It is almost like the fish in the fishbowl situtation. You do not see the water when you in it, but when you are taken outside your environment and you are looking in you finally understand your surrroundings, and truth about life. Prison in essence could be a spritual journey that can lead many to understand the big picture, though they will never be imersed back into the water of soceity they finally get to see the water for what it is. It is amazing that some people will go through society there whole life and live the life they never understand but it takes a few years in prison to realize what they will never have. It's almost apropriate to say that i wish all men spent a few years in prison.

However his outlook on the abesnce of women is completely openminded to the fact that his previous ways were not successful and eneded in heartahce for both parties. When you boil it down the only thing that women and even men want is time. Time spent with one another is the thing that women want. Sometimes even if you're fighting about dumb topics that time you spent together, though a mess, is what they rather want than being alone. Lifers understand the concept of time they have all the time in the world and no time at all. Much like isolation from women, time is also taken away. Days are mundane and repeatative, relationships faulter, and all you have is your mind to think, to realize that living in captivity let's you step back from the world and understand the big picture.

Well I guess now I can say "It's a shame all the good men are either taken, gay, or in prison." As poetic and beautiful as it was it still adds to the concept of the perfect man being unabtainable. Men take advantage of what they have, believe that they can push there women to their breaking point to see how much they can get out of her. I guess it takes complete isolation from something until you realize its worth. You never expect this from a lifer, I would imagine their fantasies of women to be rauchy and disgusting.

Polyandry is the closest thing that the world has to a women centric world, as discussed in our group conversations. The women is the one who the family revolves around. The three men in this case all partake equally in housework and manual labor. She is the sexual centerfold of the relationships the men revolve around her scheduling for them. They take on parental roles and see no issue in it. This idea is amazing that the jealousy between the brothers does not cause family turmoil. And when considering who inherits the land do they know/care which son is from the eldest brother? In reality they have no way of knowing which child is whos, if there sexual relations are altered frequently.
Could jealousy just be a cultural thing? I feel is any of my guy friends had to share a girl they would not accept it willingly. I have a feeling that in this country men can be very proud and protective of their children. Talk shows that center around paternity testing are extremely popular as of late, men want to know if they are the father and majority of the time they feel that there is some responsibility with that title. These men are willing to provide for these children that they are not even sure are their own.
We must also consider the underlying relationships besides the marriage. These men are all brothers, their personal relationship may actually add to the family cohesiveness. The fact that these children are still blood related may aid in the mutal caring. As a culture we as Americans may never truly understand how it is to live like these individuals. To us this may seem bazaar and immoral but to them it is a regular tradition that is simply a way of life.
As a women I can say this, on a positive aspect that life would awesome because I would worshiped by three men who loved me simultaneously. There would be a man to work, cook, clean and care for the children. Cuddling would be awesome and probably really warm.
On a negative aspect I can say that currently have trouble pushing away one man who nags fro sex, I would exhausted trying to keep three men away, the "I can't tonight I have a headache" bit only works every so often. It would probably be more work than its worth. :)

Post 3:
Which raises the question are we as individuals, really individual? You are in a room and the teacher makes a comment, mediocre humor at best but a few students find deeper comedy in it and begin to laugh, then a few more laugh, then the whole class is in stiches. You feel that if most people find it funny then so should you, it's the "norm". Are we as individuals, really individual?

Post 2:
The first man in the elevator was obviously embarrassed to begin with and to subside his embarrassment he "slighly" began to turn towards the back wall. The last guy, well I just feel bad for him the experiment seemed to just ahve a lot of fun with him. As confused as his face was he continued to do the hokie pokie around the elevator without verbally questioning why. This could potentially be a bad asset that human beings have. Our ability to following blindly the actions of the majority because you do not want to feel exclusive could cause serious harm. For instance if you are new at a grade school and you see a boy who gets bullied by the majority, you would find yourself in a situation. Do you go against your better judgment and bully the boy you know nothing about or do you befriend him and face the same fate he too endures? Most people do

The programs keeps telling me the comment is too long so I cut it up.
Post 1:
Conformity is a funny thing. I watched this video and started to laugh , however I laughed even harder when I heard other people laughing in the background noise. Did I laugh more because everyone else was doing it. If it was me I would probably do the same thing however because I find awkward situations to be interesting I probably would have asked questions to justify why I too turned around, such as so does this elevator open on both sides, which typically happens even today. Most people hate embarrassment, which is why conformity happens socially. Being accepted and blending in is sometimes more of a dream than being popular and well known for positive things.

