Let me explain....

So, again, I've been MIA but it seems like this will explain a bit of why:

oh jeez, where to start... I guess from the beginning, best way to say it is to just come out with it, right? Well, Gabe and I broke up about three weeks ago now.
I expected to be totally torn and broken upon this happening, but I think mentally and emotionally Gabe and I broke up a long time ago. I feel like I've already gone through the break up feelings. If I were to be totally honest, I'd say I've felt like we broke up back in July. I was just so desperate to not lose him and to make it work that I did everything I could to make it last. Needless to say, it wasn't healthy for either of us.
But I'm okay.
The part that hurts is that he didn't even fight for me. The exact opposite actually. He started lies and rumors about me, and who knows how many people he spread them to, or even how long he has been doing it. I found out because my wonderful roommates filled me in.
I'm so thankful to have them and know that we all got each other's backs.
Its sad to say, but I'm happier without Gabe being around. I loved him with all of my heart, I truly did, but I'm not noticing the huge red flags that were screaming that we never would have lasted that dream "forever". And after all that he's done since we broke up, I'm wondering if he ever really, honestly and truly cared for me or if I as just convenient. It sucks to question that, but I am.
Since he's moved out, there's music playing in my house again and I'm able to breathe without feeling suffocated. I'm not sick as much and I'm not as reliant on my depression medications as I was.
I know it seems fast, but please remember how long Gabe and I have been distant: I have started seeing another guy, his name is Zach. He has really shown me how I deserve to be treated. He brings me flowers all the time and constantly tells me I'm pretty. He holds me tight and there's a look in his eyes that I never saw in Gabe's. I'm not moving too fast after two years with Gabe... I'm moving on with my life. Gabe helped me learn a lot, and I really needed that. But now, I need someone who lets me be me and helps me rather than tears me down.

I think I have that now in Zach, but I'm not jumping into anything. I will always love Gabe, and he has been a huge part of my life, but I guess it was just time to move on.

Things get interesting

Hey there,
sorry I've been kind of MIA on the personal level blogs and have only been posting school stuff. My life seems to like to explode.
I had a lot of drama happen between my friend, her family and things... I can't really talk about it yet, but I'll update when I can.
Then school drama started because of computer error so ya know, that majorly sucked. But luckily it all got worked out (hence all the awesome papers I've been updating with).
 So far I'm doing really well in my class, and I'm stoked to almost be done.
Work is the same, haha, not really. One of my coworkers started a whole bunch of rumors that corp. has to take seriously so now everyone is walking on egg shells and super stressed out. It has become rigid and cold at work, which sucks. All due to one immature child. Grrrr.... also my hours have been varying so much that I went and started to apply for a second job, and sounds like I might have one at Sears. Phew that should help.
As for me personally, my anxiety and depression is better though I still have hard days. I kind of figure it will continue to be like that, so I just breathe through it.



I'll update more later this week when I'm not about to fall asleep on my laptop.


Love to you all, and best wishes.

DUI paper for school

Driving Under The Influence

"It is said that we will always remember the smells, noises and sight of our first car crash. Lucky for me, I got knocked out during mine. Odd to say, "lucky me" when it comes to getting close to a concussion, I know. But I'm happy that I don't have the memory of the sound of the two cars hitting. Something I do remember is the police checking to see if I was under the influence of anything: drugs, alcohol or even simply tired.

Again, luckily I was not under the influence of anything nor was the lady at fault. Unlike me, there are a lot of people who are affected by the consequences of people driving under in the influence, whether it be them, or someone else. Back in 2012 355,322 people were affected by drunk driving, with 10,322 people of those being killed and 345,000 of them being injured. Each death and injury is just another person to us until they are our family, friends, classmates and coworkers - then it becomes real, too real.

The harsh reality comes in from the fact that a lot of these injured or deceased people are teens, with car crashes - in general - being the number one killer of teens in the United States, its hard to factor in the account of underage drinking. The statistic shows that around eight teens die every day in driving under the influence car crashes, whether they are the drivers or the victims. Back in 2005, 7420 teens died or got seriously injured in these crashes. (Teen)

To throw a few more numbers in, lets talk about an every day thing: on average every 53 minutes someone is killed in a drunk driving crash. What is hard to believe is that about one-third of these drunk driving problems come from repeat offenders. 50 to 75 percent of these repeat offenders are people who have even had their licenses revoked. So, the biggest question is how can we stop the drunk drivers from driving and risking not only their lives, their passengers' lives (if there are any) and also, every other person who is out and about that day. The only thing that has been proven to work is an ignition interlock.

