|Reviews for Desiderata|
| hannah.rozenwheeler chapter 49 . 9/23
For one of my fanfiction stories on my other account, I am planning to put a homosexual couple in it if my house manager allows me to.
| hannah.rozenwheeler chapter 48 . 9/23
What do you mean by "Iris Van Herpen?" Like, does a character have herpes or something?
| hannah.rozenwheeler chapter 64 . 4/4
I loved the way you wrote this like a play. You would be a really good playwright one day!
| rebeccad1066 chapter 1 . 1/7
I disagree about sexism against men not being a systematic problem. For example, in the criminal justice system, women usually more lenient sentences than men. In divorce courts, women are more likely to get custody of the children than men. Also, there were wizard trials in the past. Five men were killed during the Salem Witch Trials.
| rebeccad1066 chapter 6 . 1/7
I disagree about Princess Buttercup. When I read The Princess Bride, I felt there was a lot of focus on her feelings. I would have said she was the main character. We see her developing feelings for Westley, her despair when she thinks he died at sea, her emotional death that allows her to agree to a loveless marriage with Prince Humperdink, her renewed hope and her ultimate decision to kill herself on her wedding night. She might not be an action heroine, but she has plenty of emotional depth. And she does make her own decisions, such as agreeing to marry Prince Buttercup, just not very good ones.
| hannah.rozenwheeler chapter 8 . 7/1/2019
I don't have anything rude to say about the LGBTQ community except I don't feel comfortable with gays and lesbians kissing.
| Hannah chapter 25 . 6/4/2019
This short story was so funny that I couldn't stop laughing. I loved how the creatures had bad English, reminded me of most of the Amy Tan books I've read. Good job!
| hannah.rozenwheeler chapter 7 . 1/13/2019
I loved reading this essay! If I were in a similar situation, I would just be cool with my parents' decisions and accept that my grades weren't that great and that I alone could change them. You did a wonderful job while writing this.
| we're all humans chapter 49 . 1/6/2019
hot take 11 is awesome
| we're all humans chapter 6 . 1/1/2019
these are really good essays
| we're all humans chapter 1 . 1/1/2019
oh my gosh this is amazing! you make really good arguments in this essay, this is very well written and everything is really easy to understand. marvelous job!
| 2am chapter 1 . 12/16/2018
Whether I agree on some of the principles of your essay, I feel that its title is misleading and should be changed. Feminism and egalitarianism are not mutually exclusive; in fact, feminism was originally (and still arguably is) a celebration of femininity and an advocation for societal change to allow women's rights. What you're arguing about is equity vs. equality; titling your essay "Why feminist, not egalitarian?" suggests that you are pitting the two concepts against one another. You're not.
Whereas I feel that more priority should be given to the proverbial trench kid, such a solution, as helpful as it is in the short run, does nothing to change the inherent inequality in the trench kid vs. platform kid situation. Despite the aid that the trench kid is receiving, they will always suffer an inherent disadvantage. It doesn't matter in the long run how many apples you give trench kid; trend kid will always be stuck in the trench with this solution. You are dealing with inequality, yes, but that inequality is a symptom of something larger in the fabric of society that needs to change in order to make society as egalitarian as possible. That should be where we ought to focus our resources.
For instance, an example you use to argue your point is the discrimination against women in the workforce. Outright discrimination against women has been almost completely eradicated; I won't say that it is gone for good, but it is illegal and also not the prominent issue causing an imbalance of pay in the workforce. The gender wage gap is caused by the inherent discrimination in the system towards people who take maternity leave, which leaves them behind people who don't, rather than textbook discrimination. Rather than stomping on the growth of employees who don't take maternity leave (giving apples to the trench kid), a solution has been found in the introduction of paid maternity and paternity leave in Iceland, which basically forces both the mother and father to assume the societal role of caretaker, and solving the issue of the gender wage gap. Instead of giving apples to the trench kid (a temporary solution), the trench kid is elevated to the level of the platform kid, allowing them the opportunity to compete for apples under fair conditions. Equity certainly has its place, however, it isn't the end goal, and we should invest most of our resources into finding a solution at the root of the problem rather than just advocating to address its symptoms.
| sparkaleah chapter 1 . 10/6/2018
thank you holy shit
| Hannah chapter 22 . 5/21/2018
I love the ideas for "Chanukah Carol" and "For Paying Guests Only," as I have been Jewish my entire life and am very proud of my religion although I am only culturally Jewish. I love the second story scrap I mentioned because I adore Asian culture, especially Japanese and Chinese culture.
| N. R. Nazario chapter 1 . 5/10/2018
I understand your position that an egalitarian approach might be insufficient to address issues when the starting point is not equal. However, when we approach the collective disadvantage, we must take care not to ignore the impacts on individuals. Considering one entire population as advantaged can make us justify the boost to the other, but on an individual level, you might actually end up repressing people because they are not part of the disadvantaged group.
There is plenty of evidence for privilege. I am not arguing that, but my case is that when we apply collective measures, we affect every member of the population, even those who are not privileged. I grew up in a lower middle class family. As such, we couldn't afford cultural enrichment events such as theater and museums. I had several friends of a similar socio-economic background who were entered into a program because they had bad grades. The program gave them help in improving their grades, but also provided many "enrichment" event, which brought them to museums, university tours, planetariums, plays, parks, and even got them priority of a Washington DC trip. I was told that I could not go with them because I had "good grades". I went ahead and intentionally lowered my grades by flunking a few tests, so they'd add me to their support group, but when they did, my regular teacher made a case that I didn't belong, and pulled me back out.
I know school grade is not a protected category, but the point is that being part of a privileged population, the platform kid if you will, limited me from participating in those opportunities that were given to my friends who had bad grades. Did they need the support these activities provided? Maybe they did. Was I undeserving of participating? Maybe I was. However, the argument I'm trying to make is that applying measures on the basis of a population can hurt people at the individual level.
You get enough stories of individuals that have been disadvantaged by boosts given to the "other" population, (and add a sprinkle of bogus or embellished stories to the mix) and the group starts feeling justified in calling you out for reverse discrimination and that whatever efforts being made are attempts to hurt them. The perception that equality movements are really trying to impose a new kind of domination is what generates resistance against them and galvanizes extreme groups to fight, or make questionable choices in the name of self-defense or self-preservation.
Somehow, a balance needs to be reached. Equal access to opportunity needs to be provided without depriving those who are "too poor to afford these opportunities on their own, but too rich to qualify for help" (using quotes because I'm not applying it to money alone, but to other disadvantages as well).
Boosting entire populations based on prior patterns of discrimination might seem like a noble idea, and there is some merit on it, but it needs to be approached with care not to hurt the individual.