But while living such varying lives and experiences, how can we possibly fathom what those around us have gone through? The short answer is: we don’t. Oftentimes, the best way to support others through emotions like pain and suffering is to understand the fact that you truly don’t know what it’s like, but despite that still offer support and assurance. Saying things like “I know that must be hard”, aren’t always as powerful as “I can’t possibly understand what you’re going through, but I’m here for you”. Leslie Jamison found this out while at a conference for those suffering from Morgellons disease. While listening to the stories of others, she tried to identify with their experiences, comparing it to insecurities or a time she felt as though she had bugs crawling through her skin. But deep down she knew that trying to empathize with them through shared experiences wasn’t the way to go. (153 words)

Although we try to place ourselves in the shoes of others while listening to their troubles, oftentimes we can’t really understand what they’ve been through. Saying things like “I know that must be hard” don’t always support the other person as intended and often leave them feeling misunderstood. Leslie Jamison realized this at a conference for those with Morgellons disease after discovering that she couldn’t understand their pain. Instead of trying to identify with their experiences, she had to listen and support despite her skepticism. (85 words)

In “Unfollow” by Adrian Chen, readers begin to see the true value of accepting people for who they are and offering empathy, despite disagreeing with them. It follows the story of Megan Phelps-Roper who for a long time, lived a life of hatred and obedience under the Westboro Baptist Church. She became the messenger of the church, leading protests and movements aimed at harassing anyone the church deemed a “sinner”. This story honestly made me angrier than most, often had me wondering, “how could someone be so hateful and believe such awful things?” But Megan’s story was one of manipulation and deception from the church and her family and it wasn’t until she was exposed to the opinions of others that she began to realize her faults. Phelps-Roper says, “I couldn’t bring myself to do the things we were doing and say the things we were saying” (Chen 87). Other than this being a story about Phelps-Roper’s life and how she got out of the church, Chen is also presenting us with a sort of argument about empathy and accepting others. Megan’s was a very extreme example, I but I think it was to show the benefits of opening yourself up to others and offering them kindness and empathy, whether or not you believe them. I think that he did this to sort of show that even if you don’t believe/agree with that person, if you offer them empathy and compassion you start to open your eyes more and see things that your hatred might’ve blinded you from.

I think one of the strengths from my paper that I feel pretty confident about was an array of well-chosen language throughout the writing. I think in comparison to the last paper I improved a lot on my word choice and sentence structure in order to convey my ideas more clearly. I also think I did well when it came to incorporating my interview into my paper and using it to strengthen my argument. I think that one of my weaknesses that still needs improvement is sometimes strange word choices. I have a habit of when I’m unable to find the best fitting word for a sentence, going to Thesaurus.com and picking whichever sounds best. I think I need to focus more on the context of the word and using it to strengthen the sentence rather than trying to make it sound more “smart”. I think that overall I used this paper to try and improve upon things I lacked in the last paper like sentence structure, word choice, and insightful analysis. I think that I dug deeper with my points this time and tried bringing my own ideas into the writing rather than recycling what’s already been stated. I also think that I improved on how I incorporated my sources into my writing to strengthen my argument.

Leslie Jamison’s piece “Devil’s Bait” was by far the most interesting I’ve read in this class so far. Morgellons disease was one I had heard of and had an inclination about but knew fairly little about the disease itself. So far, it seems there is no widely accepted explanation for why these people itch and see/feel these bugs, parasites, or fibers moving across or under their skin. But if I learned one thing from reading this is that these people are most definitely suffering. It’s difficult to empathize with people when you truly cannot fathom what is going on inside their head or you plainly just don’t believe them. But whether or not you believe these people doesn’t mean they should be denied simple human empathy towards their pain, which unlike their claim, is undeniable. The people at the convention were clearly suffering and Jamison had to look past her own skepticism to provide what few were able to give these people: empathy. When referencing a unified or divided self, one attacking, one under attack, Jamison poses the question: “But I wonder why this fractioned self shouldn’t warrant our compassion as much as the besieged self? Or maybe even more?”(Jamison 232). I personally think that throughout the writing, Jamison isn’t asking the reader whether or not they believe Morgellons is real, but rather whether we think that they deserve empathy despite our lack of understanding. I think she uses the headings of a scientific article as almost a way to counter the typical logical approach and say “this isn’t about science and the facts behind the disease, but hearing these people and supporting them through their pain”. Jamison ends with almost a confession that she feels as though she betrayed the people she talked to because she couldn’t give them what they wanted, her belief. But despite not being able to commit to their belief, she acknowledges their suffering and hopes for their relief.

