Image of Electra (a possibility)

We chose the image of the original Grimm version of Cinderella as a semi modern adaptation of Electra. We're thinking about converting to the story of Cinderella into Electra's story, since with a twist in the tale we can easily create a revenge story. The image fits because Electra and Cinderella are both abused by her mother and are forced to be dirty.

Boy's Don't Cry - My thoughts

Part I: 

The cause i think for the violence is the fact that Candace decide to just tell the two boys about what she found in Brandon's room. This caused the start of the chain reaction of events that would lead to not only her death but the rape, beating and death of Brandon. I think a contributing factor aside from Candace
blabbing was jealousy,  I think jealousy is a contributing factor because you could tell by the way John acted he liked Lana. So when he found out that 'guy' that was getting really close to Lana was actually a girl pretending to be a guy he freaked out party because he was jealous. Another factor was the fact that John was crazy and had no impulse control. Not leaving out the fact that where these kids live is so cut off and depressing that it helped set a morbid kind of life style for them all.


Part II: 

In Plato's Allegory of the Cave, He talks about a group of people in a cave who are chained with nowhere else to look but at their own shadows which symbolizes ignorance to knowledge and most of them just stay that way not trying to get free, then explains why people do not try to leave the cave because it would be unconformable and painful to have to go through the thought of something new.In Boy's Don't Cry i would say that almost everyone in the movie was stuck in the cave except in my option Lana. I think this because Lana had learned about something new, or gained new knowledge and was almost pained by it you would say but she didn't refute it and she was even excepting of the new knowledge. and it was difficult to communicate with the other left in the cave because they didn't want to except or go through that uncomfortable path, instead were happy enough to sty in the cave, an din their ignorance. 

Laramie research

I found an article about a Nebraskan woman who was attacked by three men and there were “carved derogatory epithets into the body” Of the women who is 33 years old and openly gay. It happened in Jul. 24, 2012. She was also bound, gagged and mutilated early Sunday and the three attackers splashed the victim's home with gasoline and tried to set it on fire, scorching a floor, police reports state.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/nebraska-lesbian-mutilated-anti-gay-hate-crime/story?id=16846781#.UHRbwqllSGk

I also found that Nebraska does have hate crimes laws.

http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/nebraska-hate-crimes-law

The Laramie Project Essay

Lisamarie Esposito

Laramie

                                          Throughout the reading of The Laramie Project which was a play about the brutal beating and eventual death of a young gay man named Matthew Shepard who used to live in Laramie Wyoming; I found two people with very different views on what happened to the Mathew. The two people I found to have two difference attitudes on Mathew Shepard’s death, were Father Roger Schmitt and the Baptist Minister. Father Roger Schmitt seemed to be more on the Mathew Shepard side when he talks about how violence is not only the act committed when the two accused boys hurt Mathew but when you call other people names.  The Baptist Minister on the other hand seems to be against Mathew even though he does not think what the two boys did was “Right” he still did not condone Mathew Shepard being gay and goes on to say that he should have thought about his “wrongness” while he slowly died. These two to me seemed to be on totally different sides of the spectrum on the topic.

Father Roger Schmitt to me was on Mathew’s side not only because he talks about the horror of the violence against Mathew but because he spoke about all violence generally against gay or lesbian people. Father Roger called name calling “The seed of violence.” (Moises Kaufman, pg. 66.) While talking about people calling other people dyke, les, or faggot because of their homosexuality. He was telling how he was strongly against any form of violence against any person or gay person even if it is something as little as name calling when he says “To somehow cultivate that kind of violence… I would resent it immensely.” (Moises Kaufman, pg. 66.).By saying all of this he is showing me that he was on Mathew shepherds side.

The Baptist Minister to me was against Mathew even when he says the two boys that were accused have “Forfeited their lives.” And “Now I think they deserve the death penalty…” (Moises Kaufman, pg. 68.) because he still is negative towards Mathew. He had gone on to say “I hope that when Matthew Shepard as he was tied to that fence, that he had time to reflect… and that before he slipped into that coma he had a chance to reflect on his lifestyle.” (Moises Kaufman, pg. 69.) This shows me that he was indeed against Matthew. He went by his faith to say that the two boys that killed him were wrong in what they did to Matthew was worse than the two boy’s because he was gay, that is at least how it showed me as I read.

Both the, The Baptist Minister and Father Roger Schmitt have inherited their views two different ways. Father Roger Schmitt seemed to have his views innate and for The Baptist Minister he has to me developed his outlook through cultural development. I believe this because both of them have same knowledge of the bible yet they both have their own views on the subject. Father Roger Schmitt still didn’t hate Mathew for the way he was even though he studied the bible the same as The Baptist Minister. I believe that is because his views were innate while The Baptist Minister kept his view strictly on what he was taught and not how he felt. 

Animal farm essay

Lisamarie Esposito

My friends of Animal Farm

Dear animals of Animal Farm,

                           

                       I first want to applaud you for your successful revolution which in itself was a great idea although it was diminished with help from Napoleon and Squealer. They both played a vital part in the downfall of the revolution even though there were other factors and animals that also assisted. Both Napoleon and Squealer used their literary skills and advanced vocabulary to manipulate the other animals to keep said animals comfortable while they not only changed the commandments but made their work hours longer, making all of the other lives of the animals worse. Napoleon used his smarts and label as “leader” abusively to control other animals by doing whatever he wanted, then making excuses and speaking lies through the mouth of Squealer. Squealer aided Napoleon by not only going along with Napoleon but being Napoleon’s mouth piece to the other animals that couldn’t understand fully what was happening to them or their lives. Both Napoleon and Squealer were the main cause of the failure of the revolution and I will show you how in more detail throughout this essay.

Napoleon was the main cause of the revolution going sour. He abused his power to lead the other animals to gain “perks” while the animals had no clue about what was really going on. He would tell the other animals lies to keep them in line and on his side, such as the lie he made up about Snowball coming in to steal and destroy parts of their farm. When he entered the farm house to live with the other pigs and guard dogs he lied about them needing to have a place so they could in all actually live more conformably. He also changed the commandments when he saw fit because it would not only benefit himself; it would keep the other animals from pointing a finger at Napoleon saying he was doing something wrong. He lied to keep the other animals in the farm comfortable and in their place as he changed everything which only brought him to destroying the purpose and meaning of the revolution.

Squealer had become Napoleons own personal mouth piece and he assisted in Napoleon’s bad behavior which indirectly brought about the destruction of the revolution.  He may not have thought of the lies and he may not have had any original thought that would affect the downfall of the revolution, but he did do anything for Napoleon. In the way he aided in the changing of the commandments and the spreading of the lies about Snowball or the threats about farmer Jones coming back. Squealer would go around the farm to make sure that all the other animals thought of Napoleon being something he was not, a perfect leader. By doing all of this he would became a main cause instead of just an underlining factor. Squealer could have told the truth or he could have told Napoleon that he was wrong or he simply could have not listened to Napoleon, but he didn’t, and his actions, words only furthered Napoleons success in demolishing the revolution.

Napoleon and Squealer were the main two reasons of the revolution successfully failing. They both played the vital part of deceiving the other animals who should have spoken up for themselves when they started to notice something strange going on. Squealer should have questioned Napoleon instead of going on with whatever the other pig said. He shouldn’t have lied about the commandments or praise Napoleon for his bad behavior. Napoleon, instead of abusing his power, should have distributed the power equally by setting up votes or at least having the other animals have a say when he was making a decision that would affect everyone. All the animals should have done something more in some way but Napoleon and Squealer were the main problem.