Gender

The Story Girl is a short story written by Jamaica Kincaid in 1978. It is an unorthodox text that gives an overview of the relationship between the girl and her mother also shows a list of rules that the mother gives to her daughter to obey to be accepted in society. Jamaica Kincaid shows us too many things in that very short story. When I read this story for the first time I read it as a counter reader, having a little knowledge about her culture. I did not know anything about that rules list. I did know that at some point it has a link to women and how women must portray themselves to the outside world.

The mother and her daughter are two different characters. We can see that the mother is the main speaker in the story. She always giving her daughter the strongest advices about how to run a house and live respectably. Most of the mother advices are particularly focused on sex, because she fears her daughter will shame her by becoming a loose woman. While the daughter is very silent, listen to her mother’s talk. She speak a little, only to defend herself against her mother allegations that she will someday become a “slut.”

When I read this story I tentatively construed it as an outline of how women are seen in society and how it is easy for some people to portray them as a slut. I can see that from my own culture the Arabic culture. Where people judge women based on what they wear, the way they talk, and who are saw with, they consider it like a slut. Through the story I can easily see that the mother is controlling her daughter’s life by telling her what she can do and what not to do, what kind of food to cook, what to do in the house, and how to act outside the house.

She gives her a lot of positive and negative information. Sometimes parents can be arrogant on their children. We can see that clearly in the story, which makes us see that she is present a little perspective of her thoughts as a girl. Moreover, the mother don’t ask the girl what she thinks about. The mother does not seem to think about the social aspect of her daughter’s life concerning her interactions with other children. In this regard, the mother is grievance her daughter.

Society forces stereotypes on children. This is apparent in Kincaid’s Girl. The ideas and direction that the mother gives to her daughter are discriminatory of women in society. For example, the mother says that a daughter should not play marble like a boy and that the girl should do housework. These statements show that the mother believes that there are some things that females should not do. Also, toward the end, she is even told: “don’t squat down to play marbles—you are not a boy, you know” (Kincaid 325).

This shows that until now in some cultures traditional gender roles is still exist. These stereotypes establish the gender gap. The mother agreed with the thought that women should be only limited to home and the man can do whatever he wants without getting restriction. That gives the reader an idea of how stereotypes can lead to a gap between the two genders and how its dangers being overbearing on the children.

I relate to the story at some point from the Middle East culture. Women’s rights in the Middle East have always been an issue. The rights of women have changed over the years, they have never really been equal to the rights of a man. I never went through that but I can see and feel for other women. It bothers me when people still have that think that boys have the right more than girls. A long time ago the only function of women in the Middle East is being home to take care of children, clean, and cook. However the situation has improved nowadays, because of some of the women in the Middle- East who stand up and still standing up, to try to fight for their rights. Also gender autonomy is common for some countries in our society now, there is not that risk of being judged by counterparts as a result of desiring freedom.

But most of the women in the Middle-East, especially those who live in conservative countries, still accept their status and the role that they play in society, not because they want to, it’s because they don’t have someone who protect and stand next to them if they raise their voice and speak. That’s when our role as a women come to help them.

I think this was interesting for me to read about because of its portrayal of how culture can bind people to certain beliefs. By publishing the story “Girl” Jamaica Kincaid show the experience and felling of being a young “girl” in a different culture society and that attracted me to write my response about it because it speaks about the woman being oppressed. Teaching young girls that’s okay to bow down to patriarchy by scheming her into following these rules of hypocrisy is pure insanity.

This is why we need to teach girls to love themselves and not fall victim to the oppression. On my own, I saw that we have to speak and express ourselves and help at least by expressing our voice and must impose our strength, so we can help the women who still suffer injustice and discrimination.

In the poems Women by Louise Bogan and The One Girl At the Boy’s Party by Sharon Olds, they both describe their own critique of females, envisioning a common character that is constituent of women. Bogan’s perception of women entails a stereotype from the perspective of a man, who generalizes the whole gender as “they”, pointing out their faults through limited capabilities. “They wait, when they should turn to journeys / they stiffen, when they should bend. / They use against themselves that benevolence / to which no man is friend.” (Bogan 10 -14). The aggressive tone is used to describe how the habits of women is self deprecating, in that they are often incapable when put into a situation, that their benevolence is used against themselves and builds upon naivety. In Olds’ poem however, the narrator describes the maturity of her daughter, in that her qualities as a person and as a woman are recognized and acknowledged. “They tower and / bristle, she stands there smooth and sleek / her math scores unfolding in the air around her.” (Olds 2-4). The girl, a proficient math student, works math problems in her head as the males surround her, observing the nature of her femininity. The tone used throughout the poem contrasts heavily with that of Woman is cast as a diatribe which seems to attack and demean females, whereas Olds admires the positive aspects of a woman’s character.

