Halloween: A Night of Vampires, Ghosts, and -- wait, is that supposed to be a Devil?

On Thursday night, I attended Take Back the Night’s “What is YOUR costume?” event. I had never heard of this group before, but after a few minutes I learned that these students regularly hosted student-only forums to discuss concerning topics, allowing anyone and everyone to share their thoughts. With Halloween just around the corner, it seemed inevitable that Thursday night’s topic would emerge: the controversy regarding students’ costumes and the way they express themselves through their spooky (or in this case, promiscuous, risqué, or offensive) disguises. The forum consisted of a small audience with the participation of four student-panelists who provided several unique accounts of past Halloween costume experiences and diverse opinions on the issue at hand. By the end of the night, it became clear to me that while Halloween is a time of fun and festivities, the tradition of donning Halloween costumes does not open the floodgates for complete and utter freedom of expression. Just as one cannot shout “fire!” in a public area, one must be mindful of their costume choice.

Firstly, before any questions were posed, the group showed a YouTube video that essentially captured the heart of the night’s talk. The video featured a clip from “Mean Girls” (in which Lindsay Lohan fails to see the “real” dress code for girls costumes) and about a dozen slideshow images showing different controversial Halloween costumes. This successfully set the tone for the discussion because it gave the audience an idea (or rather, imposed some “standards”) of costumes that are generally acceptable and costumes that are generally offensive. One point I found particularly interesting in the video was the comparison of old-fashioned “blackface” makeup versus the “racial” costumes of today. The video noted that while the use of blackface makeup became a racist and bigoted symbol, many kids (as well as adults) are still seen trick-or-treating as Native Americans and other minority groups – without any questioning whatsoever. Personally, I know that I would find it offensive if someone imitated my culture in a joking manner. Unfortunately, the call to wear funny and ridiculous costumes often leads to the use of offensive and hurtful costumes, and meanwhile people simply use Halloween as a safeguard to deter others’ judgments.

The question that was presented dealt with the boundaries of expression in Halloween. Before any of the panelists or members of the audience were allowed to comment, the moderator noted that Take Back the Night would not tolerate the use of “whore,” “slut,” “manwhore,” and several other terms that would alienate others – this way, the discussion could commence without the creation of any harsh judgments or ill-will. Furthermore, it allowed everyone to voice their opinions and comment on the issue at hand from a common basis, rather than polarizing views and pitting people against one another. The floor then opened up to the panelists, who shared their various opinions on the limits of expression in Halloween. They stated that girls and guys equally shared the blame. While girls can be found wearing promiscuous or risqué costumes – revealing their bodies in ways one would never find socially acceptable on a typical day – guys are notorious for wearing offensive costumes, usually with the intention to impress others. In addition, the panelists also expressed that there is a fine line between festive costumes and offensive costumes, a boundary that is routinely ignored every year on Halloween. For example, someone in the audience shared their experience of seeing someone wearing a “Jesus-on-the-cross” costume at Fell’s Point. This incited another comment by a concerned student, who stated that if she ever saw someone wearing such a costume, she would be “so directly offended and hurt because that person is attempting to make a mockery of my beliefs.”

Personally, I found myself agreeing with all aspects of the group’s platform. For one, I think that it is completely unacceptable for people to suspend all social dress-code norms for the enjoyment of one night, whether it be girls deciding to expose their bodies or guys trying to make themselves look “cool.” When people do this, they not only tarnish their individual image, but they misrepresent their body of peers. For example, if a female Loyola student decides to reveal her body in a promiscuous manner, then others may falsely assume that other female Loyola students may make the same decision. In addition, by making one poor costume decision one is falsely projecting the way they may present themselves on a typical day. To this end, I truly think that Halloween is a time of fun in which one should enjoy oneself, not an excuse to behave in ways that are simply unacceptable. I hope that Halloween will restore itself as a holiday that people look forward to – one of spooky costumes, carved pumpkins, and endless amount of candy – rather than the degenerated mess that it has become today.

