Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Wonderful job on your blogs! You have some great ideas for your anatomy course. It is extremely expensive for schools to get cadavers, and I suspect that it is also tough to get students into autopsies as well. As a nursing student, I did get a chance to see cadavers (I wasn't allowed to touch), and it was fascinating. Warning though! If you do get a chance to work with cadavers, don't wear anything that you want to wear again...the smell attaches to your skin and clothing for a long time.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Extra Credit Blog
The lawyers and judges are debating whether or not strip-searching Savanna Redding was constitutional, which later lead to what type of search should be covered under the Constitution. Wright, representing the school district, argues that it doesn’t matter what type of contraband was in question, there was an alleged substance hidden, so the school was right in searching her. Wolf, Savanna Redding’s lawyer, argues that is doesn’t matter what contraband is in question, school officials should not be allowed to strip search students. Wolf’s arguments were the most the strongest because he used the fourth amendment and specifically stated that any type of strip search would be traumatizing to any child. The lawyer comparing it to gym class was a completely wacky statement because being forced to be strip-searched is very different from changing in gym class.
There would have to be strong evidence that we would definitely find something in the strip-search. The child would have had to have prior problems in the school. For instance, if a child came in who was repeatedly problematic and had situations like this prior to the one in question, then that could be a reason for a strip-search. However, the child would be allowed to get undressed behind a curtain and placed in a robe-like paper gown. Their head would be above the curtain, though, so the child doesn’t try to ingest the possible medicine in question. The parents would be contacted, as well, to supervise.
If they found a large quantity I probably wouldn’t have had a different opinion, but I still believe they should have done it in private. Also, the fact that she lied probably would have played a big role because I don’t like people who blatantly lie to your face. However, I don’t think we would be discussing this if a large amount of pills were found. The school should have gotten more evidence. It sounded like they were taking orders from someone who had a history or problems. Savanna Redding didn’t have a prior history with the school, so I think they acted a little rash. They should have developed more evidence, and then if they still felt she had pills on her, they should have done the search in a different manner and contacted her mother to come in and supervise.
There would have to be strong evidence that we would definitely find something in the strip-search. The child would have had to have prior problems in the school. For instance, if a child came in who was repeatedly problematic and had situations like this prior to the one in question, then that could be a reason for a strip-search. However, the child would be allowed to get undressed behind a curtain and placed in a robe-like paper gown. Their head would be above the curtain, though, so the child doesn’t try to ingest the possible medicine in question. The parents would be contacted, as well, to supervise.
If they found a large quantity I probably wouldn’t have had a different opinion, but I still believe they should have done it in private. Also, the fact that she lied probably would have played a big role because I don’t like people who blatantly lie to your face. However, I don’t think we would be discussing this if a large amount of pills were found. The school should have gotten more evidence. It sounded like they were taking orders from someone who had a history or problems. Savanna Redding didn’t have a prior history with the school, so I think they acted a little rash. They should have developed more evidence, and then if they still felt she had pills on her, they should have done the search in a different manner and contacted her mother to come in and supervise.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
My Ideal University
Before coming to college, I had created this image of what I thought college was through movies, television, and stories from teachers and peers that had already graduated from high school. I thought college was going to be a lot different than what it has actually turned out to be and sometimes I wonder whether it would be different somewhere else, but then again, what if every college is the same in a sense?
What I want in my ideal university is for there to be school spirit for a specific sport, like football or basketball. There would tailgating and lots of enthusiasm leading up to the game. Everyone would want to live on campus to just be apart of all the festivities. Also, I would love for there to be more on-campus activities that would involve everyone, like concerts or guess speakers. There would definitely be a lot of on-campus activities on the weekends because that’s when college students have the most time.
As far as classes and schoolwork goes, I would love to have an Anatomy & Physiology class that was more exciting and did more hands-on activities. For instance, I would love if we could take a field trip to a morgue to watch a mortician do an autopsy. I feel like that experience, alone, would be so much more rewarding and educational than dissecting a pig. We would be able to have more time to do Anatomy & Physiology because that’s one of the most important classes to know for a nursing student, so I feel like the most time should be spent with more important classes. The class would be three times a week and would not be until like 9 in the morning. If all classes started late nothing would ever get accomplished.
College is supposed to be the most stimulating and fun time for everyone to experience because it is the first time, normally, for young adults to be on their own. College should prepare us for the future, but also, be a great place for students to be able to learn about themselves and how to deal with others. I wish all housing were apartment style because than there is the option to not eat on-campus food, so it would be easier to have access to healthy foods if you so choose. Also, people should get put with people who are similar with the other people they are living with because your room environment has a big impact on your mental health.
Although movies and television portray college to be this exciting times in a young person’s life, that isn’t always that case because many universities do not offer all the same advantages that make those fictional colleges fun. If my university was to ever be created, it would definitely be the most exciting time in my life!
What I want in my ideal university is for there to be school spirit for a specific sport, like football or basketball. There would tailgating and lots of enthusiasm leading up to the game. Everyone would want to live on campus to just be apart of all the festivities. Also, I would love for there to be more on-campus activities that would involve everyone, like concerts or guess speakers. There would definitely be a lot of on-campus activities on the weekends because that’s when college students have the most time.
As far as classes and schoolwork goes, I would love to have an Anatomy & Physiology class that was more exciting and did more hands-on activities. For instance, I would love if we could take a field trip to a morgue to watch a mortician do an autopsy. I feel like that experience, alone, would be so much more rewarding and educational than dissecting a pig. We would be able to have more time to do Anatomy & Physiology because that’s one of the most important classes to know for a nursing student, so I feel like the most time should be spent with more important classes. The class would be three times a week and would not be until like 9 in the morning. If all classes started late nothing would ever get accomplished.
