The message that I attempted to get across was the idea that there will always be two opposing sides in EVERY situation. That being said, I also tried the emphasise the fact there can never be in any form a way of successful equality. In fact the closest thing that we have to being equal is fact that we are all mammals. Another lense that I attempted to look through was this idea on an “equalizer”. By this I mean leveling the central rights between both sides during the reconstruction era. And It may sound like a little much, but connect this topic to a more relatable instance in our modern society where something that is greater is being changed by an equalizer. The problem isn't whether or not it is unfair for the thing that is greater. The real issue is that fact that it's problematic on both sides because they are being equalized. So then what do we consider it? Is this really a reconstruction for the better? After doing this project I realized the radical perspectives in literally everything. In a sense it was almost troublesome looking at different situations and noticing the shift between good and bad (As cheesy as it sounds).On top of that I’ve noticed that something that may appear to be confusing is the history behind my idea. The whole point of my magazine was to not only highlight the opposing side, but it was more of a thinking activity, and less of a learning experience if that makes sense?