I love the line that "the child did not make any threats with the gun." And my second favorite is that "he a suspect and a victim." I'm sorry but a suspect for what exactly? If there were no threats, no discharge, no harm done but a shaken up music teacher there should be no reason to even use the word suspect. As a crime, law, justice major I hear over and over again about the age of 7 being the age when delinquent acts start be considered intentional. The important word being considered. A five year old has just figured out how to tie his shoes, say the alphabet, however the police of putnam county arrested and suspended his young boy because he was in possession of an item he could not even spell, let alone understand it's usage. This poor boy must be horrified as to what he did wrong. It is said that he found the gun in the car of his stepfather. So the boy was curious and took he gun, maybe he has toy guns at home, maybe he wants to be like stepdad, in an admiring way. However the police of putnam county must believe that this child, who's syntax will not allow him to create full logical sentences, has the mind power to create potential thoughts to those of the columbine boys. The fact that this boy is not allowed back into school until the investigation is complete is counter productive. Let's leave a curious growing mind alone in a house that obviously has a gun control problem for days on end when he should be learning and with peers. Next week we'll see on the news the self inflicted death of a five year old who was playing with his stepfathers gun instead of being in school. Maybe the police will "suspect" that the five year old was a depressed (because that happens to five year olds?). The stepfather and mother are the two worth the blame in this situation. This child should not be punished for sins of the father. There is a legal doctrine Parens Patrie that says a parent is responsible for the actions of their minor child and if they decline responsibility it is then the job of the government to care for this child. How can you say this boy is a suspected criminal, he's five! His parents should know now not to leave the gun around. I am the daughter of a Philadelphia Police Officer. When I was around 5 years old I picked up my fathers gun and gave it to him. I was never yelled at so harshly. My reasoning for picking it up was Daddy was getting dressed for work and he forgot to pun this thing on his belt that he puts on everyday. To me a five year old that gun was an accessory like a hat or a watch. However after I was told it was wrong I never touched it again. This young boy knows when he did was wrong, I can guarantee that he knows that. So send the boy back to school, hell metal detect him if you're that concerned, but from my experience he had no idea what he was doing.

First I want to address the Hollywood aspect of women. Women are portrayed in many different ways, beautiful leading roles can range from having large breasts to having a completely flat chests, being late summer tan, to being as pale as snow. However there is one aspect that most "beautiful" women have in common, they are never overweight. Women in movies are usually slender or muscular or just thin but never fat. It really depends on each person's outlook on beauty. Lets take models for examples. Playboy models have the perfect hour glass shape large breasts smaller waist and larger hips and butt. Fashion models are always tall, slender, flat chested but stll seen as beautiful to many. To say that breasts are a deciding factor is true to a very small extent. If anything it has to deal with weight and fat around the middle. Most girls will probably find a problem in their midsections before anywhere else. Could this be a health issue? Has society put the pressures of weight on females because of health reasons? Possibly but then how do you explain the appreciation for women with anorexic bodies, that is obviously not healthy.
Appearance seems to be everything for women, but the fact is that for women who appear to be beautiful appearances is everything. For those who do not fit the criteria for beautiful, they find other ways to prove themselves to society. They may be pointed out for talent, kindness, humor, personality, responsibility. These are the qualities that are overlooked upon first impressions. First impressions are always skin deep. And that is why these other women the ones with quality are deep, not shallow like those who base impression on beauty because they too are beautiful and that is how they are used to be being judged, and how they got so far in society.
Society does not like women with quality, women with substance. Women who are comparable to men in quality are seen as less attractive and are sometimes questioned to be lesbians and masculine in gender. Why can't society accept non attractive women with quality as assets. Going through life these girls, and this goes for men too, had to undergo so much criticism and bullying for their difference. They had to work hard for their success and nothing was ever handed to them. These people are the ones with strong personalities, great senses of humor, brilliant ideas and these people are the ones that i would rather spend my time. For pretty people to say that attractiveness is not the most important thing is like a fish saying water is not important. The reason they can voice their opinion is because they are beautiful, and the reset of us hide behind our blog postings objective against them because they would never accept the ugly girls comment,.

I too am not an expert on the welfare system however I have seen the welfare system at work numerous times and I think because of everything I have experienced with it I personally feel it should be changed. I am not saying we should do away with welfare all together. Children need welfare, their lives depend on it. Similac is expensive their other necessities are too crucial for thier growth, to demolish welfare would kill innocent lives, or cause the overpopulation of the foster care system. The problem here is not welfare or the children it is the adults who are the problem.
I live in inner city Philadelphia. I have seen my fair share or WIC receipts and Access Cards as well as the people who use them. Numerous occasions. And only once have I seen someone use it correctly. I was behind her young women no older that 18. She had a jug of orange juice, galllon of milk and a carton of eggs. The cashier rung her up and she pulled out her WIC coupons that entitled her to these items. She had a toddler with her. This was the one and only time i was in favor of the current welfare system.
Numerous other times I find myself in KMarts, Walmarts, Targets etc. Well dressed individuals with large gold earrings, jewelry being flaunted. I was once off school, so it was a week day around 2pm, not that this is true but I made the assumption that the people in front of me did not hold jobs due to the time and day which most people work, I could most definitely be wrong. They were buying extravagant clothing, nice new toys for children, one time a man tried purchasing a television. The cashiers rings them up and they whip out their pretty green Access Card. Now please explain to me how these people who may or may not possess a job have nice clothing, large jewelry, and use their access card on things that are nonessential. To say they were humble would be far from the truth, no food, no self grooming supplies were purchased. Just extravagant luxuries that some middle class working families have to pass up.
The welfare system is being abused plan and simple. Food, soap, humble clothing, and possibly rent should be the only things allowed for welfare. This then would give the user incentive to get a job so that their humble life can take a step in the right direction. All I have to say is that I hope in the cabinets of those people's homes I saw abusing their Access Cards that their is a least a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk because if there's not, there is something really wrong here.