Both poems examine the features of women, comparing similarities to that of their own expectation of other grown women. “…and they will / see her sweet face, solemn and / sealed, a factor of one, and she will / see their eyes, two each / their legs, and the curves of their sexes/ one each, and in her head she’ll be doing her / wild multiplying, as the drops / sparkle and fall to the power of a thousand from her body.” (Olds 15-22). The girl is adorned for her qualities as a maturing woman, who is recognized for the appeal of her face, legs and curves, and in return, recognizes the virility of the males around her. This associates her expressive maturation of the girl by the sophistication of mind and sexuality, thus exhibiting her progression as an adult. In comparison, Olds also describes his paradigm for female mannerisms, that (they are) “…content in the tight hot cells of their hearts.” (Bogan 3).

The narrator explains that women are comfortable living within the reclusion of their own emotions, devoid of any desire to explore the environment outside the bounds of their satisfaction. Thus, since both poems entail the parallelism akin to all women, it follows that they similarly circumnavigate the common habits shared among them as well. Old’s description of her daughter utilizes an empowering tone to champion her transition through adolescence, showcasing the significance of a woman’s coming of age. “When they climb out, / her ponytail will hang its pencil lead / down her back…” (Olds 10-13). She surfaces the physical attributes of the girl, focusing attention to the sprouting of her sexuality. The daughter’s development emphasizes her This contrasts heavily with Bogan’s denigration of women, stating that “Women have no wilderness in them” (Bogan 1), and “They cannot think of so many crops to a field” (Bogan 12). He attacks the feminist gender paradigm, explaining that they neither wild nor practical enough,that they are completely domesticated, thus formally asserting their incompetence. Its as if theses emotions prisons their capabilities, lessening their value as people.

Old’s promotes the feminine qualities that are surfaced through the maturation of her daughter, while Bogan belittles those feminine qualities entirely. Both poems are similarly concerned with the progression or retrogression of women, yet protest differing perspectives. As the author’s daughter is growing, her physical attributes appear more prominent, revealing the importance of femininity, whereas Bogan derogates their significance altogether, generalizing their ineptitude as people. The poems ultimately together create a paradox of opposing antithetical positions which materialize the substance and character of women through their own frame of reference.

A concept that has existed since ancient times, but in quite modern times it is causing more and more protests and cries for help. Many men feel targeted and fear judgment. But why, who is behind this sick idea of toxic masculinity? Are women or society (including men) as a whole? First of all, what is toxic masculinity? Toxic masculinity is the concept and belief of many (men and women) that the male gender should be more courageous, macho, daring. If a man refuses to do something, he is often ridiculed or called a coward. Although women also face this, but men are victims of it more.

Many believe that being more masculine is the nature of all men and this is confirmed by ancient evidence. According to many religions and in general, since the beginning of time, men have been told to do the “dirty” work while women should do the housework… This concept annoys many, both men and women (as does the concept of toxic masculinity). Over the past decade, there have been more and more gender equality protests. While the fact that men are forced to do the “heavier” work irritates many males, this particular issue can raise questions about toxic masculinity.

What the reason for such gender roles, are they beliefs? A morality that has been spreading in society for a long time? Or is it simple because of the physical features of the male body compared to the female? Biology shows that men have more muscle mass than women. Studies have shown that since the beginning of time, this has been the case. This does not mean, however, that men should not help a female in the household and vice versa for females. Many religions preach to treat your family, spouse, children as well as (or better) you would want to be treated. (citation) How has toxic masculinity impacted men mentally? Mentally, men seem to suffer more. How does toxic masculinity play into this? Although men are often the cause of bad mental health in others (abusiveness, both physical and mental, etc..), men are also often expected to be able to get through more things.

A prime example of this is that whilst 72% of women suffering from depression seek immediate therapy, only 60% of depressed men seek therapy. Although there could be cases in which access to therapy is limited, in many other cases men may believe that they’re “too soft” or should be able to get through things by themselves. This belief is molded firmly into men by two main things, upbringings and society. Young adult males may have a rough childhood and have to assume the role of the “man of the family” at a young age. It is at this age that young adults (of both genders) need their parents of equal gender most.

