The way you look should be a sin

There is a cliche that says "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and while it is up for one to decide what they deem as "beautiful", it remains pretty uniform, with slight variations as one travels around the world.

In The Scarlet Letter, Hester is described almost exclusively with positive adjectives. "Elegant", and "lady-like" Her beauty both emphasizes and draws away from the severity of her crimes at the same time. Because Hester's beauty creates an aura of purity around her, the townspeople are shocked at the heinousness of her crimes. At the same time, all her charitable work is further highlighted by her radiance, creating an angel-like image, a pretty big deal in the deeply religious Puritan society.

"Beauty" in the sense of physical attractiveness can actually be scientifically calculated. It's really interesting, but even scarier, how you can assign a numerical value to one's beauty. Features developed by testosterone and estrogen, certain distance ratios between facial features, and symmetry between facial features all contribute to one's "beauty score". What's even more disturbing is being physically attractive implies more than being physically attractive.

In The Bluest Eye, the "beauty" of the doll that Claudia receives causes many people to imply that it is a "worthy" toy. In reality, it's quite the opposite. The doll has no intrinsic value, and Claudia is the only one to see this. The only purpose it serves is to "irritate" her and it seems the only fun she can get out of the doll is to destroy it. Claudia sees past the illusion that the beauty of the doll creates about its worth.

There is a cliche that says "Don't judge a book by its cover" and while it is up for one to decide what they deem as valuable, it's pretty obvious that one should actually look into another person's character to judge their character.

the people highest up got the lowest self esteem

While it may be true that those at the top of the social ladder are insecure, it is true that those at the top of the social ladder tend to give those that are lower a hard time. It is true that those at the bottom of the social ladder must stay strong to withstand all the judgement they receive, and they do.

In The Scarlet Letter, Hester holds her head up, despite all the public shaming she undergoes, and her mark eventually comes to symbolize her charitability and willingness to help the sick. In The Lone Ranger and Tonto fistfight in Heaven, Alexie's Native-american heritage is constantly commented on during his youth. Despite the negative preformed ideas about Alexie that everyone has about Alexie in their head, and Alexie's awareness of those ideas, he is still able to become a prolific, and educated writer. In "Black men and Public Spaces"Staples is aware that he is being judged by his skin color. Although he is deeply saddened by his judgers' actions, he doesn't show it, knowing that a physical appeal won't do anything. Instead, he seeks to change the world through his writing and journalism. In "The Glass Castle" Walls and her family are a bunch of migratory vagrants. However, through familial bonds and pride, the Walls family is able to keep together through other kids' teasing, and the judgement of the entire town.

Literature has shown that we should stop focusing on the higher up and their cruelties, but the lower class, and their steadfastness and resolve.

All falls down

Humans are scared of the unknown. It's why we judge, and stereotype, and plan. Planning is easy enough, but carrying out a plan is a little more difficult. It's impossible to account for all the little variables that might mess up a plan, and the volatile nature of the variables is the reason for 100% of plans not going 100% of the way they are planned out.

Everything we do is planned. I plan to go downstairs to the kitchen to get a snack, but I am stupid- a variable that I didn't account for because I am stupid- so I forget why I went downstairs and return empty handed. If I had perfectly executed that plan, I would've swiftly gotten to the kitchen, gotten my snack of choice, and returned to my bedroom with minimum energy expenditure. Instead, I returned empty handed. Even if I had remembered to get a snack there would've been other variables to ruin my plan. I could have fell down the stairs, or maybe there wouldn't be any pudding left. I might have taken one step too many, and wasted precious calories.

In The Scarlet Letter, Hester and Dimmesdale's plans to flee to Europe are ruined when Chillingsworth joins as the boat's doctor. The ruining of their plan causes "Hester's strong, calm, steadfastly enduring spirit almost sank,"(Hawthorne 241). For Dimmesdale, it makes him feel like there's no other way out, so he publicly confesses to his sins, and swiftly proceeds to drop dead.

The bigger a plan is, the more variables there are, and the bigger the consequence is when it gets messed up. You could trip on your way to school and dirty your sweater, or you might crash and die on a plane ride to Disney Land. Either way, it's pretty messed up.

What's a king without a crown

In Deborah' Tannen's "There is no unmarked woman" piece, one of the traits she discusses that marks women is their hair. She says that since women don't have a standard hairstyle, every hairstyle is seen as different, which removes a woman's "option of being unmarked". While I do agree that women's hairstyles mark them because there is no set standard, I feel like its unfair to say that men always have a choice to be unmarked.

When I look at all my friends hairstyles, none of them look the same. Bangs, curls, fringes, sideburns,  and even the locations of their parts mark them.

Tannen also treats being marked as if it is always a bad thing. I like to think my hair used to be pretty marked. Marked enough to have 4 of your teachers tell you you're unrecognizable after a haircut, and have 3 of your friends actively avoid you because they don't know who you are, until another friend tells them.

I just find it pretty mind blowing that I had some friends that didn't know what my face looked like, but could still recognize me perfectly, because of my "mark".

Everybody is marked in some way. Old people are marked by their age. Rich people are marked by their riches, fit people are marked by their fitness. Every mark tells a story, but it's up to those that are marked to decide what story the mark will tell.