College is supposed to be the most stimulating and fun time for everyone to experience because it is the first time, normally, for young adults to be on their own. College should prepare us for the future, but also, be a great place for students to be able to learn about themselves and how to deal with others. I wish all housing were apartment style because than there is the option to not eat on-campus food, so it would be easier to have access to healthy foods if you so choose. Also, people should get put with people who are similar with the other people they are living with because your room environment has a big impact on your mental health.
Although movies and television portray college to be this exciting times in a young person’s life, that isn’t always that case because many universities do not offer all the same advantages that make those fictional colleges fun. If my university was to ever be created, it would definitely be the most exciting time in my life!
Saturday, April 4, 2009
"Jesus is My Homeboy" T-shirts
Ever since I was little, every Sunday morning has been dedicated to going to church with my family. I was baptized when I was 10 years old and have continued to follow my faith while I am at school, even though I don’t have the ability to attend church every Sunday. I wouldn’t consider myself extremely religious, I don’t go around telling everyone I’m religious, but I do believe in God and try to follow the values of a Christian. When I see people wearing these shirts, whom I know are religious, I can see their reason behind wearing the shirt. They want to speak to everyone and tell him or her how much Christ means to them. However, when I see kids wearing these shirts and not acting very Christianly, it makes me wonder whether they are just wearing these shirts because they think they are funny or are their intentions good? That’s where my problem with these shirts arises. I feel like kids and teenagers are buying these shirts to make fun of religion, not because they are trying to tell people how much they love Christ. I do see these shirts as a way of mocking religion because, now, it is seen just as a fashion trend. For instance, Ronald Frasch, the chief merchant of Saks, said “we bought it as a fashion item, not as a moral statement,” (qtd. in La Ferla 321). If this is the thinking behind the buying and selling of religious merchandize, then I do believe the shirts are a parody of religion.
In Paul Mitchell’s article, he writes about how he believes the new fashion statement of wearing spoof Christian t-shirts is wrong. He writes, “in the end, Christianity is not a brand—it’s a relationship whose depth can’t be reduced to slogans,” (Mitchell 325). If he can make a statement like that, then how can he write in the beginning of his article about him wearing a t-shirt of the crucifixion to an alternative rock fest? He is being a hypocrite because, although, in the end he says, “t-shirts…reduced to slogans”, the t-shirt he wore to the concert is still a t-shirt. He said in at end that Christianity couldn’t be communicated to everyone by wearing a t-shirt, but rather through love. So, by him telling us the story about his wearing of a Christian t-shirt to a rock concert, he isn’t making his theory of these spoof t-shirts too credible.
If these t-shirts only contained text, I think they would still be the same because when I see these t-shirts, the words are really the only thing I see. I don’t pay attention to the photo on the t-shirt because the words are always so bold. The black and white shirt makes the picture of Jesus very similar to how he is described in movies and other pictures. The designer is making the picture of Jesus hold the words “Jesus is my Homeboy”, so I think it is trying to say Jesus supports this idea. The white and red shirt, on the other hand, has Jesus dressed in jeans and a hoodie, with his hands in a peace sign. The black and white shirt isn’t as offensive as the white and red shirt because it has God in the form as described in the Bible. However, in the white and red shirt, I wouldn’t have even known the person was supposed to be God. It doesn’t look like God, and I think it is offensive to the idea of God as a heavenly body. I still don’t like the thought behind the shirts because I don’t believe people wear them to express their love for faith in God. If I did have to choose which shirt was “better”, than the black and white shirt would be it because I don’t see it as really offensive.
On the other hand, who am I to tell people what to wear or not to wear? If people want to wear these shirts them by all means they can wear them. I just don’t think people’s intentions behind wearing the t-shirts are the same as the designers who first put them out.
In Paul Mitchell’s article, he writes about how he believes the new fashion statement of wearing spoof Christian t-shirts is wrong. He writes, “in the end, Christianity is not a brand—it’s a relationship whose depth can’t be reduced to slogans,” (Mitchell 325). If he can make a statement like that, then how can he write in the beginning of his article about him wearing a t-shirt of the crucifixion to an alternative rock fest? He is being a hypocrite because, although, in the end he says, “t-shirts…reduced to slogans”, the t-shirt he wore to the concert is still a t-shirt. He said in at end that Christianity couldn’t be communicated to everyone by wearing a t-shirt, but rather through love. So, by him telling us the story about his wearing of a Christian t-shirt to a rock concert, he isn’t making his theory of these spoof t-shirts too credible.
If these t-shirts only contained text, I think they would still be the same because when I see these t-shirts, the words are really the only thing I see. I don’t pay attention to the photo on the t-shirt because the words are always so bold. The black and white shirt makes the picture of Jesus very similar to how he is described in movies and other pictures. The designer is making the picture of Jesus hold the words “Jesus is my Homeboy”, so I think it is trying to say Jesus supports this idea. The white and red shirt, on the other hand, has Jesus dressed in jeans and a hoodie, with his hands in a peace sign. The black and white shirt isn’t as offensive as the white and red shirt because it has God in the form as described in the Bible. However, in the white and red shirt, I wouldn’t have even known the person was supposed to be God. It doesn’t look like God, and I think it is offensive to the idea of God as a heavenly body. I still don’t like the thought behind the shirts because I don’t believe people wear them to express their love for faith in God. If I did have to choose which shirt was “better”, than the black and white shirt would be it because I don’t see it as really offensive.
On the other hand, who am I to tell people what to wear or not to wear? If people want to wear these shirts them by all means they can wear them. I just don’t think people’s intentions behind wearing the t-shirts are the same as the designers who first put them out.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Jammin' Ideas
Song Title 1: Burnin’ Holes
Genre: Rock
Explanation: This song is written about the ridiculous amount of money it costs to travel during these economic hard times. It begins by explaining the days when traveling wasn’t such a hassle, and then it moves into a portrayal of what it is like now to go on vacation from stipulations with security to paying for checked luggage. It is considered under a Rock genre because it is meant to be hardcore and loud with a big bass and solos by the percussion section.