People of all kinds of backgrounds, for different reasons, feel the need to cover in their everyday life. In the article “The Pressure to Cover” by Kenji Yoshino, the idea of covering and how damaging it can be to human flourishing is explored. Covering is the act of conforming to mainstream behaviors in order to subside the “flaunting” of a person’s differences, usually under pressure of those around them. Most people do cover in one way or another, whether it be a subconscious attempt to fit in with what is normalized, or a forced covering by others. Yoshino discusses the pressure to cover and how, while it’s not protected by the law, it can be seen as a form of discrimination. Yoshino states, “This discrimination does not aim at groups as a whole. Rather, it aims at the subset of the group that refuses to cover, that is, to assimilate to dominant norms. And for the most part, existing civil rights laws do not protect individuals against such covering demands”. The pressure to cover has become a loophole of sorts in order to accept the differences of others, as long as they don’t make a fuss of it. While it gives the impression of acceptance, the pressure to cover is far from it. It gives the appearance that those differences are valid but they should not be seen, shown, or expressed in any way. This ideology is very harmful and the suppression and silencing of differences only takes us further away from human flourishing.

The article titled “Post-#MeToo, Ernst & Young Grapples With Diverging Views Of Its Culture” by Yuki Noguchi on NPR was an eye-opening and shocking view of how gender inequality still remains in the workplace. Noguchi references several instances in which female Ernst & Young employees endured acts of sexual harassment and discrimination while working there. One of the examples was a training program that promoted sexist ideals where female employees were told to “manicure their nails and wear fitting attire, but to avoid plunging necklines” or that “Affection and cheerfulness were feminine traits, they were told, whereas ambition and assertiveness were masculine” (Noguchi). These outdated and harmful standards are some of the many examples of women and other discriminated groups needing to cover for those around them. Many people today are beginning to think that there isn’t much need for feminism anymore when, in their eyes, men and women are equal enough. But the sad reality is that still is a long ways away. This discrimination is still going on under our noses as women are being pressured to cover in the workplace in order to make a more “suitable” work environment for their male counterparts. Noguchi highlights how while the discrimination may not be obvious, the covering that results is very harmful.

In my first paper, one of the sentences that could’ve been revised had an odd, clunky flow to it, so I moved the words around to state the same idea but with more fluidity. I think that sometimes in an attempt to cram a lot of context into one sentence, I tend to jumble my words and thoughts in an unorganized way. When revising, I definitely had to work more on conveying my thoughts and points in a clear, cohesive way.

Old Sentence:

Another example of this effect of labeling found in the writing is Gay’s internal struggle over her status as a feminist.

New Sentence:

Gay’s internal struggle over her status as a feminist is another example of the effects of labeling that can be found in her writing.

I think that one of my weaknesses throughout my writing was sometimes having unnecessary repetition of ideas instead of clearer, more direct statements. Instead of stating my thoughts more directly, I often danced around the idea without being as straightforward as needed. I think that one of my strengths in my writing was my word choice and was able to convey strong statements with meaning and a variety of vocabulary. But it was also at some points a weakness where going out of my way to find the perfect word resulted in lost meaning of my sentence.

In the article “Want to be less racist? Move to Hawaii” by Moises Velasquez-Manoff, the author shares the interesting perspective on race of the Hawaiian residents. He describes how many of the people of Hawaii have mixed backgrounds from multiple races and cultures and how it’s become completely normal there. The people don’t typically use race and appearances to make assumptions about others, helping to prove that racism and stereotyping is a learnt behavior, rather than instinctual. A lot of this comes from the large population of people of mixed races in Hawaii, many of which have several different racial backgrounds. This results in a difficulty of categorizing people based off race, which Velasquez-Manoff realized during his time in Hawaii. He recalls a time when he tried this categorization but, as he states, “quickly realized the assumption underlying my fieldwork was fatally flawed. Here I was trying to discern ancestry, but how was I to know anyone’s background just by looking, particularly in a place where people were so mixed? (Velasquez Manoff). He eventually came to the realization of how different Hawaii views race than the states of the Lower 48 and while they “see” race, they don’t use it as a defining factor of a person to make assumptions or categorize them. This article showed many great examples of behaviors of stereotyping and racism and how they aren’t ingrained in our minds, but in our society.