The prettiest people do the ugliest things

Humans are social creatures, and in order for people to interact properly, not only laws were put in place to govern one's behavior, but many, complicated, untold, yet important social constructs. It's generally considered rude to point and laugh at someone. However, what if someone pointed and laughed at someone else who farted on a crowded elevator. Is it acceptable then? Or just a little bit more acceptable, or maybe even more unacceptable? Analyzing social situations becomes even more interesting if more variables are added. The reactions of people might change if it was a child doing the laughing, rather than a teenager, or a middle-aged person. Their judgement might also change if it were a female's flatulence, rather than a male's. Different people are held to different social standards.  Anybody would be more disgusted if a dentist or a lawyer, rather than  a garbageman, picked their nose during work, In The Scarlet Letter, Hester Prynne, being of  "perfect elegance", is an image of dignity and beauty, except for the fact that she is an adulteress, and her flawless physical appearance only serves to exemplify her crimes. Even 200 years ago, and probably since civilized society has existed, the laws and social codes put in place have been interpreted different- even unfairly- for different people.

Don't be mad cause I'm doing me better than you're doing you

As a human being, one of the things we instinctively do is judge. Although it's offensive to make inferences on a person you don't even know, I'm guilty of this, and sometimes I can't help myself to jump to conclusions based on someone's first impression. Physical appearance- skin color, height, weight, stance- are all used as "clues" into trying to decipher who somebody is on the inside. Sometimes I decide if a person looks "mean" or "nice" just by the way their features are arranged on their face. These preconceived notions distort reality for all of us. Although we try and save all our judgement for ourselves- evaluating our own abilities and limitations,-we always have that thought in the back of our heads like "I bet that asian kid beat me on the math test" or "I bet that black guy will beat me in this race". Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason however, in that they're not true for a majority of their subject. Like any longstanding belief, its unfair to say that stereotypes don't have strong foundations. However, it is unfair to believe Sherman Alexie was going to grow up and become and alcoholic just because he was a "dang Indian". It's also unfair to determine that a college-educated professional journalist is a "mugger, a rapist, or worse" solely by the color of his skin. Prejudiced notions of other human beings have existed in our society from the beginning, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't end anytime soon.

Soy un perdedor

A racist , bloodthirsty man once said "History is written by the victors". That man also happened to be one of the most beloved and well known English prime ministers in history, Winston Churchill. Praised for being one of the great minds that defeated Hitler, Churchill's legacy would've been much different if the Nazis had triumphed in World War II. Indeed, if the axis powers had came out victorious in World War II, the world would be a much different place than it is today. Fascism would have dominated the worlds governments, the holocaust might have expanded to an an unthinkably horrible degree, and Hitler's dream of an Aryan master race might have come true. Fortunately, all we can do today is speculate about what would have happened to the human race if World War II had ended differently. However, this speculation opens a question that can be asked to everything that happened in history, ever- "what happened to the other guys"?

The timelessness of this question proves the validity of Churchill's quote. Theorizing about the changes humanity would've faced if the American revolution had ended differently is as important as thinking about what happened to that kid who cracked his new I Phone screen. The events that have occurred have occurred- history has been "written" and America is now one of the most powerful nations on the planet, and that kid no longer has a functional phone. Although the American revolution seems like a relic of the past, and a broken I Phone is too trivial to reflect on, any and all events in history are fair game to analyze Churchill's statement. The Glass Castle is one of the best examples of this philosophy. Jeannette Walls is a "victor" having worked hard enough to earn an education and succeed in life. Thus, she is writing her own history, literally, in the form of a memoir. The reader feels sympathy for Walls and all her struggles, and they should. However, Jeanette is far from the only person that has had problems with poverty, or molestation, with thousands of people having it far worse than her. Even though millions of people deserve to be heard, they never can be, and never will be; simply because they have "lost" in society's eyes. One of the most influential figures in the modern day is Oprah. She turned her childhood struggles into an extremely popular daytime television show. Now she writes history. Oprah dictates many a life, with thousands of zealous watchers eating what Oprah eats, reading what Oprah reads, and trying as hard as they can to live how Oprah lives. However, for every Oprah, there are tens of thousands of the depressed, the unheard, the forgotten- those that are lost and have lost. They might be more well read than Oprah, more cultured, have more of an appreciation for the arts, but nobody would ever guess that that dirty, homeless man was a Shakespeare connoisseur. Even more meta into the subject of winners and losers in The Glass Castle is a certain instance where Jeanette is discussing her new job with her mother. Instead of covering the "oppressive landlords, social injustice, and the class struggle on the Lower East Side" (Walls 171) she writes articles on the gossip of the city's elite. She is  "winning" by getting a decent job writing about the "winners", that is the wealthy of New York, which provides her the money and credibility to "win" in the future- which is publishing her own book, which deals with how history is written by the victors. Another case is in the Disney movie Frozen, and possibly every other Disney movie ever. The main character always has a happy ending, while the villain is defeated and properly punished. In Frozen, we see Hans, the villain, getting punched off a boat, while we see Elsa and Anna return to a loving kingdom. A sequel is rumored to be released in 2015, which raises the question, "what happened to the other guys?" Did Hans drown after being punched off a boat? Was he exiled from his homeland for his criminal behaviors and eventually killed in the wilderness? Was he executed for his treasonous behavior? He "lost" by failing in his plan to take over Arendelle kingdom, and for that we will never know his story. Perhaps he had good intentions for Arendelle. Maybe whatever he took from his brothers was far worse than anything he ever did to Anna. With a simple example from a childish movie, we can see one of the greatest inequalities in human nature. In a world with so much to say, learn, discover, and be, 50% of  the world is being ignored. History is the study of past events, and with those past events being described and dictated by those that have come out on top, there seems nothing else to do but ignore those on the bottom.