Song Title 2: Such Close Quarters
Genre: R&B
Explanation: This song explains the difficult relationships people experience when they are forced to live with 20 strangers. It takes a stance from one person who just can’t understand why there isn’t the same level of respect among the floor-mates. For instance, why can’t everyone respect the rules that the majority of people follow? The song then looks into the possibility of the different races and the difference in how people are raised. It is labeled under an R&B genre because it has a soulful look into the life of one person.
Song Title 3: Fightin’ To Stay Straight
Genre: Rap
Explanation: This song focuses on the inability to have peace between everyone. It fights to understand why people can’t get along, and why they turn to violence for redemption. It goes on to talk about the impact the media has on violence and the way it makes it seem rewarding to commit crimes. It further states how some races are more likely to be involved in crimes than others. This song is labeled under a Rap genre because it looks at the hard life of murder and violence and uses profanity to describe the results of some people’s actions.
Song Title 4: You Don’t Know What You Have Til’ It’s Gone
Genre: Classical
Explanation: This song talks about the relationships of families and how the dynamics change when people grow up. It looks at one family and explains the fun times they had when they were young. It explains how the family was considered close, but nothing like they experienced once everyone had grown up. It looks at the possibility of moving out and living separately to realize how much family means. It then looks at how it’s possible for people to not have love and support from families. This is considered a Classical piece because it has a piano has the main instrument and shows a story about love through time apart.
Song Title 5: Life on the Line
Genre: Country
Explanation: This song looks at the level of respect people have for those who serve and how they are treated once they’re home. It is from the perspective of a child whose father served in Iraq and the child struggles to understand why once the homecoming parade was over his father wasn’t really saluted anymore. It continues to go on to talk about whether we are doing everything we can to make sure the people we serve get the respect they deserve once they’re home from duty. It is labeled under a Country genre because it has a strong stance on the freedom we have and has a powerful guitar section.
Chorus to “Life on the Line”
What happened to the day when soldiers were the ones
Everyone in town looked up to
After the parade and the Bar-be-que
He was just a regular man a-gain
Wasn’t puttin’ his life on the line all day
Worth more than just a table of food
I just hope he knows,
How much he means to me.
The music video would be set in a small town, designed so that everyone knows everyone. It will take us through the journey of how much this little boy looks up to his father for what he does. The little boy counts down the days until his father returns, and can’t wait for his father to get all the respect he deserves. Once the town has the homecoming parade and BBQ to thank him for the service he did, the little boy can’t believe why his dad isn’t treated like that everyday after. He wonders whether some people really appreciate the job a soldier does to fight for our freedom. It ends with the father sitting on the porch swing and the little boy going up to sit on his lap with the father’s army hat on.
Title of CD: Standin’ On The Edge
Design: The cover of my CD would be very simple because I’m a simple person. The set would be located in the Grand Canyon. I would be taking pictures in the Grand Canyon because it would let us remember the beauty and simplicity of life. I will be near the end of the canyon to show the relationship with the title of the CD. I would be dressed simply: in shorts and a basic white t-shirt with no shoes on. Half of the cover’s background will be the scene during a rainstorm and the other half will be when it’s sunny. It is to reflect the idea that sometimes life can be hard but there will always be another day and another chance to make a difference.
Genre: Rock
Explanation: This song is written about the ridiculous amount of money it costs to travel during these economic hard times. It begins by explaining the days when traveling wasn’t such a hassle, and then it moves into a portrayal of what it is like now to go on vacation from stipulations with security to paying for checked luggage. It is considered under a Rock genre because it is meant to be hardcore and loud with a big bass and solos by the percussion section.
Song Title 2: Such Close Quarters
Genre: R&B
Explanation: This song explains the difficult relationships people experience when they are forced to live with 20 strangers. It takes a stance from one person who just can’t understand why there isn’t the same level of respect among the floor-mates. For instance, why can’t everyone respect the rules that the majority of people follow? The song then looks into the possibility of the different races and the difference in how people are raised. It is labeled under an R&B genre because it has a soulful look into the life of one person.
Song Title 3: Fightin’ To Stay Straight
Genre: Rap
Explanation: This song focuses on the inability to have peace between everyone. It fights to understand why people can’t get along, and why they turn to violence for redemption. It goes on to talk about the impact the media has on violence and the way it makes it seem rewarding to commit crimes. It further states how some races are more likely to be involved in crimes than others. This song is labeled under a Rap genre because it looks at the hard life of murder and violence and uses profanity to describe the results of some people’s actions.
Song Title 4: You Don’t Know What You Have Til’ It’s Gone
Genre: Classical
Explanation: This song talks about the relationships of families and how the dynamics change when people grow up. It looks at one family and explains the fun times they had when they were young. It explains how the family was considered close, but nothing like they experienced once everyone had grown up. It looks at the possibility of moving out and living separately to realize how much family means. It then looks at how it’s possible for people to not have love and support from families. This is considered a Classical piece because it has a piano has the main instrument and shows a story about love through time apart.
Song Title 5: Life on the Line
Genre: Country
Explanation: This song looks at the level of respect people have for those who serve and how they are treated once they’re home. It is from the perspective of a child whose father served in Iraq and the child struggles to understand why once the homecoming parade was over his father wasn’t really saluted anymore. It continues to go on to talk about whether we are doing everything we can to make sure the people we serve get the respect they deserve once they’re home from duty. It is labeled under a Country genre because it has a strong stance on the freedom we have and has a powerful guitar section.
Chorus to “Life on the Line”
What happened to the day when soldiers were the ones
Everyone in town looked up to
After the parade and the Bar-be-que
He was just a regular man a-gain
Wasn’t puttin’ his life on the line all day
Worth more than just a table of food
I just hope he knows,
How much he means to me.