One man Under God

There’s more to me than you see. It is a seemingly simple quote which has a little bit of a rhyme to it, that makes you smile and nod in agreement. We all like to think that people see more than just face value of who we are; we hope that they take the time to get to know who we are as people instead of just holding us to stereotypical viewpoints of our race or ethnicity. The truth is though that most people do not take the week it may take, but starts judging from the very second they see you. I went to the lecture, “There’s more to me than you see” and at first I thought it was just going to be another cheesy thing Loyola does to get us to get to know each other. I thought there would be some stories about people which may or may not be true and I thought that I was not going to really get much out of it. Then when the lecture started I realized that it was going to be a little more interesting than Gaby goes to College.
Most of the seats were taken in the back and middle sections, so my friend and I were lead right up to the second row where there was a noticeable different atmosphere. The people sitting in front of us were obviously teachers or some kind of other authority figure. It was weird because they did not seem eager to hear what was going to be said they seemed to be on edge and looked a bit nervous as if they were expecting something bad to happen. When the speaker welcomed us I got that same kind of somber feel. His voice was a bit shaky as if he was on the verge of tears and his voice was more monotone than anything. He went on to ask everyone if we could all please stay in our seats and pay the people the respect of not talking, this was all normal stuff, but then he added that if anyone got offended by anything that was said to hold their comments to themselves and just excuse themselves; this I thought was a little weird. What the heck was going to be said where people are not going to be able to stand to sit in their chair?
In the first row there were about eight students sitting side by side preparing their thoughts to speak and share their stories, which dug right into my heart. I heard about a black student who, while trying to save a man from not jumping off the Loyola bridge, was called the N word over and over again. I heard about a blind student who was abused by his swim teammates who were suppose to be his friends, but instead thought it as funny to poke him and probe him with sick games. I heard about an Asian lesbian who brought up the point that we all probably thought she was going to talk about being a minority on campus, but really she was making that her point that no one would know that she was a lesbian by looking at her so we shouldn’t judge her as if we know her, when we don’t. I heard about a white Irish male student who did not come from a high class rich neighborhood, but was proud of his heritage and who he was and comfortable enough to venture out to become the President of an African American group on campus. I heard about a student who lives her day switching with her moods and dealing with being Bipolar, and how she was placed in a box of depression and isolation. I heard about a Jewish student who gained confidence in embracing her religion. I heard about a student who did not think about what he said most of the time and slipped up with calling his friend a ‘fairy’ by losing a video game, he was joking but he did not think that someone in the group may have been gay or might have taken offence.
I heard a lot of stories that night and I realized something. We all have a story and are all living our lives facing each other and are probably being judged by one another. This shouldn’t happen though. We are all people, all made up of the same things, but we are also all unique and I think that we all just need to embrace each other’s differences and learn about them instead of shying away from something or someone that makes you uncomfortable. I wish we really all realized that we are one man, whether we are black, white, gay, Asian, blind, challenged or whatever, and that we are all under the same necessities to live under God. I’m glad I went to this forum because it made me exited for my next four years here. I realized that there are people out there willing to accept others, we just need to open ourselves up also.

Role Models: The good, The Bad

The stories “A Father,” by Bharati Mukherjee, and “Serving up Hope,” by Stephanie Shapiro, as well as the poems, “Directions for Resisting the SAT,” by Richard Hague, and “First Practice,” by Gary Gildner, provide the reader with severely contrasting messages regarding a role models place in society. “A Father” as well as “First Practice” illuminate the power struggle between the speakers and their mentees, eventually leading to the point when the speakers fail their sole responsibility. On the other hand, “Serving up Hope” and “Directions for Resisting the SAT” inspire their readers, as their messages exemplify that of good character and advice.

Last week at Guilford Elementary Middle School, the first National Academic League competition was held. Mr. Smith, or Coach Smith as many of the students call him, is not only a teacher for these students but a father figure, an influential and disciplined man with rules that must be followed. As strict as Mr. Smith may be during the hours of National Academic League practice (held every day after school from 2:30-4:30) his smile is just as rewarding, encouraging all of his students to reach the impossible, or in their case the memorization of the 70 geographic facts listed on their worksheet.

In “A Father” the reader is placed into Mr. Bhowmick’s head, a third person omniscient narrator exposes his every thought and feeling. A fascinating short story, leads to a terrible discovery of a depressed and culturally confused man who, appalled by his daughters decision to become impregnated with in vitro fertilization, kills her unborn child. Mr. Bhowmick’s cowardice and lack of leadership leads his family into a rut they cannot escape and ultimately leads him to the devastating act of murder. A father’s traditional role in society is that of leadership and courage, however, the depiction of Mr. Bhowmick shows the reader what terrible circumstances can create in even a traditional man. In contrast to Mr. Bhowmick, the Sampson’s, the speaker in “Directions for Resisting the SAT,” and Guilford Elementary’s Mr. Smith, are examples of excellent role models. Each gives back to the community by offering employment, advice or knowledge all with a stern demeanor structured with just enough laughter to create the perfect recipe for success.