The society also teaches men that they should have different feelings or should have a tougher outlook on men, and there isn’t a single person, nor group that is really behind this. Society has been like this for as long as can be remembered through history, especially after The Industrial Revolution, gender roles have been more prominent in society. This is wrong as all humans have equal feelings, no matter the gender, race, or beliefs. Humans should be treated based on their actions. (citation) A common belief is that although men do suffer, they should be held accountable for the suffering they have caused in their own families as well. Society is not a person, nor a certain gender, nor a group of a certain people. Rather, society is more generally a social network of beliefs and ideas popularized through the people, through everyone. Yes, men do cause ruin in their families.

Yes, men do ruin relationships more harshly than women. And although men have their flaws, they also have their own difficulties. Not all men are flawed this bad, neither is any human. These flaws are caused through a rough upbringing, addictions, or other things. Among these other things, toxic masculinity is one. Sometimes, this idea that men have to be tougher may even lead to an internal belief that they should be more powerful, or dominant. This is also a flawed idea passed down through society originated through toxic masculinity. (citation)

In conclusion, neither men nor women are accountable for toxic masculinity, nor the 350% increase in suicide in men over the last three years. This foreign, ancient idea has been passed on through generations upon generations. There is no obvious one person(s) who are responsible for this rather, a people. And several groups of them at that. Many people (INCLUDING MEN) have believed in this idea and supported it, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. The impact of this as well as many others on men, though, is undeniable.

My position on the death penalty is that it is completely unfair and an unjust system. Throughout the whole novel we learn how the death penalty was strictly enforced more in the south than in any other part of the nation. The worst part of this was that it was most rigorously used against people who killed “white” people. The death penalty was a system that was racial and also socioeconomic biased, making it totally unfair and one-sided.

In a state that had the highest misery stats in the nation, it was pretty expensive to afford a well-prepared lawyer. By not having a well-prepared lawyer you had to rely on public defenders which usually had many clients to defend that made it impossible to interview inmates before trials, much less do time-consuming investigations that capital cases required; thus the reason why ninety-nine percent of death-row inmates were poor. The government had basically created two types of separate, unjust legal systems: one for the rich, in which everything was put into consideration, every opinion was heard, and where you could buy your freedom; and one for the rich, in which hasty guilty pleas and brief hearings are the rule and appeals are the exceptions.

Read this

Racism was a very big part of this penal system. As both Prejean and Farmer pointed out in the novel, the death penalty biased people who committed murders against white people and that in the south nine times out of ten when the death penalty is sought it’s because the victim is “white”. Around seventy-five percent of death-row inmates were there for killing “whites”. Even the Supreme Court acknowledged, in McCleskey vs. Kemp (1987), that there exists racial bias in capital sentencing and that killers of “whites” are more likely to receive the death penalty than killers of “blacks”. These are the type of things that made this system prejudice towards “blacks”, not only that but it also demoralized their life.

Throughout the novel Prejean strives to do the opposite of what society is doing to these men, which is humanize them. The humanization of both Willie and Sonnier actually made my stance against the death penalty a lot stronger. It just shows that not everyone is perfect and no matter how big or small everyone will have flaws. I do agree with punishment but it doesn’t give the government the right to choose whether you live or die.

Mar’s theories had mostly to do with capitalism. The dominated because they used their power to exploit workers and so on. Exploitation is the difference between what Is produced and what Is paid for. Exploitation Is limitless. Race was exploited for a profit. Wilson thought that Mar’s theory explained the racial-caste system. Production, aristocracy dominated both economic and political Life_ Capitalist class benefit more. In the sass’s there was a shift from paternal racial-caste system to a more class- based labor market. Jim Crow law helped keep blacks out of the privileged few.

In the North they had a bunch of race riots. Race relations are mainly about split labor market theory. This theory talks about how everyone needs to compete against one another regardless of race. Exploitation was high because of putting blacks against whites. Split labor theory has three classes: capital business class, high-paid labor, and cheaper labor. Split market happens when different groups are paid differently. Structural arrangements determine social relations. The economy Isn’t the only thing that structures social relationships. Wilson states that state is always changing. World War II had a ban on discrimination.

No matter why changes happened, the Tate took successive steps to address black inequality. Wilson shows two things after World War II, push-pull forces; one Is more political and economic opportunities for blacks. The other one is, sass’s on, the decreases in manufacturing and Increases In government and corporate Jobs. Plus the push from urban to suburban settings. This created different opportunities for different groups of blacks, Race is a factor but class is a distinctions. Before the Civil war racial tensions revolved around economy. Wilson thought things should move from race to more about class.