The music video would be set in a small town, designed so that everyone knows everyone. It will take us through the journey of how much this little boy looks up to his father for what he does. The little boy counts down the days until his father returns, and can’t wait for his father to get all the respect he deserves. Once the town has the homecoming parade and BBQ to thank him for the service he did, the little boy can’t believe why his dad isn’t treated like that everyday after. He wonders whether some people really appreciate the job a soldier does to fight for our freedom. It ends with the father sitting on the porch swing and the little boy going up to sit on his lap with the father’s army hat on.
Title of CD: Standin’ On The Edge
Design: The cover of my CD would be very simple because I’m a simple person. The set would be located in the Grand Canyon. I would be taking pictures in the Grand Canyon because it would let us remember the beauty and simplicity of life. I will be near the end of the canyon to show the relationship with the title of the CD. I would be dressed simply: in shorts and a basic white t-shirt with no shoes on. Half of the cover’s background will be the scene during a rainstorm and the other half will be when it’s sunny. It is to reflect the idea that sometimes life can be hard but there will always be another day and another chance to make a difference.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Steroids
When I first read the title for this blog, I thought here we go again; another video about how steroids are bad and how they should be illegal. Then, once I started to watch the video, it was interesting to hear that there hasn’t been any evidence by all the drug and health companies that steroids were, actually bad in the long run. The fact that they talked to a doctor who had received all of his degrees from Ivy League colleges gave the story credibility. The one downfall to the video was that they didn’t really address the major impact steroids have on the athletic community. They did address the issue a little, but this video could make high school students think steroids are okay to use. However, this study was taken on healthy, adult males. If high school aged boys use steroids it could have a different effect because their bodies’ haven’t matured completely. Also, the video fails to mention the fact that steroids are a controlled substance in the United States. This means that people are allowed to have steroids in their possession, but they must have a prescription given by a doctor. With this fact, this kind of negates the issue of whether these steroids are good or bad because they’re illegal without a prescription. I don’t think steroids can be used responsibly because once these men start the steroids and see the results; it is more than likely that they will be able to stop easily.
Steroid use is becoming a bigger problem, or so it seems, in sports and in just real life than before. It is a real shame to think that people can’t hit over 700 home runs, without the use of steroids, anymore. What happened to exercising, lifting weights, eating properly, and getting enough sleep to help you recover? Why do people now feel like they need steroids to do all these things? We have become such an “I don’t want to do it myself” generation, that we can’t even depend on the basics to make us become top athletes: practicing everyday, eating healthily, lifting weights, and getting enough sleep to “recover” from workouts. Testing should definitely be regulated to keep sports clean because it seems that everyone is using steroids now. There shouldn’t be different standards for professional athletes vs. high school athletes because if you are using steroids, you are cheating in my eyes. Also, the same steroid testing should be regulated throughout different sports. I think the only exception to that statement is baseball and track & field should have more testing because it seems those two sports are the problematic ones.
As much stress as athletes are put under to be great at their sports, it shouldn’t be an excuse to use steroids. We look up to all the greats: Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Michael Jordan, Lou Gehrig, and Wilt Chamberlin. They were pressured to be the best at their sports as well, but they never used steroids, or at least were found guilty of it. However, this just proves that athletes can still be great at their sports and not feel pressured to use steroids. I think if people think we are forcing steroids into all sports, than that is just an excuse to let athletes use them. I, personally, hated to hear that Barry Bonds passed Hank Aarons’ record for most home runs because Barry Bonds cheated. I think most people were outraged as well. So, I don’t think people are being forced to use steroids because most people, I believe, prefer the hard-workers to the cheaters.
Steroid use is becoming a bigger problem, or so it seems, in sports and in just real life than before. It is a real shame to think that people can’t hit over 700 home runs, without the use of steroids, anymore. What happened to exercising, lifting weights, eating properly, and getting enough sleep to help you recover? Why do people now feel like they need steroids to do all these things? We have become such an “I don’t want to do it myself” generation, that we can’t even depend on the basics to make us become top athletes: practicing everyday, eating healthily, lifting weights, and getting enough sleep to “recover” from workouts. Testing should definitely be regulated to keep sports clean because it seems that everyone is using steroids now. There shouldn’t be different standards for professional athletes vs. high school athletes because if you are using steroids, you are cheating in my eyes. Also, the same steroid testing should be regulated throughout different sports. I think the only exception to that statement is baseball and track & field should have more testing because it seems those two sports are the problematic ones.
As much stress as athletes are put under to be great at their sports, it shouldn’t be an excuse to use steroids. We look up to all the greats: Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Michael Jordan, Lou Gehrig, and Wilt Chamberlin. They were pressured to be the best at their sports as well, but they never used steroids, or at least were found guilty of it. However, this just proves that athletes can still be great at their sports and not feel pressured to use steroids. I think if people think we are forcing steroids into all sports, than that is just an excuse to let athletes use them. I, personally, hated to hear that Barry Bonds passed Hank Aarons’ record for most home runs because Barry Bonds cheated. I think most people were outraged as well. So, I don’t think people are being forced to use steroids because most people, I believe, prefer the hard-workers to the cheaters.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Georgetown Stance/Counterargument
Although the Washington D.C. officers are doing something good and safe for the community, they are completely taking away the freedom college students have to throw a party if they are of legal age. It is unfortunate that the college is located in a city and so space is limited. However, the rules they are enforcing go against the freedom these college students have a right to. They shouldn't be worrying about the amount of students at a party or how many kegs one party has (Kinzie). Rather, they should be worrying about patrolling the city and locking up bad people who actually commit legitamate crimes. Students are going to party; it's just a fact about college. Enforcing these rules could just turn students off to applying to Georgetown, which is a very far-fetched thought, but if the school is going to regulate something like how many people students are allowed to have at a party it isn't so absurd to think. Susan Kinzie eludes to this possibility stating, "many students say the changes...have pushed social life off campus." The law states that at 21 years of age, people are allowed to legally drink alcohol. If the parties these students are throwing aren't harmful to others around them, affecting the neighbors, and not dangerous then there is no reason the school should regulate these new rules.