Right before the competition was set to commence, Mr. Smith called our team out into the hallway to lecture as well as motivate all of his young scholars. Unlike Clifford Hill in “First Practice,” whose lecture read suspiciously like that of a basic training indoctrination speech, Mr. Smith allowed for the students to see his reassuring smile. The students finished with a chant for Guilford and headed to their perspective seats in the cafeteria, some behind buzzers others on the bench waiting to be put into the game.

Gary Gildner paints a strategically different picture. Gildner uses the word OK throughout his poem to symbolize the methodic “YES SIR” so often chanted in basic training and continually through military life. The depiction of a school nurse checking for a basic physical is much more intense, transforming this character into a doctor and utilizing the word ruptured, clearly to emphasize the severity of this first game or quite possibly foreshadowing these athletes futures. Although the intensity of Clifford Hill makes for a compelling read, many coaches like this run the risk of injuring their players, placing winning before anything else. Although this tactic is necessary for war when the stakes are life or death, high school coaches need to support students in other aspects of life, as their influence can be the greatest of all. Mr. Smith is a key role model for his students, encouraging knowledge and preaching non-violence during the competition. On game day he emphasized to his students the importance of beating their opponent in the cafeteria through intelligence and expressed grave concern for those who though it appropriate to take the competition further with the use of their fists. Mr. Smith finished by saying, “a lot of schools have been kicked out of the National Academic League for being too ghetto. These are mostly charter schools now. Guilford is not. We will not hold that reputation.” I watched as together, Mr. Smith the mentor and the students of Guilford Elementary Middle School eloquently and passionately kicked butt at their first competition.

Making It Work

Tonight I thoroughly enjoyed the commanding presence of Dr. Pedro Noguera as he spoke about troubling social trends in the public school system of the Untied States. Dr. Noguera is man who has dedicated his life to ensuring students, namely of color, develop as they rightfully should academically. He has made trips to underperforming schools around the country in an effort to raise them from their dumping ground statuses. After a plentiful amount of observation, he provided many interesting points. These points include that luck (having a good family who receives a respectable income and has educational history) plays a significant role in student success rates and that the people who devote all their time and effort into helping this problem are not doing their jobs effectively.

Dr. Noguera suggests that the more fortunate members of society (YOU and ME) need to make use of their resources to better those without the means to succeed (the unlucky). I thought this notion tied in superbly with Stephanie Shapiro’s Serving Up Hope, which is about husband and wife Galen and Bridget Sampson who did just what Dr. Noguera preached this evening. The couple own Dogwood Deli, a restaurant that strongly exudes a commitment to social justice by hiring former drug users and convicts to prominent roles. While the article and Dr. Noguera’s lecture are not exactly similar in content, they share rich similarities thru underlying messages. Dr. Noguera stressed the importance of having a plan to improve and not just temporarily remedying problems. Dogwood Deli is putting a plan that is proving successful into action and it is bridging the misconnection between policy and reality together. The Sampson’s are giving these people a fresh start in life. “Sampson is creating a sorely needed avenue for men and women transitioning back to society.” (2)

As previously mentioned, something that Dr. Noguera stressed was the incompetence of the people who are supposed to be “helping the cause.” Dr. Noguera referenced New York and their school rating system endorsed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg and his chancellor said that they would shutdown schools with an “F” rating. Dr. Noguera fully sanctions the system but stated that the execution is poor. Chancellors are not hired to shutdown schools, but to improve them. He went on to say that these schools are designed to fail because the most needy students are being grouped together with the most inept teachers. I fully agree with Dr. Noguera. Before the lecture I thought that this was an excellent approach by Bloomberg, something I would even suggest myself if given the chance. However he made me ask myself, “what is that really doing?” The schools will just be reopened and branded again. Incorporating the actions of the Sampson’s, making it work needs work from us and simply covering up the problem is not a real solution.

