The Great Dying in the beginning of chapter 13 was eye opening to me. I hadn't realized the reality of what else happened when Europeans came to America. I remember as a kid learning about the Indians that were scalped and how viscous the take over was. I also remember learning about Christopher Columbus and it was taught that he was a hero. The way that I was taught in school had shaped my view for a decent amount of time. I never felt discriminatory about native Americans, but its almost as if what had happened wasn't an issue. I also remember associating Thanksgiving with the Indians, but remembering it as a peaceful merging of the peoples. This is no way how I feel now and after reading the first part of chapter 13 has made me rethink everything I had learned growing up.

It saddens and frustrates me every time I hear/read negative, justifying quotes associated with God. I am referring to pg 623, "such conditions represented the good hand of God at work, sweeping away great multitudes of the natives... that he might make room for us." WHAT? I don't understand this mindset and what's worse is this thinking was typical then regarding other races and sexes and has shaped our society across the globe. Even worse, this thinking and discrimination is seen today in the most horrific of circumstances. When will we learn it is human nature to be different but the same and it is ok. We should be equal because we are in fact only human.

There was another part of this chapter that stood out for me and it was also quite early on in the first few pages. Pg 625, "Never before in human history had such a large-scale and consequential diffusion of plants and animals operated to remake the biological environment of the planet." What a powerful statement! As a society, we are strongly focused on our immediate needs and pleasures that there is little worry or regard of the future implications. This is seen in all aspects of life and society, from global warming to obesity. I guess you can say that history is repeating itself as humans alter our planet. I wonder what it would look like if this hadn't happened. What benefits have we seen from this altering? One may say that we live longer, we are able to mass produce ourselves and our food. If humans are smart enough to alter food and the environment, how come we are not smart enough to repair and stop the damage we have done? Pg 670 talks about the need for tropical spices, I think I would have gone as well.

There are benefits to having a global economy and there are benefits of local economies. There is an influx of buy local and made in the USA market. I buy into this especially when it comes to food. Our we as a society trying to scale back from the mas import/export of the past? I would like to think so. I would like to think that I am doing myself and the world a favor by buying local. Then I think, what would it be like if the first time I ate a mango, banana, pineapple or coconut was when I was 30 years old. This is the first time I went to Hawaii. On one hand, I would be missing out on pretty amazing food and on the other, I think what a treat to taste these wonderful fruits for the first time as an adult and be captivated by the experience.

There are so many aspects of history that show the cruelty of humans. Recently, I wrote a reflection on what makes a good leader and in it I pointed out that a good leader is present. A good leader is one who is intimately involved with the people. Well, I would have to contradict myself because the reflection I read on pg 651 talks about a horrible leader who wants to set examples by instilling fear into the people. Later in the reflection, however, it talks about his tour and the way he talks with people about their crops and visits homes. According to my last paper I would have counted Emperor Kangxi as a good leader except that he executed people and their families to make examples of them. He is like the confused father that doesn't know if he is more effective by being forceful or loving. What a terrible way to lead. Lead by example, your example, not the example of killing others.

Thoughts on Mecca and Muhammad

It is my opinion that the people of Mecca were saved by Muhammad and his prophecy could not have been timed any better. Just as God had intended, as I’m sure is believed by the majority of people of this faith.

The notion of turning Mecca into a trading and revenue stream may have been called ingenious from a capitalist view point. What a misfortune to misuse power in such that people had to pay to pray. From past to present it seems human nature is to find ways to make a profit and Mecca is the result of that attitude. These few ruling Quraysh families saw an opportunity to rule over the clans and take control of the city, and then decided to monopolize the bodies of the Gods “of the time” and entomb them together so you would have to pay the price to pay. The history of Mecca and the Ka’ba reminds me of the priests that were telling people that for a price they could pray to get ancestors removed from purgatory. People can be corrupt and it is unfortunate that they take advantage of others, but even more so when religion should come from a place of good and just and not used for corruption.

No matter the religion it seems that there are misuses like this that happen and have happened from the beginning of time. The modern day issues that society faces may have been influenced by the religious structures from the past. We definitely can see patterns of bad behavior then and now, such as slavery and oppression.

I think Muhammad was and is relatable to people because he came from a place of misfortune and became very successful and this lack of balance caused him deep struggle. He had a very difficult time balancing his life between trying to sustain his wife’s business and his need to provide generosity to others. I think people are sometimes given monetary success, so that they can help others. Only those that are truly generous can help provide for the less fortunate and refrain from greed. Muhammad may not be so relatable in the facts of his marriage. What a time for a reversal in roles, this was and still is a time in society where the men are looked at to be the financial providers. Here is an established woman though, who is highly sought, who finds Muhammad and supports him in every way. Muhammad needed her, without her he probably would have tried harder to take his life once getting his first vision.

I cannot begin to imagine the pain and confusion he must have felt with his first vision. I wonder if people are still messengers of God and how they would be accepted by society today. If Muhammad had a hard time then, when visions and prophecy were more common, what are we doing with modern day visionaries? Are they cast aside to be ignored? It would be most helpful today if we could see war coming, as Muhammad did. I am not sure how we would react to the information though, surely not as calmly as he. The entire Qur’an fell on his shoulders and he really did shape the future of Muslims.

Foot Binding

Again, I am back on the subject of women and the place women hold in society. I am not deliberately looking to discuss the roles of women and men in every blog, so then I wonder, is this the author's doing? Is Strayer making a point to be obvious about the gender discrepancy in today's society and where the problem is rooted from? Of course I am going to talk about foot binding and what it meant to be a woman in this time period. What it means now and are women still acting in this same mind frame of trying to be more appealing?