Although students should have the freedom to have a party when they of legal age, what are the chances that everyone at the party is actually legal. Many parties are hosted by students of legal age, but are attended by students who are not allowed to drink legally yet. So, even if the students try and say that they will only allow people who are legal to drink, that isn't a definite because underage students always can get in under the radar. Also, by limiting students to only one keg parties, the police could possibly be saving many students from alcohol poisoning and trips to the hospital from drinking way too much. In response to 2nd District Cmdr. Andy Solberg's statement about he'd prefer to protect the entire community, Kinzie states, "rather than hauling students in for public drinking or public urination." Students may say they can control themselves, but everyone knows that when a bunch of friends get together, things can get out of control. If these students are drinking excessive amounts how are they going to be able to control themselves or even the other guests at their party. Because the school is in a city, there is limited space between neighbors. If a family lived next door to a group of college students, obviously the time the family goes to sleep compared to the college students is completely different. Friday, saturday, and sunday aren't the only days students have parties. Many college students have parties in the middle of the week. If a family was trying to sleep because they have to wake up early for school and work the next morning, it would be difficult if the college students were having a party because they would be loud. As much as students try to keep the noise to a minimum for parties, it is inevitable that the noise level will rise to the point where neighbors can hear it. For the protection of the college students themselves and others around them, the police should enforce a more strict policy on college students' parties.
Although students should have the freedom to have a party when they of legal age, what are the chances that everyone at the party is actually legal. Many parties are hosted by students of legal age, but are attended by students who are not allowed to drink legally yet. So, even if the students try and say that they will only allow people who are legal to drink, that isn't a definite because underage students always can get in under the radar. Also, by limiting students to only one keg parties, the police could possibly be saving many students from alcohol poisoning and trips to the hospital from drinking way too much. In response to 2nd District Cmdr. Andy Solberg's statement about he'd prefer to protect the entire community, Kinzie states, "rather than hauling students in for public drinking or public urination." Students may say they can control themselves, but everyone knows that when a bunch of friends get together, things can get out of control. If these students are drinking excessive amounts how are they going to be able to control themselves or even the other guests at their party. Because the school is in a city, there is limited space between neighbors. If a family lived next door to a group of college students, obviously the time the family goes to sleep compared to the college students is completely different. Friday, saturday, and sunday aren't the only days students have parties. Many college students have parties in the middle of the week. If a family was trying to sleep because they have to wake up early for school and work the next morning, it would be difficult if the college students were having a party because they would be loud. As much as students try to keep the noise to a minimum for parties, it is inevitable that the noise level will rise to the point where neighbors can hear it. For the protection of the college students themselves and others around them, the police should enforce a more strict policy on college students' parties.
Monday, February 16, 2009
"Paraphrasing Practice"
When students are taking notes on a topic, they tend to copy the notes word for word. This is a bad habit because students then end up plagarising or using a lot of quotes throughout their research paper. According to Dr. James Lester, the final draft of your research paper should only contain about 10% worth of quotes.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
"GI Joe and Male Bodies"
Both articles oppose each other’s ideas about the impact of male figurines on the image of men’s bodies. Harrison G. Pope and some of his colleagues created an experiment to prove that male figurines have changed immensely over the years, and they reflect the idea mean have about how their bodies should be. His experiment consisted of comparing GI Joe and Star War’s figurines from different decades to prove that the ideal image of male bodies change throughout the time periods. Through the different male figurines, Pope concluded that the male body type changed throughout the different decades dramatically because as they got “older” they became more buff and more like body builders. Kim Franke-Folstad went in the compete opposite direction and argued the idea Pope came up with, saying there is no way the figurines could have an impact on the image of male bodies. She stated that boys just played with the figurines. She believes that boys don’t play the figurines and then think “oh, I want to look big and buff like GI Joe.” She doesn’t believe there is any truth to Pope’s theory even though he had an experiment to prove it.
Pope and Franke-Folstad’s articles were completely different, even in the way they brought about their arguments. Pope thought up and experiment and tried to prove his hypothesis through the purchasing of the different male figurines. He tried to use a persuasive tone to get the audience to side with his theory. However, he said at the end of his article “These finding, however, must be interpreted cautiously…” This statement to me sounds like he isn’t a hundred percent sure whether his findings are arguable in situations. Because he was only able to find two types of figurines, that doesn’t show that his proven facts answer his hypothesis because that isn’t that compelling of evidence. Franke-Folstad uses a tone of sarcasm and argumentative. The way she writes makes her article sound sarcastic because she just can’t fathom the fact that someone would make this type of an argument. She says, “They are toys. We all know that. That’s why we stop playing with them before we get out of grade school.” She can’t believe Hope would associate these male figurines with the idea of male bodies. Her argument completely goes against Hope’s argument about the figurines impacting real male bodies. Hope’s audience is more geared towards parents, and it sounds like he is trying to persuade parents to watch out for impact the GI Joe figurine has on their sons’ images. Franke-Folstad’s audience sounds more like the random, everyday person who is reading the newspaper. She sounds like she is just trying to write an article about arguing Hope’s point of view.
I think the argument Hope gives is kind of ridiculous, so I guess I would have to say I side more with Franke-Folstad’s opinion. There is no way he has enough evidence to prove his point, and it is also something that just sounds ridiculous. He may be right in the fact that the figurines have become more buff. However, I don’t think they are influencing the opinions of men and boys. I know that I never thought I wanted to have my Barbie’s body. The dolls were strictly used to play with and that’s what boys do with their GI Joe dolls. They aren’t thinking about the way their bodies are, but rather how they can take down the enemy. My parents never told me I couldn’t get a Barbie doll because she was too skinny. I don’t think they ever thought I was planning on making my body similar to Barbie’s body. That’s why I think Hope’s argument is ridiculous because boys don’t look at GI Joe’s for their idea of a body image.