The most important lesson that I learned from walking out of McGuire Hall was that the public school system of our country is far from perfect. People like Dr. Noguera have the right idea and the more people like Galen and Bridget Sampson who step up and make a difference, the sooner perfect can be reached. There are a lot of inner-city students who want to learn and succeed, but they are born into situations where the chances are stacked up against them. The obstacles are too much to handle, even if there are Cinderella stories here and there, they are just that, Cinderella stories.

individualism is behind the steering wheel

Last week I attended the discussion dealing with the personal and sexual decisions of people, mainly focusing on their decisions within times surrounding Halloween. The discussion left me with a feeling that ever person is different and that independence and free will over moral decisions are what drives humans to the ultimate decisions in which they make and that these decisions promote the sense of individuality and uniqueness in human lives. The discussion started with the question about why do people dress the way they do during Halloween, mainly focusing on the distinct difference in how most guys dress in ridiculous but funny costumes while girls take the more extreme route and push the limits of whether they are actually wearing clothes or not.

Everyone knows of October 31st and the festivities it brings, with all of the parties and nonsense of dressing up in something you would not wear on a normal day. But why, on the spectrum of Halloween costumes as we will call it, do guys fall on the complete opposite of girls, for nearly 99% of the situations. Is it just a natural instinct for guys to dress in funny costumes that push the limits and girls dress in more risqué costumes, which advertise their assets? It seems that Halloween has rendered a natural feeling for its okay that women dress in these provocative costumes, with supposedly the intent that since it is Halloween it is the night they can dress like this while it not directly showing who they truly are. I feel that guys dress in funny costumes that push the limits, such as dressing up as Jesus and such, mainly for a sense of humor or a joke rather than anything else. On the other hand I do not understand why some women think that their “petite” Halloween costumes are acceptable, but in the back of my mind I feel that some women do it to show who they truly are, whether it is because they are comfortable with themselves or for other reasons, but there is no way I can get into a woman’s head to actually find out. Every person has a free will over their choices and should be independent in the choices that they make, but in some situations, such as Halloween, I cannot understand why for the most part men have a complete opposite mindset on what costumes they wear. But in the end the overall society has, I guess you could call them moral acceptances, of what is actually okay and what isn’t. But on Halloween for some reason these codes seem to disappear and I believe the reason is that people have decided to be complete independent of the society and to express their individuality without worry about judgments and reprimands. Thus allowing the individual to come out and provide distinctive differences in human’s lives.

The discussion then led to why guys buy drinks for girls and what the expectations are to come from this generous action, in some minds. In my opinion I believe some women abuse the generosity that some men show when they purchase drinks for them. But then again every man is different and is completely independent on their choices to buy a drink for women. Some may do it just because they are nice guys with no intention of taking the situation any further than a meager friendly conversation, although I believe most women wouldn’t think that’s the guy’s true intentions. But then you have some guys whose intentions of buying a girl drinks are to enable the process of getting down to the business with her later that night. Individuals have individual minds and are independent on their choices, in my mind if a woman allows a guy to buy her drinks she needs to be able to understand the situation she may be putting herself in later in the evening. Thinking about it on the other how would a woman think and/or act if she were to walk up to a guy and buy him a drink?

The discussion then turned to the concept of casual sex and whether it is okay or not. In simple terms, society would say that it is wrong and should not happen. But in my mind every person has control over their self and should be able to independently decide what is right or wrong in their life, while still being able to understand what society approves and disapproves of. I am not saying that casual sex is right or that it is wrong, but that if a person is able to understand the consequences of these types of actions and are able to accept them, that they can find the answers to these questions by and within themselves, for it is you life and you should live it the way that you want.

Changing directions towards the readings for today, the sense that humans need independence and free will over the decisions they make in life, can be related to the poem “Directions for Resisting the SAT,” by Richard Hauge. The speaker tells how to avoid the SAT and to make the personal self-choices that benefit the reader. The last two lines, “Listen to no one, Make your marks on everything” show how the speaker believes that humans should be completely independent while still being able to make and active impact on the society around them. This discussion can also be related to the reading “A Father,” by Bharati Mukheriee in the sense that decisions needed to be made dealing with the moral rights and wrongs in which the family believed. The father was undecided on what should actually happen, coming from and Indian childhood and living a life that is essentially planned before it has begun and living in America where individual decisions are what drive lives. The daughter was also faced with these decisions of what she believed to be right and wrong in her own mind, without consent of what her parents believed.

Moral rights and wrongs are determined by choices that individuals make during their lives. Individual choices are what enable human beings to live life to its fullest, whether they be bad choices or good, you learn from your mistakes and benefit from your successes. These choices allow humans to take the many different paths of life, to which each person is completely different from the next. Without these individual choices, a human life would not be considered such, but rather one continuous highway through time, on which everyone travels.

