and her best friend. 

Roy’s actions are what most would consider predatory. He took advantage of his relationship as a trusted adult to these two girls combined with their own new found awareness of the social relationships between males and females. He followed their internet chat logs, and when possible began chatting with him on his own.While reading his story, however, I could not help but wonder how much of the blame for current predicament lie with his sexual encounter with his aunt. Having been sexually engaged as a child, Roy’s deepest sexual passion surrounded young people. How different would it be is his first sexual and romantic love been with girl read hair, and  subsequently leading him to fantasize and lust after red heads? Fantasies such as this arise everyday for men and women. Roy just had the unfortunate luck of feeling a passionate connection, with someone who may not have understood the entirety of the situation.

 
          It seems Roy’s story is just a mix of awful fate and inappropriate conduct. But to make him out as a callous sexual offender seems much too strong of a description. Maybe it is the time he has spent in group counseling, or Bergner’s writing portrays a much more repentant man than exists. But reading his story, there is a great part of me that would like to believe the subsequent to Roy’s interaction with his aunt, there was not much of a chance for him. His sexual desires as tested placed Roy “within the realm of ordinary male desire”, causing me to eternally ponder where it was nature or nurture that granted him such an unfortunate life (Bergner,115).

Freud, the feminist?

           Sigmund Freud wrote some of the most controversial work in the psychological society. Scholars have been and are actively taking apart his work finding corrections and new beliefs. One usually believes in Freud’s views or does not; there is no middle ground. Suzanne Brom takes a closer look of his view of women. In Freud, the Feminist? she takes us through different circumstances between him and his patients and shows how Freud may be considered one of the earliest feminist. When first starting to read this article I thought Brom was trying to criticize Freud and his treatment of women. Shortly into it I realized it was doing the opposite, this made the article even more interesting to read.

            Although some of his accusations were rather sexist, the way he treated women canceled the negative comments out. Brom made me remember that during that time women were very repressed and secluded and most doctors would not even treat hysterical women. The whole society viewed women as the only ones who could be hysterical and “tools for men, creating their children, maintaining their homes, and providing sexual release.” I would be hysterical too. I think that the women who sought out treatment with Freud knew this was not the way they were supposed to live and were more modern women, who were ahead of their time. They were ambitious, intelligent, outspoken, and even homosexual.

            In looking at Freud and his patients we see a man who did not want to change the patient, but study how they became this way. The women would get better just from talking about their troubles, because they had no one else to listen to them. Freud was one of the only men to willingly treat hysterical women and even claimed that they were gifted. He treated them as equals.

            This article was not only useful for learning about Freud but also about women’s history. It is amazing in how many years such progress has been made. These women were totally repressed by their society and if they tried to challenge it they were diagnosed as hysterical. I think if we lived by those same terms today most of the women in our country would be diagnosed hysterical.

Ashley Burger

Re-Orienting Desire

          This is Niya. While reading Joseph Massad’s Re-Orienting Desire: The Gay International and the Arab World I was fascinated by his argument. The difficulty of the gay rights in Arab nations is, as he presents, not as simple as Western media assumes. He argues through many examples how the gay rights movement in Arab nations is quite different from the struggles throughout the United States.

Many problems lie within the advocacy of Gay International, a term used by Massad to collectively describe the organizations that seek, often through misguided attempts, to advance the human rights of the gay and lesbian community. These organizations, he argues are abundant with European and Western white men hoping to erase the oppression of gay men in these countries. Their lack of proper research and historical and social understanding of these countries often works counterintuitive to their mission. The first of the issues Massad highlights is the understanding, or rather misunderstanding of language in Muslim countries. Many of these organizations commonly use the term homosexual and homosexuality to describe same sex sex-acts in these countries. However, these words do not have the same definition for the men and women in Arab nations. For them, the act of formalized homosexuality is quite unnerving. Even historians, it seems, have taken a small portion of time and used it to blanket discusses decades of social history. This body of literature, so deeply founded in historians without a proper background inevitably leads to years of misunderstanding. The issue of sexual desire is essentially a statement about ones allegiance to the families, their religion, and in some cases their personal level of nationalism.

Gay International, Massad argues, works to “produce homosexuals […] where they do not exist, and repress same sex desires and practices that refuse to be assimilated into its sexual epistemology” (363). Their work is not liberating, so much as it confronting these men with a Western dichotomy and forcing them to alter their self-ideas into this system. Massad however does not simply push his personal agenda throughout his article. He cites author Rex Wockner who looked into the similar issue. Wockner questioned whether this Western sexual model was helping to spotlight gay men desperately in need of salvation or simply underscoring the reality that humans are “by nature bisexual”.

Throughout Massad’s argument, I found that the organizations considered Gay International imagined themselves to be saviors of a highly oppressed people. This narrow-minded approach was in fact forcing men and women to confront multiple Western assumptions, and then their own nation’s prejudice. These complications seem so basic it is astounding that they have lasted for so long. These advocates disassociate themselves from the land and the people, yet still consider their work effective. The multiple cases, which highlight mistranslations and errors in understanding, show that very few people have a complete truthful understanding of homosexual life in Muslim nations. Without this working knowledge, it is impossible to imagine these organizations truly enact social and political change. This application of the Western sexual model to other areas, is failing the mission.