Pope and Franke-Folstad’s articles were completely different, even in the way they brought about their arguments. Pope thought up and experiment and tried to prove his hypothesis through the purchasing of the different male figurines. He tried to use a persuasive tone to get the audience to side with his theory. However, he said at the end of his article “These finding, however, must be interpreted cautiously…” This statement to me sounds like he isn’t a hundred percent sure whether his findings are arguable in situations. Because he was only able to find two types of figurines, that doesn’t show that his proven facts answer his hypothesis because that isn’t that compelling of evidence. Franke-Folstad uses a tone of sarcasm and argumentative. The way she writes makes her article sound sarcastic because she just can’t fathom the fact that someone would make this type of an argument. She says, “They are toys. We all know that. That’s why we stop playing with them before we get out of grade school.” She can’t believe Hope would associate these male figurines with the idea of male bodies. Her argument completely goes against Hope’s argument about the figurines impacting real male bodies. Hope’s audience is more geared towards parents, and it sounds like he is trying to persuade parents to watch out for impact the GI Joe figurine has on their sons’ images. Franke-Folstad’s audience sounds more like the random, everyday person who is reading the newspaper. She sounds like she is just trying to write an article about arguing Hope’s point of view.
I think the argument Hope gives is kind of ridiculous, so I guess I would have to say I side more with Franke-Folstad’s opinion. There is no way he has enough evidence to prove his point, and it is also something that just sounds ridiculous. He may be right in the fact that the figurines have become more buff. However, I don’t think they are influencing the opinions of men and boys. I know that I never thought I wanted to have my Barbie’s body. The dolls were strictly used to play with and that’s what boys do with their GI Joe dolls. They aren’t thinking about the way their bodies are, but rather how they can take down the enemy. My parents never told me I couldn’t get a Barbie doll because she was too skinny. I don’t think they ever thought I was planning on making my body similar to Barbie’s body. That’s why I think Hope’s argument is ridiculous because boys don’t look at GI Joe’s for their idea of a body image.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Freewrite #1
What really makes me angry is that people around campus don't follow the "Stand 25 ft. from the building to smoke" and George Mason doesn't enforce it either. Smoking is absolutely disgusting to those who don't smoke, especially me, so I just want to be able to walk into the JC or the building where my classroom is without getting smoke blown in my face. It makes me get a headache if I am around it too much and it makes people smell bad. Why people decide to smoke is beyond my capacity to fathom it but I don't think I should suffer from inhaling smoke when I have made a decision not to smoke. Cancer is something that people try and avoid at all costs because it is such a tramatic experience, but people who are smoking are willingly taking the chance at getting cancer. However, research has shown that people who don't smoke are getting cancer at alarming rates because they may live with someone that smokes and enhales smoke just as frequently. So, with secondhand smoke being a huge issue to causing lung cancer, I don't want to have to hold my breath just to avoid getting secondhand smoke. It is inconvient to me. I mean I don't they would appreciate me if I did something they didn't like right in there face all the time. People would start to get angry and probably say something. I, on the other hand, have not said anything to anyone. But I don't want to stay quiet anymore because it isn't just affecting the environment with pollution of those rotten cancer sticks, but also affecting my life. I don't want to, in 20 years, find out I have lung cancer because I don't smoke and I try to avoid it at all costs. Why doesn't the campus make designated smoking areas, enforce the 25 ft. away from the building, or even make this a smoke free campus! Some other colleges have made their campus smoke free, and they are still up and running. Hey, maybe GMU could cause a wide-spread epidemic of making campuses smoke free. Then, we could help those that do smoke and maybe make them quit! It is just such a nasty habit that should be eliminated from the world, but since the world is such a big place, maybe we could just start here at GMU.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
"A Secret Society of the Starving"
At first glance, the picture of the girl on the blog made me sick to my stomach. No way should anyone that skinny still be able to breath. Then, after reading the text “A Secret Society of the Starving” it made realize that the idea of bulimia and anorexia went further then just throwing up after eating and not eating at all. These girls are completely obsessed with the idea of being thin and are willing to make their lives difficult, and even death an option, in order for that to happen. Although Clairegirl and Futurebird say the websites are a way for them to discuss everything that is happening inside of them, they should be shut down. The websites are kind of like forming a cult for girls and women who have eating disorders. For example, Claire says that she goes on after a long day at school because “I don’t have to worry about them judging me for how I feel”. I think it is great they feel they can have that type of support, but these girls and women are sick. They need to get support from the people that love them and that can get them help. They don’t need to get support from other people that are sick because they are just feeding them the same bull crap they think and that isn’t the slightest bit healthy. The two girls say they can’t rely on their friends and family because they will just look at them like they are sick and not understand them. However, it is the truth; they are sick! They need all the help they can receive and by relying on these websites, it is feeding into their sickness.
The kind of stress these girls are putting on their bodies, it is surprising they haven’t lost a lot of friends through this website and even their own lives. That is one of the strengths of this websites and it is what makes this not completely downright wrong. All these girls are going through something that most people can’t even fathom about. The type of support they receive from this website is like non-other. They are all going through the same struggles in life, so why wouldn’t it make sense to talk to people who have the same problems. Futurebird says that she feels like she can’t go to anyone because they won’t understand her problems. She doesn’t want other girls who are younger than her to have those same problems, so she writes about the website “…what I hope they find is people who share their experience and that they’re able to just simply talk.” For her, she doesn’t want girls to go through the experiences she has alone. So, the website does have its benefits because it could prevent girls, who are already depressed and low, from committing suicide or hurting themselves further.