Chaffed was more concerned with gender inequality. She thought about things in four different levels: macro, mess, micro, and individual. Macro is for analysis of Institutions and structures. The mess level Is for organization. The Micro part Is about face to face interactions. Lastly, the individual level about the individual concept. Chaffed looks at Mar’s theory of feminist. Patriarchy and capitalism help the oppression of women. Mar’s emphasis the economy as the most important site for social stability and change that Chaffed uses. Patriarchy provides men with control of production and the profit while women who are cheap to fear labor.

Women do not et paid for their tasks In society as much. Man’s ability to fully work Is dependent 1 OFF upon ten women’s explanation. C TX tanks Tanat gender Unequally structural need of capitalism. Men use their power to keep women down they use their structural power. Workforce, macro, plays a huge part in mess and micro areas. The mess-level of gender. Canter has three factors that influence work and gender; possibility of advancement, power to achieve goals, and relative number of a specific type of person within the position. Canter thinks women have different career paths and most don’t lead as high.

Women’s path constrict two ways: minimized occupations are limited and women on professional career paths high glass ceilings. Canter states that social contexts influence individuals and their attitudes and behaviors. Our social environment influences who we are and how we act. Staying and feeling powerless and limited creates negative stereotypes of gender and work, these enforce gender inequalities. When exploitation goes up, women’s presence in the Job market goes down. Micro is the personal levels of coercive structures are next. Chaffed uses exchange theory to explain micro level.

Exchange theory makes lines between economic and social exchange. Economics are governed by explicit agreements. Economic exchange is always known when and how something is done or will be done. Social exchange is implicit and not explicit. Gender inequalities are latent, they are hidden. People want to keep the same actions to keep society going, even if there are inequalities. Voluntarism keeps gender inequality going. There are three types of gender definitions; gender ideology, norms, and stereotypes. Intrinsically structures are parts of the inner person that are fixed and divided off from one another.

Boys and girls are socialized differently. Everything is voluntary. Social learning theory is about modeling. It has four stages: attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation. Things are more about structural then cultural changes, if gender inequality is to happen. Chaffed divides her theory into unintentional and intentional processes. Four different ways of unintentional changes: population growth or decline, changes in sex ratio, and technological innovations and changes in the economic structure. For intentional change if focused on macro-structural, industrialization, arbitration, and the size of the middle class.

For example, In today’s society we can clearly see that there are many objects geared towards men that are not geared towards women and vice versa. Earrings is an example of this About half of the United States population wear earrings. From day to day I see men,women, teenagers and even babies wearing them, and it is clear to see that some are made for women and not made for men. The earring itself can be used to define a persons sexuality; wearing certain types of earrings could affect the way society looks at you. The general public is programmed to believe objects are gendered.

Without these preconceived beliefs objects would Just be objects and would not be used as a determination of human characteristics. From the readings that were assigned from my Gender Women’s Studies class and my personal experiences, I learned that objects can be gendered by color, shape, size, and even texture. This lead me to the conclusion that objects have no meaning until society gives it an irrelevant and often sexist generalized meaning. Gender can come unexpected at any time in life. The situation is that you have to know how to handle it when it sneaks up on you, like it did me.

I went to Walter one day, going to look for a pair of earrings, I was stuck in the isle for a while, contemplating on which pair of earrings I should buy. I was torn between two similar types of earrings. Although they were different prices I was still cautious on Just buying the less expensive pair. One pair were studs that had pink rhinestones on It and It was medium sized, while the other pair was less expensive and was also some studs that were medium sized as well. Pasting back and forth in the isle for almost an hour. I decided to call over a consultant.

This person was a male employee I ask him which pair of earrings did he prefer to buy and he said the pair that was the cheapest. I was very stunned that he chose the cheaper pair because those were the ones that had the pink rhinestones embedded in them. Thanking him for his assistance and moving on to ask a female consultant about which pair would she prefer to buy and she pick the pair that looked the best and also the pair that happened to be much more expensive. However, after getting their advice I was still puzzled about which pair to buy because I had gotten two totally different opinions.

Deciding not to buy any pair, I went home and thought about why was It so difficult for me to choose a simple pair of earrings. It finally donned on me that men and women were confronted with different obstacles. Men are constrained by things that women are not constrained by and women are constrained Day tongs Tanat men are not constrained Day. History Itself shows this For example, women are expected to be the homemaker and the nurturer in contrast with men who are expected to be the bread winners. Americans have been programmed so well that their beliefs become innate. Its similar to Pavlov’s experiment with the salivating dogs.