The Gay Arab World

By Melissa

Gay International, their mission, to advance the rights of those belonging to different sexual orientations around the world. Missionaries from this organization produced literature on the Muslim world detailing the history of "homosexuals" in the Arab world and journalistic accounts of gays and lesbians in the contemporary Arab and Muslim worlds. Th discourse in the beginning of the article suggests that homosexuals, gays, and lesbians are universal categories that exist all over the world.

Arab men who engage in homosexual activities ruse the Western identification of gayness. Now the question exists, are these straight men really gay and overdue for liberation or are human beings bisexual by nature and Arab and Muslim men are better tuned into reality than Westerners? Personally, I believe we are all bisexual by nature and Arab and Muslim men are actually right on track with natural design.

Christians have portrayed Muslims as immoral and sexually deviant for centuries. In the Muslim world there is no exact word for homosexual, the concept doesn't exist, neither the concept of heterosexuality. Although Western colonization has affected the Arab world n many ways, the heterosexual regime on the Arab world has only effected the upper class and parts of the middle class. Th poor still hold their original beliefs on unnamed sexuality.

In the Arab world, engaging in homosexual activities doesn't make one gay. One is considered gay only when the relationship isn't only sexual, when love and a relationship actually begins to form. In order for gay activists to help homosexual individuals in the Arab and Muslim world, the people there must first label themselves as homosexuals. This system makes sense but I don't think its fair that people need to label their sexuality in order to have their basic human rights preserved.

The Gay International is supported by two phenomena affecting the international public sphere,the AIDS epidemic and the western homophobic identification of the "gay disease". The Muslim world was seen as a homosexuals paradise and so many gay europeans have converted to Islam. There is a huge marked for Muslims to sodomize westerners. It is seen as a kind of psychological relief for former " subject races" to now have a chance to take it out on their oppressors.

There was an instance sighted in this article of muslim men being "medically examined" for signs of sins against their religion and practicing debauchery. The issue of homosexual sex was considered a national security issue. I believe the government wanted to use these men as an example, that the Arab government would not stand for having homosexuals within their society. The press ate up this story and instantly activist from around the globe came to their aid demanding that they be released from their sentences.

Who is to say that a person's sexual desires turn them into societal deviants. The government has no right to make that assumption about people. I don't see how it was at all legal to imprison people for acting on their natural urges if they were consensual. I'm happy that some American politicians got involved in this international injustice.

An Invasion of Space

This is Charisse.

My roommate and I went to one of our favorite restaurants this weekend. It’s a quaint and cozy Thai restaurant that we frequent. We usually sit in the exact same seat and if we go in the daytime the light is slightly dimmer than some other places and there is a peaceful ambiance. The food is delicious and the waiters will let you sit there for hour, mostly because there are rarely any other customers. If we go in the evening, there is light music, the lights are turned down really low and there is a candle placed on our table. The food is still delicious and you can sit comfortably for a while.

This weekend, however, was different. When we arrived at the restaurant it was crowded. There were only two tables available and neither was our usual table. I hit two people’s arms and the waiter had to ask a woman to scoot her chair up some for me to get to my table. The music was louder than usual and though the low lights and candles made for an intimate setting, the close proximity to others ruined any chance at privacy. I looked around and everyone was talking and eating and it was harder to focus on my roommate. She must have felt the same way because ever so often her eyes wondered and the conversation would halt.

There was no room for my purse so I was basically holding it and we waited impatiently for the waiter to take our order because the menus were taking up the bulk of the table space. Our food came and it was good as usual. The waiters did not, even with a crowded room, rush us. Everything was essentially the same, but it was drastically different. The space had not changed but things had been added to it to make it something other than the quaint relaxing restaurant I had come to enjoy.

When we left, I felt anxious and slightly claustrophobic. I wanted air and space. It is  interesting to note that places can hold sentimental value for you and they can represent safe havens and peaceful times, but with a few changes or added people, your place of refuge can become unbearable.

Could Freud Be a Feminist?

By Melissa

Suzanne Brown takes a closer look at Freud's view on women in her article, Freud, the Feminist?.  Many people have labeled Freud sexist, since most of his theories only pertain to the male half of our species. I believed that Freud didn't include include women because he was misogynistic. After reading this article, I believe I might have been slightly off about him.

The feminist critique of Freud centered on his almost glorification of the phallus and the neglect of female sexuality in his theory. Freud said, "While men's genital wee the objects of pride and power, women's were cloaked in secrecy and shame." Even though these critiques were posed against him, he still agreed not only to see female patients but females suffering from hysteria. These women were considered to poses a very low social status. 

Freud believe that these women suffering from hysteria had unfulfilled possibilities and suffered this mental illness as a consequence. Hysteria was seen a a " feminine neurosis", but Freud acknowledged that men could be affected as well. Freud not only treated these women but also labeled some of them gifted. This in itself proves that he was an advocate for women. 