An ignition interlock is a small device - picture your normal cellphone size - that is put into a car and is wired to the car's ignition system. The driver of the car must blow into the device, as if they were taking a breathalyzer test. If the driver has a measurable blood alcohol level in their system at that time, the car will not start. These devices have been seen to drop deaths from drunk driving by more than 30 percent in Oregon, Arizona, Louisiana and New Mexico. With only 25 states requiring these systems to be put into all offender's vehicles, I'm excited to see the percent in deaths go down as the number of states goes up. (Drunk)

I chose this topic because it hits home for me. Though I have never been part of a crash that involved any driver being under the influence, I have been affected by one. In 2011 I got a phone call that no one ever wants to get, my boyfriend had been in a car wreck. His car was found rolled over in a ditch. He was found a few feet away. His seat belt had snapped and he flew out of the windshield. He was dead. On the other side of the road was the truck that had hit his, the driver still inside, passed out, but still breathing. Once he was in the hospital, his tests came back positive for a blood alcohol level that was through the roof. It was because of this guy deciding he was okay to drive that I lost a person who was soon to be my fiance. No one wants to be in the position I was in, and I would never wish that heartbreaking phone call on anybody. But it is due to the empathy that I feel as to why I feel I am a key person for this cause. I know what its like to be on the other side of the phone.

I know that there are always arguments of people knowing their limits when it comes to if they are safe to drive after going out for a drink that quickly turned into two and then three and so on and so forth. I want to know, how. How do these people know that "oh, well I've had three vodka martinis but since I can still walk, I can drive". From my knowledge, there is no proven way to know without a breath test or knowing your alcohol level. The safest bet is to always have a designated driver or have money for a cab. Planning ahead when you know there is going to be alcohol is the one way to know that people are going to be safe.

But still, how do we know if we are "sober enough" to drive, well if you're asking the question, then chances are you're not. Yes, people can give themselves the walking a straight line test, but for some people it isn't that hard to simply put one foot in front of the other so the question will honestly never be solved. It is all personal judgment and the judgment of those around you. The harsh reality is that on average, a person has driven drunk eighty times before they are arrested the first time. Big number isn't it? But with knowing how many people are killed every hour due to people driving under the influence, the number seems to shrink. If that person was able to drive eighty times, then it seems obvious that they did it safely, right? I mean, they made it from point A to point B without drawing any attention to themselves, so they must not have been that drunk.

What is "that drunk" though. One beer? Two, three, four beers? Again, there is no way of telling since everyone handles alcohol differently. So it is on us to take responsibility for ourselves and everyone around us. Do you want to risk one of those eighty times after three beers, and that one time getting in a wreck where a person was killed. Imagine if it was your friend, or a teen driving the other car. Now that eighty seems like a smaller number, right?

Now think of that deceased person's family. What do they have? They just lost their child, sibling, cousin... their blood. Luckily there are organizations like MADD - Mothers Against Drunk Driving - that do offer support and services to victims and their families. MADD helps one person ever 8.6 minutes. That is one person who is a victim of a crash of someone under the influence whether it be drunk driving, underage drinking or drugged driving. Now that eighty might as well be one. It only takes one crash to destroy a group of people's lives. A car crash - not even just one from drunk driving - hurts not only those physically involved but the families, friends and other loved ones as well. Only one, not eighty.

I chose this topic because no matter how you swing it, there is no excuse for driving under the influence. There are always people to call, public transportation or simply choosing who will be the designated driver for the night so that way you know that you can do your best in making sure everyone gets home safe."  

Obedience paper for school

Obedience

" In the beginning, I thought that Stanley Milgram's  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCVlI-_4GZQ) experiment was torture - just like I'm sure a lot of people assume, being shocked with high voltage would seem to kill a man in a seemingly heartless way. Then when I got to the point of the video where it mentioned that it was all in the person's mind and that they weren't actually being shocked, I was amazed how a person's brain can trigger them to think they were being shocked all because they were told as such. To have such an influence over someone to where they actually think that they are being shocked at such high voltages to where they think they are actually in pain.

It seems that the presence of an authority figure puts such a pressure on people that they either mess up because they are concentrating more on the authority rather than their task at hand. On the other side, there seem to be other people who perform better under a watchful eye, so it all depends on how the individual performs under stress. Either way, having that figure present seems to influence people to behave - in an obedience sense - better since they do know they are being watched and could get in trouble or in the video's case "shocked".