He would ring the bell whenever it was time for the dogs to eat and the dogs became so used to it that they would start to salivate whenever they heard the bell ring because they knew it was time to eat. Humans have been trained the same way. We have been programmed since birth to follow these ideals. Even newborn babies are dressed in either blue or pink blankets to display their gender. Courageousness becomes a sign of femininity and muscularity becomes a sign of masculinity. Humans becomes so well trained that muscular or on-curvaceous women are considered to be unfeminine and less attractive to men.

The ideals set by society start to control are beliefs and in turn start to control are actions. While sitting at home I stumbled across a book entitled, Introduction to Women’s Studies, written by Internal Grew and Careen Kaplan; it had several articles relating to the roles of men and women in human society. There was an article called “Gender and Consumption,” composed by Bruce Babcock, and it spoke about how men were the production; the ones who produce the money and the women were the consumption; aid to spend up all the money.

There was a part in the article where is stated that “Production was active, led men earning money, and provided them with some form of power exercised through newly created trade unions, for instance” (329). However, it also implied that “Consumption was more passive, involved spending money, and did not lead to any publicly recognizable forms of power” (329). After reading this article, it had me thinking about the pair of earrings that I left in Walter It left me with the question of what makes men and women different. Men do not care about assign, but when they do it seems that they are categorized as being gay.

In this case the government has manipulated the citizen’s minds in society to have them think that certain looks are only for certain types of people. But most times men tend to Just buy what every appeals to them the greatest. This is why the male employee chose the cheap pair of earrings, not because he liked pink, but because they were cheaper. Women on the other hand are expected to like more expensive things, so society would refer to them as “gold diggers. ” A lot of advertisers target women cause they know how to manipulate women into buying the most expensive merchandise.

A piece called, “On Gender and Things,” by Newly Dishonor is located in the Gender Women’s Studies reader. What Dishonor expresses in this piece is that “objects can become gendered because innovators anticipate the preferences, motives, tastes, and skills of the potential users, and the cultural norms in society at large” (Reader:65). Dishonor also implies that, “due to the norms values that are inscribed into a technical artifact, objects can attribute and delegate specific roles, actions, and responsibilities to their users” (Reader:65).

Another article in this book, called, “Woman is an Island,” written by Judith Williamson, sells a product, which is pond’s cream cocoa butter, and it is made for women only. This product and the earring is related to one another by directing their viewing to a specific audience. For example, in the text of the article, it says that it is meant Tort women to prove teen wilt n ten smoothest Ana sorest silk ever. As Tort a certain type of earring, like the hoop for example, is meant for women only.

Men were not looked at in this case because they are looks as being masculine, which means that it is mandatory for their skin to be so called “rough. ” Well, that is what the government says, and the society Just feeds in on this nonsense. For instance, in the article it states that, “with colonial economies as with the family, capitalism feeds on different value systems and takes control of them, while nourishing their symbolic differences from itself” (314). This again leads me back to earrings because earring type wore can also be based on culture.

I wonder if the consultants at Walter knew that the earrings were gendered and that each pair was meant for a man and a women I believe that things like this often go unnoticed. We often fail to notice the sexism involved in the things we do not even realize we believe in. In this 21st century, femininity and masculinity is greatly support by what the government proclaims. Humans constantly let society define what they believe This can all be seen through a simple pair of earrings. Objects are just objects you ultimately decide what they mean for you; they do not have meaning unless you give them meaning.

Ethical relativism means, that I reject the Idea that there Is a single correct moral view. I think this because I believe that everyone has a right to choose and have their own moral view. I also think that in my own opinion that everyone that wants to do or say or feel a certain way should be able to and that no matter how much people say it may be wrong they should be able to show how we feel. I have also thought about critical thinking a lot different when it comes to sexuality. I think that we as younger adults, considering I am only 28, need to stop and think about the decisions that we eke as we are growing up.

Now a days kids are getting younger and younger when they are having their babies, but the problem is that they are still babies themselves. They are ruing their lives and in some cases their baby’s lives as well. Society needs to stop with all the media and showing the good things with babies and show the more negative things. With me though if I would have known what I know now I do not think that I would have had a child at 20, but no matter what I would not change it for anything and I know it is hard but in my opinion it was and is worth it. ;

Describe the effect of environment and historical perspectives on your sexuality. In the environment that I was raised, I was raised to be tough and to be a manly man. My father really did not like gay, lesbian, or bi-sexual people and even treated them like they were nothing. I understand that if I was gay I would have been “disc- owned” and probably thrown out of the family, I did though have a lesbian cousin and I think that it must be the way my dad and his family were raised because her dad was very, very rude and really disheartening towards her.