A Flawed Educational System

I went to the “Social Justice in Education” lecture given by Pedro Noguera tonight. His main point on education was the idea that interaction with students was the most effective method of education. He started off his lecture by saying that without encouragement students are not capable of living up to their potential or able to obtain a proper education. According to him, an educational system that focuses more on interaction between the student and the teacher rather than simply aptitude testing. Measuring a student’s intelligence does nothing to assist in their development, but rather just accentuates the flawed educational system.

Specifically, I found it very interesting when Dr. Noguera talked about the work he did in an alternative high school in Berkeley, California. When he arrived at the school he saw an educational system in shambles; kids didn’t attend class and teachers were perfectly fine with that. He saw that these kids realized the value of an education though, as many of them still came to school in order to get a high school diploma. He managed to set up a system where many of these kids were given the opportunity to succeed out of high school, based off of interaction with people working at a biotech facility nearby. Through the attention given to these kids, they were able to achieve something they never would have dreamed of in the old system.

This idea of education being more complex than simply reading books is very reminiscent of the Kolvenbach article from the beginning of the semester. Although that article takes a slightly different angle, that being that experience of knowledge in the real world is most important, they both highly value things other than book education as necessary.

The most important idea that I was able to obtain from Dr. Noguera was that the educational system, specifically in impoverished areas, is very flawed. As he mentioned, the challenge is to get those who have money to understand that their future lies in the hands of those who don’t, specifically these children. With a better-focused educational system more children could have opportunities to succeed in this world and make a difference.

Gaps in American Education

Strong relationships are the foundation of a healthy education. In order for a child to be successful in school, they must be inspired and encouraged to do so. This evening I attended a lecture on “Social Justice in Education” by a delightfully eloquent Dr. Pedro Noguera. This man has focused his life into improving the quality of education of underprivileged children. He said that the quality of a child’s education was based exclusively on his or her family’s income and the level of his or her parent’s education. He said that the only thing that enabled him to go to Brown University was ‘luck’. He doesn’t have a larger mental capacity, but he was born into a family that was wealthy enough to pay for proper education. The biggest issue in America’s education today is poverty. While wealthy children are given an abundance of great opportunities, poor children need to find incentive to gain an education. Wealthy kids with learning disabilities are given the tools they need to become great in an accepting environment. On the other hand, poor children with the same problems run the risk of becoming failures if they resist help. Without a proper education, financial support, and family guidance, these people are faced with the dangers of poverty. Some are involved with drugs just to provide for themselves and their families. They may end up behind bars because their teachers didn’t care enough to encourage them.

Throughout this inspirational speech, Dr. Noguera urged everyone to take action and not just speak or write about progress of school districts. He proved that it is possible with the examples of the “Cinderella story” schools. These schools are located in poor cities with poor inhabitants. A school district with these characteristics is destined to fail. As I said earlier, poverty is the most prominent educational issue in America. 1 in 5 American children are below the poverty line. Quite a shocking statistic coming from the richest country in the world. Dr. Noguera addressed this problem by adding that not only is there an opportunity gap, but also an allocation gap. The U.S. is spending too much money on wealthy children’s education and not nearly enough on the poor. The schools who have the lowest quality of education are also the ones who teach the poorest children. These are the institutions that face the greatest challenges and have many needs that are usually disregarded. Governors try to improve education by threatening teachers or shutting down schools that don’t meet their “standards”. They put up a facade of these idealistic policies but they do not address the reality of the situation. Dr. Noguera stressed the importance of learning over testing. Some schools only prepare their students for tests that affect the image of the school. They should be providing the students with an education that will lead to the students’ success in the future.

Dr. Noguera stressed that devoted teachers are a necessary part to improve the education issue. The children need strong guidance and leadership. This reminded me of Bharati Mukherjee’s “A Father”. In the story, Mr. Bhowmick, idealizes a patriarchal family yet he is unable to be the leader of his family. Because of this, his family erupted into turmoil at the end when his daughter revealed her pregnancy. He did not have a close relationship with either his wife or daughter. Just like schools need teachers to guide their students, families need parents to guide their children. Without these relationships, they are both unable to grow and prosper.

Towards the end of his speech, Dr. Pedro Noguera said, “I’m an optimist, but I’m not a naive optimist.” He knows improvement of America’s school systems is not going to happen all at once. Baltimore has some of the worst school districts in the United States. He believes we have the capacity and resources to create great schools; we just need the will power and fervor to make it happen.