He appreciated women who did not fit into social norms. These individuals processing a type of freedom from societies imposed standards which he almost admired them for. He respected some of the women he treated, the same as if they were a man. He took his female patients seriously and didn't strip them of their humanity because of their neurosis. Unlike many other therapists of his time, Freud did not use his therapeutic skills to manipulate his female patients into filling the oppressive standards that society paces out for them. Instead of trying to change them, he spent his time trying to discover how they came to be the way they were.

He was one of the first therapists to formulate an explanation of women's sexuality. By doing so, he took a step in becoming the voice on behalf of women's sexuality which was so repressed by his culture. Freud made the argument that sex was a natural thing, which helped to free women's sexuality. I believe he was right in these notions. Underneath it all, I think Freud was a bit of a feminist but didn't openly broadcast it because he didn't want his contributions to the psychiatric field to be discredited.

The Other Side of Desire

This is Charisse.

I prefer tall men. I don’t mean men that are simply taller than me. I mean men that are considered to be tall by everyone. The first boy that I dated, (fake dated because it was 8^th grade), was 6’4 and the tallest person I have ever dated is 7 feet tall. My friends tease me occasionally, but I have never been made to feel ashamed of my obsession with height. Reading “The Other Side of Desire” made me think about the things that people find attractive and how some of these things come to be accepted as normal while some are not.

            The last section of the book, Devotee, was interesting because it not only explored the disdain that people held for devotees, but it also looked at how those who are disabled feel about devotees and the people that see them as “freaks.” I cannot imagine life without my legs or arms, but I also cannot imagine life without love. Why is it that being an amputee means that people are not allowed to find you attractive? As Laura asks, “Was a preference for a single arm really all that different from a preference for a certain color hair, a certain tone of skin or shape of face or type of body?” (190). The only difference that I can see is that society has deemed amputees as beings that are abnormal and uncomfortable to look at. 

            Blond girls, tall girls, and brown-eyed girls, are not uncomfortable to look at so no one cares if you have a preference for one over the other. This last chapter shows that even family member and friends of disabled persons feel that to be attracted to this group of people is abhorrent. What does that say about how they feel about their loved one? Disabled persons experience enough pain and suffering; why should they have to experience it alone? Bergner uses the personal experiences of his interviewees to show that just because one’s desire is different from main stream society does not mean that the desire is wrong.

Babette's Feast

This is Charisse.

The film, Babette’s Feast, explored one of the greatest pleasures of life, food. I grew up in a house with a professional chef and good food is something that is essential to my life. When I saw the meals that Babette was forced to prepare at the beginning of the movie I was immediately disgusted, but when I found out that Babette was a chef herself, I was sad. In class we discussed the pleasures denied to the people who lived in the Denmark village, but my main concern was for Babette. Cooking is an art and to be denied the opportunity to practice the skill that Babette had was one thing, but to be asked to stifle that kind of talent in order to prepare the horrible meals that Babette had to make is a tragedy.

Cooking is a pleasure that I only get to experience occasionally when I feel like braving the Guild kitchen and even then it’s not the same as when I cook at home. This denial of pleasure brought me back to Freud’s theory of repression. Too much pleasure can certainly be a bad thing, but being cut off from pleasure in the extreme way that Babette was is just as bad if not worse. As witnessed in some of Freud’s patients, repression can lead to psychosis and other ailments. It must have been very stressful for Babette to suppress her culinary skills to prepare the same meals every day.

The fact that the villagers were denied good food and drinks all their lives is horrible, but what is worse is that Babette knew of all these pleasures and was simply unable to experience them in her new home.

"Freud, the Feminist?"

After reading Suzanne Brom’s Freud, the Feminist I got a new sense of Freud. It was interesting to read about him from this angle. This article focused on Freud and did an analysis on him and his treatments of women.

Scientists are subjective. The culture of scientists affects the way they do science. I think this is true not just for scientists, but for everyone. This is supported by Christopher Lasch in his book, The Culture of Narcissism, “the individual’s analysis tells us something about the inner workings of society itself, and personality is the reproduction of society in the individual.” No one can escape the affects of the culture they live in. the cultural biases and rules people are taught come from society and produce a person who fits and comes to understand that society’s inner workings.

This is very true for Sigmund Freud as well. He studied and worked in a time when women were very oppressed economically, politically, and sexually. “it was not appropriate to express sexual desire, even within the context of marriage… women’s genitalia were cloaked in secrecy and shame.” (Brom) They were also oppressed in their own homes.

Freud too would be expected to look at women the same way the rest of society does because it is the time they were living in with the paradigms they share. However after reading Suzanne Brom’s article, Freud treated women much differently. Instead of limiting and manipulating his female patients to change their ways to fit society, rather he accepted them and wanted to understand how they came to be. “His aim in the analysis, rather than converting her sexual preference, was to discover how the girl came to choose her love object… if a woman was comfortable with her choice of sexual object, her human possibilities were not limited.” This way of thinking was radical in that time period. It was radical, however it was liberating to the oppressed women. This article by Suzanne Brom gave a clear analysis on Freud’s treatment and relationship to women.

http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/eascfa/feminist_art_base/gallery/lynn_hershman_leeson.php?i=368