HW 45 - Reply to Other Peoples' Comments

Reply to Alina:

I'm glad that you enjoyed my project and understand the main arguments I presented to you.  I intended to make my readers re-think and reconsider the reasons behind their opinions and so, I was more than happy to hear that you tried to put your self in a different perspective and evaluate your ideas and opinions.  However, I didn't intend for my reader to become unbiased because truthfully, no one person can be un-biased.  It's simply impossible because we base our decisions and beliefs on our past experiences and those that were told to us.  I hope that others become as captivated as you were after you read my project.  I'll be sure to look out for your insights and criticisms in the near future! 

Reply to Abdul M:

First and foremost, thank you for spending time writing such a lengthy comment.  I truly appreciate it.  I feel accomplished to know that you fully understood what aspects of abortion I wanted to focus on.  I had unintentionally chosen people of different races to interview but, now that you've pointed it out, I see the benefits of doing so.  Diversity or rather, opposing view points are always good to have in a persuasive paper.  I'll definitely make it necessary to provide all the possible perspectives of a topic the next time.  

I hope to create more writing pieces that are important to you so that my writing cannot only capture your interest but, provoke you to take a step forward in your actions as person with opinions subject to change or influence.  To answer your first question - doing this project definitely helped me evaluate myself and how I would argue my stance to an opposer.  Like that of my interviewees, I have been influenced by my parents and most likely propaganda.  My opinions on abortion, as well those on other topics, are subject to change as the surrounding popular influence changes along with them.

Thank you for saying that my post was better than yours but, I think that's degrading to you and your work.  Your work was especially revealing and I applaud you for your use of statistics, an area of which my project lacked in.  I will take into account for my next project that my reader will not always have prior knowledge to the topic I choose to talk about.  It would have been ideal if I had defined what abortion was.  Though I mentioned some statistics in my film, I should've put more statistics in my paper like you've just suggested.  Although offering more information about how political parties feel about abortion would be beneficial, I wanted to focus more on the opinions of my peers.  I will try my best to better educate and engage those who choose to read my posts.

Reply to Martyna:

Thank you for recognizing that the topic I chose to write about and explore as difficult and controversial.  However, the difficulty of my topic does not make up for my lack of creativity as many people have decided to explore the same topic in the same way.  I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you define abortion as being taboo...When you have the time, please help me understand what you mean by saying abortion is taboo.  What makes it taboo?  

I assure you that my peers were very comfortable answering questions - it was the camera that probably put them under pressure.  I find that my peers approach the subject with certain prior knowledge - knowledge that I surprised to have known that they had.  I've never actually known someone who was in the process of deciding if she wanted an abortion or not but, I'm glad that you were able to connect your experience of knowing someone who had to my project.  I'd really like to explore what the attitude towards abortion is like in Poland.  Although I am sure that some opinions on abortion in Poland are similar to that of the U.S., I also know that there are separate opinions and reasoning I have not heard of yet.  Like you have given up your spare time to read this, I can only ask you, with gratitude, to give me the opportunity to learn about these topics in the perspective of someone who was not originally from this country.

Reply to Stephanie:  

I agree that being able to understand different perspectives, allows people to be less biased.  However, my paper was far from objective.  I'd like to have been more objective but, it was difficult to find people to interview who were not liberal.  Offering my own take on the questions I asked at the end of my paper would have been helpful in letting the reader know what had interested me in talking about abortion.  When it comes time for me to conduct another experiential project, I will definitely be sure to answer the questions I pose to my own readers.  It wouldn't be fair of me to ask if I, myself, have not answered the questions yet.

I hadn't thought about defining what right and wrong meant to me or to the people I interviewed.  Thank you for pointing this out because I realize that making the distinction is important in understanding an opinion wholly.  It's even more so important because people do have different perspectives on the meaning of the words and to assume that all my readers have a generic definition of right and wrong is bad.  Thank you for taking the time to read my post and your criticisms are always welcome!