When I think of authority figures in every day life, four different people come into my mind: police, teachers, bosses and parents. What's funny is to each it seems that they have a different affect on people and obedience. Maybe because they're in different environments or maybe because each holds a different form of being an authority figure.

Police get both sides of the spectrum when it comes to how others obeying them. They get some people who obey and listen better when there is a cop around, maybe for fear of going to jail or getting a ticket or maybe out of sheer respect for someone with a badge. But of course, there are criminals. There are always those people who try to run, spit on or fight the police and then usually attempt to run. In general though, it seems that the majority of people do obey most laws and listen, as well as respect, police.

As for teachers, they also get both hands dealt to them. I'd almost put teachers and parents in the same boat when it comes to obedience in people towards authority figures. There's the kids who do well and seem to never get in trouble in school or at home, then there's the "rebellious" group who seems to always be in trouble and are frequent visitors to the principal or the term grounded.

I think bosses are really the only ones I see where they have an affect on obedience because it seems, especially in my town, people struggle so much to get a job that they wont do anything to risk losing that job once they get it. So, they do every task and obey every rule that their boss gives them. I am even guilty of this. People might still talk negatively behind their boss' back, but to their face they try to be on their best behavior.

In general, I feel that people think that being a person of authority means that they are higher on the totem pole and closer to being "top dog". I feel that a lot of people go against their own personal ethics because they think that this person has something to offer them. Whether it be getting out of a speeding ticket, getting an A on a test or getting a raise, it does come off that the authority always has something to offer."

Personality Theories paper for school

Personality Theories

"When looking at different theories and theorists, especially when it comes to human behavior you see different groups and studies that they are separated in by their study. The theorists that we are talking about is Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. Freud and Jung are both psychoanalytic while Rogers and Maslow are both Humanistic.

Humanistic is a study that more concentrates on the value of human beings, both individually and collectively. Usually humanistic studies focus on critical thinking, evidence, established doctrine and faith. Psychoanalysis is when the psychiatrists helps a patient discover and confront the causes of their illness. This method of treating illnesses started with Sigmund Freud, well at least it was the most heard of and dominate from early in the twentieth century.

Sigmund Freud considered that the primary source of motivation, especially for males, is sexual impulses. These impulses are usually seen as being unconscious, and help direct an individual's thinking and behavior. Freud's view of sexual motivation became a hot topic since there are so many ways for a person to be sexually motivated. Either by intimacy or straight out physically. A man is more likely to clean the kitchen if his woman is willing to do something in return. Freud's theory was based of off instinct, emphasized off of interpersonal relations and self assertiveness.

Carl Jung disagrees on the emphasis that Freud puts on the role and importance of sex on a person's personality development. Jung thought that attention importance for motivation should be more focused on religious, aesthetic - their appearance - and other basic needs. Jung also started to include the different concepts and differences of people who are introverts, extroverts and archetypes. With this, Jung was the start of the modern day existentialism. Jung was more of the opinion that the cosmic order and history of the human race is the most important part of the human mind. He used dreams as his example. Jung's study contained archetypes, which are manifested symbols that appear in dreams, disturbed states of mind and are different products of different cultures.

Carl Rogers, said to be the father of client centered therapy. This means that Rogers likes to have nondirect sessions and reflect on the responses rather than making it vague. Making his sessions more focused on the individual client made him feel like there was a more atmosphere of acceptance for his clients. With this environment, Rogers felt that it allowed his clients to get more in touch with the resources and knowledge within himself (Rogers) for successfully dealing with life and his client's own development self esteem. Having that one on one time and feeling to the sessions gave the clients the ability to develop their individuality and learn more about themselves rather than just having their questions answered in a scientific based way.

Abraham Maslow, the popular hierarchy of needs. Maslow liked to focus on the individual and the thought of self actualization. Maslow thought that humans are basically good in nature and within themselves need to develop their own full potential all while staying true to themselves. Maslow's hierarchy of needs includes both physiological and psychological levels of a person's daily needs. The physiological were the more primary in his thinking and theory of his creation of the hierarchy of needs. These needs are a daily thing, rather than what a person should focus on for their life. A person should focus on accomplishing each tear of the popular ladder or triangle that is often used to show the hierarchy of needs. The pyramid has the largest, most fundamental level of needs at the bottom and the need for self actualization at the top.