Anorexia and bulimia are two extremely dangerous eating disorders that affect girls and women in many different ways. Some take it to the extremes and some just do it to “fit into a bathing suit”. The websites aren’t the best form of a support group because the girls on the website feel like it is the only place for hope. However, they need to know that their family and friends are people they can turn to as well. The website doesn’t help in that aspect because they all have fears of revealing their problems to loved ones. The website shouldn’t just be between girls who have problems. They should allow people who are trained professionals to help them through the website. Otherwise, the website is a very extreme form of a support group. These young girls and women need help from professionals, not other people are just as sick.
The kind of stress these girls are putting on their bodies, it is surprising they haven’t lost a lot of friends through this website and even their own lives. That is one of the strengths of this websites and it is what makes this not completely downright wrong. All these girls are going through something that most people can’t even fathom about. The type of support they receive from this website is like non-other. They are all going through the same struggles in life, so why wouldn’t it make sense to talk to people who have the same problems. Futurebird says that she feels like she can’t go to anyone because they won’t understand her problems. She doesn’t want other girls who are younger than her to have those same problems, so she writes about the website “…what I hope they find is people who share their experience and that they’re able to just simply talk.” For her, she doesn’t want girls to go through the experiences she has alone. So, the website does have its benefits because it could prevent girls, who are already depressed and low, from committing suicide or hurting themselves further.
Anorexia and bulimia are two extremely dangerous eating disorders that affect girls and women in many different ways. Some take it to the extremes and some just do it to “fit into a bathing suit”. The websites aren’t the best form of a support group because the girls on the website feel like it is the only place for hope. However, they need to know that their family and friends are people they can turn to as well. The website doesn’t help in that aspect because they all have fears of revealing their problems to loved ones. The website shouldn’t just be between girls who have problems. They should allow people who are trained professionals to help them through the website. Otherwise, the website is a very extreme form of a support group. These young girls and women need help from professionals, not other people are just as sick.
Monday, February 2, 2009
"Fallacies"
HASTY GENERALIZATION:
"I can't believe that Mexican woman came in to the ER and received so much treatment, yet she doesn't even have health insurance. No Mexican immigrants ever have health insurance."
AD HOMINEM:
"She's sixteen years old and pregnant. What would she know about being a good mother?"
"I can't believe that Mexican woman came in to the ER and received so much treatment, yet she doesn't even have health insurance. No Mexican immigrants ever have health insurance."
AD HOMINEM:
"She's sixteen years old and pregnant. What would she know about being a good mother?"
Sunday, February 1, 2009
"Jogging vs. Running"
Seeing the running shoes made me want to read the advertisement right away because I’m a runner, myself, so I those types of ads always intrigue me. When I first read the ad, it took me a minute to actually decide whether I liked the way they put everything. However, after thinking about Law & Order: SVU, which they always use the plot of a runner finding a dead body, I thought the ad was very smart. The elements that first stood out were the shoes on the dirt/ground and the lettering/color of the heading. The shoes clearly stood out the most because they are the biggest figure in the ad, but for some reason the font stood out to me too. Whether it was the white on black or the chalkiness, the font made me want to read on as well. As I mentioned before, I am a runner so the ad had more of an affect on me. I ran cross-country throughout high school and developed a love for it, even though I don’t run competitively anymore. I definitely think the fact that I run had an impact to the way I viewed the ad. I think it appealed to me more and made me understand everything they were talking about.
After reading the Pearl Izumi’s campaign for “We are not Joggers” it made me laugh but also definitely had good persuasion techniques during all the ads. If I wasn’t a runner I would be embarrassed to say I was a jogger. The ad definitely persuades to everyone that they should become, or at least try to become, a runner. For example, the ad points out the people who listen to music as they “run”, actually “jog”. I know when I’m running that I see a lot of people listening to music because they say they can’t just run. Also, the ad says that runners can jog, but it is really them just running slower. Joggers on the other hand, find it painful and difficult to go any faster than their normal pace and actually run. The reference to TV is definitely a persuasion technique because it alludes to the fact that runners like to find different paths to run on, while joggers take the usual and safe trail to run on. All of these techniques make you feel sort of like a failure if you’re a jogger and not a runner.
The ad states that our ancestors used running as a type of survival. It says that in order for our ancestors to get the meat they needed, they had to run to get it because if they were to jog it would never have been caught. The other species were too fast, so running was a necessity. Pearl Izumi definitely alienates the “jogging” population. Throughout the entire campaign he makes joggers seem like they are worthless and they might as well not even try it because they aren’t even doing anything. I don’t know how there would be any advantage to dividing them because the joggers would be turned away and pissed off at this guy and his ads. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got hate mail, and lots of it, from people all around the world who were offended by his allegations. The logos were very strong, with lines that said survival depended on running back with our ancestors. However, the pathos was much stronger because this whole campaign was based around what runners thought. Izumi made statements that said they have tried to determine the speed people would be classified as a runner and as a jogger, but they haven’t ever been able to. Some people physically can’t run faster than they are when, as Izumi would say, they are jogging. Also, he says that the shoes he designed weren’t meant for joggers to use on treadmills. However, treadmills can go to a speed that would be classified as a run. There aren’t really any facts in this campaign. Rather, Izumi is just writing his opinion and other avid runner’s opinion throughout the campaign. The Reebok ad definitely appealed to me more because it wasn’t as “rude”. The Reebok ad was actually kind of badass. As a runner, I know it is considered great if you puke because it means that you have tried as hard as you can, which is a huge accomplishment. I know it sounds kind of morbid, but anytime anyone puked on our team after a workout or race, they would receive a round of applause or props because they would probably continue the workout or race. However, the Pearl Izumi ad was degrading to people who weren’t avid runners. So, if you weren’t that runner, then why would the ad be appealing? Running is such a hard sport and so to be told that you aren’t actually running if you listen to music or run on the usual trails, that is a put down. It makes you feel unaccomplished and like a failure.
