The readings this past week are making me think about how activism is valued in problematic ways. Gonnerman paints a story for us about how Elaine Bartlett was empowered by the activist work she did to fight the Rockefeller laws. Although other things in her life were not going as she hoped, she had her activism as a source of stability and strength, and began to see herself as an activist. We also read about formerly incarcerated students and activists at Berkeley. One thing I really liked about these texts was that they showed people who were affected by incarceration working against the system and helping others, unlike many of the "white savior" and "white lady bountiful" type figures we previously encountered.

It was my first time in a prison, as well as the others'. On the trip there, we talked about how nervous we were. We weren't sure what to expect, about the prison or the young men we were about to meet. We had come up with a themed workshop focusing around the idea of superheroes and weren't sure how successful it was going to be. I think I can speak for all of us when I say I'm really glad, as well as relieved, that it seemed to have gone really well. 

One thing that struck me about the DSR reading was the call for extrinsic value. I question whether that is necessary for acceptance. But overall, I enjoyed the article's point about deaf gain, versus hearing loss. Aneta from the documentary Deaf Jam had the same sentiment when she said the wanted to change the definition of deaf from "can't hear" to "don't hear". Its an interesting shift in power. 

Samantha Melamed,"Mandatory minimums don't reduce recidivism. So why is Pa. weighing bringing them back?"
Philadelphia Inquirer, March 17, 2017:
http://www.philly.com/philly/living/mandatory-minimum-criminal-justice-reform-pennsylvania.html

FRIEND IN RESIDENCE EILEEN FLANAGAN @ HC Mon, 3/20- 4/14
https://www.haverford.edu/quaker-affairs/friend-residence