I wouldn't say that I like my feet, I will say that I thought at most times that for feet mine are cute, they are small and not to wide or narrow and when my toes are freshly manicured, they are cute. I do understand the idea of little or dainty being feminine, so I understand that small feet would be considered desireable. I suppose? I mean really, when you think of desirable women in today's soceity, I am not sure many are concerned of a woman's feet. Most desireable women most likely dont have man hands or feet. However, I can't understand why mutating someone's body would ever be considered beautiful.

Many cultures do things to women and men that effect body image. Outside of American enhancements, let's discuss other cultures. Such as the elongated neck, where women from a young age stretch their necks with rings to become more feminine. Another image is the gigantic holes that are deliberately put in the ears. I also once remember learning something about young men being tattooed (not with a typical tattoo gun) as a sign of manhood. Most of these rituals are most likely painful and done to children. As was foot binding. I can't even imagine putting a 4-9 year old child through the torture of repeated mutilation. That alone bothers me deeply.

With the pain aside, what's more is the fact that these girls and mothers of these girls believed it to be a sign of status and hoped that these girls would be more suitable candidates for marriage. Today, those that are crippled or missing limbs are the ones that stand out in a crowd. No one wants to be crippled, yet, during this era these women in China were being crippled. It may have been a sign of status to not work a field, but to not be able to walk doesn't seem to be much of an incetive to want this status. I was shocked to learn that the last lotus producer was closed in 1999, what? This was encouraged till the 1990s! Incredible!

It is deeply concerning that young girls volunteered to have this done and even binded there own feet to fit in. Which makes me think of all the things women today do. I know women who have had breast enhancements and botox. I know women who willingly got enhanced and it sounded as they were on their death bed for a week. Women and men get nose jobs, face lifts, liposuction, injections, the list goes on and on. And for what? All to be more attractive, to have better self esteem and to fit in. What a delusion that any of these problems can be solved by suffering for enhancements. A false sense of enhancements, since what may be viewed as beautiful to one may be disgusting to another.

Chapter 4

So many things stood out to me in this chapter, it will be hard to organize my thoughts. As in the beginning chapters, I once again found that humans seem to be cruel by nature. Not just cruel, but seem to be scared and will bend with the wind or majority as you read in the chapter. I am referring to the facts that societies deemed it necessary to execute individuals that did no more than appear to disrupt the majority norm. From Socrates to Jesus, there were men who sought to change and challenge how things were done and when persons in power feel threatened they eliminated them. Then years later society pulls them back in and finds meaning in their messages. Civilization has evolved in the sense that it is unlawful to execute individuals in America and we have came along way to have freedom of speech. People of today are encouraged and sometimes celebrated to think differently, challenge the present and past, yet one must do this delicately, or they are still cast aside. As we have evolved it seems that there is a need to test the boundaries, maybe this isn't evolution because as one saw in Socrates that need has always been there, it is more accepted in today's society. Even still, for the majority there is an inherit fear of the unknown or un-norm. We want it, but are afraid of it and if it isn't done delicately, you are in big trouble.

It is also apparent that there is a strong need in humans to find purpose and faith. I am immensely impressed in the impact that individuals had on our history and future. I often think I have no power or how could I have impact on the world (even if that world is my immediate surroundings). Then I am reminded of how only one persons have been tremendously impact-full in the past. We are all just one person and it is important to remember that when we are a part of society. We can impact the world in both a positive and negative way as long as we get outside ourselves, outside our comfort zones, or perhaps even challenge the norm. Of course there are many ways that single individuals have shaped today, but the part in the chapter about the Buddha and Jesus and the effects they had on people and religion is amazing. To think that the entire timeline of history revolved around one birth and death is truly remarkable.

I found similarities in the religions, such as the obvious of having deities, heaven and hell, sacrifices and rules. I used to think, like some, that all religions are basically the same and reading about the similarities made me understand why this theory is relevant. I also thought once, that there are many religions just as there are cultures and that they were created that way to ensure that people could find connection with something. And that ultimately, we all would be led to the same spot (unless you are Hindu and will be resurrecting). This to me made sense for a brief moment as if they are different languages.

I liked how Strayer makes it a point when talking about Jesus that women were equal to men. However, it didn't take long for men to twist this and once again rule that women would be subdue. I wonder why women stood for this? Was it really that men were so much stronger, or was it the idea that they were stronger? Were there no women that could stand up to the men and demand change? There were the martys that followed Christianity and I applaud them. The entire sense of the alpha male frankly pisses me off. A strong man is not a man that walks around beating his chest or his woman. A strong man is caring and compassionate. I think it was Confucius who talks about what it meant to be a man and he may be on to something. Except of course the thought of ruling over women.

How different would our world be if men were subdued to men those days? How about Christianity, would the bible be reflected differently, if women sat down at the table and decided which books should be included? I think so. I think the entire sections on women subduing to their husbands would have been thrown out! Maybe if women decided our fate, our world wouldn't be so fearful. Except women were fearful and that may have been why they were easily told what to do. Anyway, if women were more in positions of power then, would there have been so many executions? Would civilization been less cruel? I would like to thank yes. Maybe if there were more influential women back then, civilization may not have faced slavery or inequality of any kind. Sure women can be ruthless as well, but are the lesser of the two evils? Either way, our history has been skewed because it derived from half of the population. If women weren't even taken into account then the history that we know may be even further from the truth.