After reading the Pearl Izumi’s campaign for “We are not Joggers” it made me laugh but also definitely had good persuasion techniques during all the ads. If I wasn’t a runner I would be embarrassed to say I was a jogger. The ad definitely persuades to everyone that they should become, or at least try to become, a runner. For example, the ad points out the people who listen to music as they “run”, actually “jog”. I know when I’m running that I see a lot of people listening to music because they say they can’t just run. Also, the ad says that runners can jog, but it is really them just running slower. Joggers on the other hand, find it painful and difficult to go any faster than their normal pace and actually run. The reference to TV is definitely a persuasion technique because it alludes to the fact that runners like to find different paths to run on, while joggers take the usual and safe trail to run on. All of these techniques make you feel sort of like a failure if you’re a jogger and not a runner.
The ad states that our ancestors used running as a type of survival. It says that in order for our ancestors to get the meat they needed, they had to run to get it because if they were to jog it would never have been caught. The other species were too fast, so running was a necessity. Pearl Izumi definitely alienates the “jogging” population. Throughout the entire campaign he makes joggers seem like they are worthless and they might as well not even try it because they aren’t even doing anything. I don’t know how there would be any advantage to dividing them because the joggers would be turned away and pissed off at this guy and his ads. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got hate mail, and lots of it, from people all around the world who were offended by his allegations. The logos were very strong, with lines that said survival depended on running back with our ancestors. However, the pathos was much stronger because this whole campaign was based around what runners thought. Izumi made statements that said they have tried to determine the speed people would be classified as a runner and as a jogger, but they haven’t ever been able to. Some people physically can’t run faster than they are when, as Izumi would say, they are jogging. Also, he says that the shoes he designed weren’t meant for joggers to use on treadmills. However, treadmills can go to a speed that would be classified as a run. There aren’t really any facts in this campaign. Rather, Izumi is just writing his opinion and other avid runner’s opinion throughout the campaign. The Reebok ad definitely appealed to me more because it wasn’t as “rude”. The Reebok ad was actually kind of badass. As a runner, I know it is considered great if you puke because it means that you have tried as hard as you can, which is a huge accomplishment. I know it sounds kind of morbid, but anytime anyone puked on our team after a workout or race, they would receive a round of applause or props because they would probably continue the workout or race. However, the Pearl Izumi ad was degrading to people who weren’t avid runners. So, if you weren’t that runner, then why would the ad be appealing? Running is such a hard sport and so to be told that you aren’t actually running if you listen to music or run on the usual trails, that is a put down. It makes you feel unaccomplished and like a failure.
Friday, January 30, 2009
"America's Army"
All day everyday there are aspects of life that are so stressful and hard to deal with, they feel like a burden that will never be lifted. The feeling of wanting to be lost in another world would just be the token to ease the pain for a little while. For me, reading a book or watching a movie is an outlet I use to help me get through the stresses of everyday life. For others, it may be playing a video game that gives them power and feelings of accomplishment and success. "America's Army" is a video game designed to give people the strength and success they may be lacking in their "normal" lives.
The website is designed to draw attention immediately, and get people to sign up for the video game. The graphics used for the entire program is just mind-blowing because it shows that the creators behind this gaming website put in a lot of thought. Just take, for example, the graphics of the high-ranking official in "Game Training". Nascone looks almost like a real person down to the details of the evenly-shaped eyebrows, the eye color, the ear shape; all of the details of this official are a perfect resemblance of a real human being. That's the advantage the creators use because while people play this game, it will not only look like they are truly in life, but it will feel like that as well. "America's Army" was designed for the intense video gamers that want to achieve success and feel powerful. If anyone was to have a doubt about whether they would be the only person playing, could never exist because it states on the website the number of members is 9,785,138, at the time of the last check of the website. That's an incredible number of people playing this game, which I have never heard of prior to this blog. Another saying that would draw people in right away is the slogan "one of the ten most popular PC action games played online". With that number of members and the statistics that show it must be a great game, why would anyone doubt it?
This is where the downfall to the video game becomes clear. It may be a great thing to try and promote being in the Army and being part of the people that can say they are the "best-trained, most respected, and embody physical strength". However, this game, although it may have realistic graphics, is not a realistic interpretation of the how the army would be if a gamer was to actually join the army. Just like Todd Boyle stated, this game is somewhat "brainwashing" gamers to believe the army is exactly what the army is portrayed as through this video game. It shows the heroes and physically strong, the amazing stories of survival and injured going back for more. Is that a real interpretation of how every aspect of the army is in Iraq, though? No, because the game doesn't show all the innocent children blown up into pieces, the mangled hands and arms of your comrade next to you. It doesn't give you the same emotions and fears that you would really experience in Iraq as a soldier. The media helps in educating the ignorant as to what really goes on over there and the lives that are lost day in and day out. "America's Army" is simply one aspect of the army, that although it may be a great team to be a part of, it shouldn't be "sold" to children and adolescents in this perfect, fun way.
The last question made me laugh because we just had a discussion in my psych class about violent video games and whether the had an impact of the violence seen in teenagers. What was discussed in class was that a lot of people play violent video games and not every single one of them turns out horrible and goes and purposely hurts others. I believe that "America's Army" wasn't created to promote violence because violence is a fact of life. You can try and hide from it but it will always be there. I don't think everyone who plays violent video games becomes a violent person. However, I do think there is a possibility of it happening, but there isn't a set correlation between violent video games and violent behavior. The person has to choose whether they want to take those violent actions from a fictional video game and make them become real. I personally, don't like violent video games because I just don't think they are appropriate. Life isn't a game and neither is war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)