The first tear is physiological, this is the basic human needs such as breathing, food, water, sleep, sex and exercise. The second tear is safety. The need of employment, feeling that your body is safe, having family, healthy, morality and a roof over your head. Middle tear is love and belonging. The basic human need of friendship, family and intimacy. Then goes esteem. Having self esteem, confidence, achievement, respect of others and respect by others. The top tear is self actualization. This tear is often the hardest for people to accomplish. This is the human need of morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving and the acceptance of facts.

Though each of the above theorists contributed greatly to the study of personality traits. It is easy to see that each one is different from the other. Freud focuses on physical motivation, Jung believes more in the state of dreams, Rogers focuses on self worth and development of self esteem then Maslow focuses on individual needs on a day to day basis.

Personally, I agree more with Maslow's theory in that everyone is an individual and needs to focus more on their own individual needs versus focusing on the human race as a whole and putting them as groups and categories rather than individualizing them as people. Having something to aim towards day to day and over a life time is a very realistic motivation and though the hierarchy of needs is in a vague set up, each stage can mean something different to each individual. For example, safety to me means that I'm in no way shape or form going to be in a situation that my life or health is on the line. To others, it might simply mean having a roof over their head and money in their pockets. But in the hierarchy of needs, your just supposed to successfully feel safe. A vague theory can almost be the best because each person can take it on as they see fit and as it fits them, where having something just pin pointed, such as Freud's theory of sexual motivation, doesn't work for everyone because there are people who don't enjoy sex or even to be touched.

Either way, each theorist contributed greatly to the study of personality development and self individual growth and development. Each in their own way but still working with each other. Maslow's pyramid does include human sexual need from Freud, and self worth from Rogers. Though they are each different, they are each working together and including similar aspects of the study of personality and motivation in human beings as individuals and as a group."  

Prejudice paper for school

Prejudice

"Society and prejudicial attitudes seem to run hand in hand, though we usually hear it as people stereotyping or discriminating. It seems that a lot of people's opinions depend on where and how they grew up, as if their environment alters their feelings, thinking and behavior.

As an example, I grew up in very discriminative town especially towards racial differences. When there was the first black teacher at my high school. parents wouldn't even go up to talk to him and kids were dropping out of the class he took. Then when he came out as being bisexual, even more kids dropped and some parents had their children switch classes or schools. All of this because of what they had been taught, and now those kids are being taught the same thing.

For me, my personal identity is also how I grew up, but I saw how people around me were treating anyone who was different, so though I was taught that "different" was bad, I didn't like seeing the negative effect on the "victims". Just because someone is different doesn't make them less of a human. And that personal opinion has caused me to be different than how I grew up, I am very accepting of others. Though for personal identity in others, I see where it is a lot of how they are raised. If you are taught to fear or judge people who are different than yourself, then it is going to be hard to change that opinion.

Fear, negativity and looking for something to judge others off of. That is what is learned and taught generation to generation. These emotions and behaviors just keep the prejudicial attitudes going strong. It only takes one person in a large group to be an influence over everyone else. If one person yells a racial slur, then chances are others will start up and join as well.

It is hard to change something that you've learned or have lived with your entire life, but it is possible. To not fear and to be educated, each person is different and there is no point in treating others different than how you personally want to be treated."  

Case Study paper for school

Case Study

"Group think is when a person discourages creativity or individual responsibility by making decisions for the group. A few examples of it that are shown in our Appendix B is when Tom, Susie and Richard plan the paper into sections without Mark and Betty. To further on that one, the second example is that they already indicated what the different sections should include. Third example is that they also chose who should write each section. Then again when Mark and Betty bring up that the citations are required but the rest of the group turns them down.

A few things that I would have done is bring up that I'm a new insight to the paper and that I can do a lot more than what they had "assigned" me to do. As a group, though, it is important to remember that you're a team. Everyone needs to work together, and just because you might have worked with people previously doesn't mean that someone doesn't know that section better. Making plans as a team can really help. Also, in this case a reason why the team got a lower grade is because people weren't being listened to. If everyone had listened to Mark and Betty, they would have included the citations that were needed in each section, and they would have gotten a higher grade since that's the only reason they got a low grade.

If Mark and Betty had grouped together and listened to each other, they could have made their sections of the paper proper and the teacher would have been bound to notice that only two people followed the syllabus as it was supposed to be. Asserting yourself and following what you know can be the best way to go, even if it means going against the group's decision."