Being that my dad Is Native American and his family Is very proud I think that Just being raised around this type of family and their values can really affect you as a person. I think that the historical perspectives have really had no Influence on me personally because I think that we should learn from the past and historical events but we can choose whether or not to actually use them In our lives or make our lives ;our lives” that we live. ; Discuss the development of your gender Identity.

A few things that have helped me In determining my gender Identity are that I have always felt that I need to take care of my family and to do my best when I am trying, his is one of the reasons that I chose to go back to school and further my education Ana try to get a netter JODI winner I can earn more money Ana Tell netter Dialectally secure about our future. I always feel that growing up my dad did a lot of working and really never spent time with us kids and I was always told that it was because he needed to take care of us kids and the family.

And if I have gotten anything from him it was that taking care of your family was the first and most important thing to do. Another is that I am a sports fanatic and love the competition that comes with it. While watching TV. Hen I was younger I really never got what was happening but I knew that my dad did it so I thought it was the right thing to do. And when our team lost he was disappointed and really showed, so I thought that was normal activity, but I know now that it is Just a game and am now teaching my son that it is k to loose but having fun is the main goal.

And lastly, and one of the most important things that I would say helped me with my gender identity was that growing up boys were the ;tough” ones and the girls were the ;weak’ ones of course now that I am older I know that this untrue and that some girls are in fact stronger than some guys. Even though now that I think about it I and how wrong I really was I Just laugh about it because we were kids and it was only the perception of other kids that influenced me. ; Analyze the effect of attraction and love in your relationships.

I think that the effect that attraction has had on me in my relationships has a lot of who I dated when I was younger. I used to see a girl that I felt was attractive and try to ask her out on a date. Then as I got older I used to see a girl that was attractive to me and I would try to take her out and start a relationship with her based solely on the first initial attraction. I understand that a real and stable relationship takes a whole lot more than Just looks to be a successful relationship and to be serious.

I now am married to the most wonderful women on this planet and really and truly understand love. She is my best friend, my lover, and my world. We have nothing in common but that is what makes it so much fun, every day we either try something different or Just hang out together. Being different I think is Just like people say ;opposites attract” well in our case it has and I believe that life could not get any better. To me love really means something a to deeper than to other people.

To me it means to love unconditionally and no matter what you do not give up on that person Just because you or they are mad. So when I say ;l love you” I really mean it with all my heart and it is not Just a turn of phrase to me, like some of these kids that Just through it out there to Just say it. ; Discuss another topic of this course that is interesting and useful to you. Relate this topic to your life. I think that after taking this course another topic that has interested me and really related to my life is that of child and sexual molesters.

The reason that this topic has really interested me is because I personally think that these men and women are very mentally and physically sick people. I think that these people should be giving help but only if they admit that they have done wrong and need the help. Now some people that think that this may be something they need to say to get out of Jail or whatever else that they are being held in, but they are only saying this to get out and are more than likely going to refined and hurt someone else’s child or them personally by raping them.

I think that we as a society need to make a law that is a en strike for these offenders and be put away for life. I have a child and I know that being a father and if one was to hurt or molest my son I would be engulfed with rage Tanat may not De addle to nylon Deck IT I met ten person won a a It. So In my pollen I think that this would not only be looking out for the children but for the person who did this and to the parents or loved ones that the sex offender has done this to.

Many people think that there should be either stricter rules for sex offenders and some think that the laws are fine as long as they register as a sex offender, but I think that story has shown that many of them go out and refined and hurt another child or person. So instead of stopping this while we could at the first time that they did it we let them out and they go out and destroy another life. I think that this is Just too risky and should leave them in the prisons to live their life out.

An idea that I would suggest is that maybe build a facility on an island to serve as a place to put offenders and let them live a normal life but far, far away from people they may hurt and the children they may hurt. Now that I am done with this class I will still be doing my own research on a lot of he things that we have learned here and I hope to be able to pass them on not only to my kids but to anyone that may want to learn about this as well.

This class has not only taught me a lot but it has opened my eyes to things that I may have never known or even thought about learning. I thank you and I hope that one day I may be able to share this with people to ensure that we understand our bodies and how they work, and what to do when things happen to us. Format your personal response consistent with PAP guidelines. Post your personal response as an attachment.