Not My Cup of "Vomit"

I am not an avid news watcher, article reader, or blog scroller. In fact, typing and blog posts this year is the closest I’ve ever come blogs. So when I stumbled upon the “Barf Blog,” by Doug Powell, I didn’t really know what to make of it at first for a blog can have many of its own rules, but I knew what interested me and disinterested me.

The Barf Blog, for the most part, disinterested me.

The Barf Blog is intended to inform the reader about “safe food from farm to fork.” Throughout this blog Doug Powell explores food and it’s corrupt effects on society through labeling, disease, over pricing, nutrition, and cleanliness of food. At the same time, Powell also divulges into his personal life with his daughter and wife, and his many food related adventures in Canada, Kansas, New York, and Australia. Each day he makes around five to ten posts, each around two to ten short paragraphs long. Quantitatively the Barf Blog discusses many aspects of the food industry in just one day. Qualitatively Doug Powell barely shares a personal opinion or deeper thinking.    

Powell gives a short, and many times, repetitive scope of the corrupt food industry. Whether it be “3 sick; SD Salmonella outbreak associated with baby chicks” (4/20/13) or “34 sick, 2009-11; Salmonella and duck eggs in Ireland, outbreak summary“ (4/19/13) or “First, you growl: when your dog’s food is recalled for Salmonella“ (4/16/13) without any personal insight, Powell posts small random outbreaks of Salmonella almost daily. Although, yes, it is morally disturbing to hear people are dying from food, to read a very minor outbreak everyday is repetitive. Even then, it isn’t very shocking to read because very few people die and it’s affecting people from all around the world, like Irish duck eggs containing Salmonella getting 34 sick, or German sandwiches containing rat poison getting 25 sick.

Holistically what interested me most was finding out Powell’s opinion on monkey nuts, and elephant poop beer. He used humor, and let out his real persona in these posts, which is why I found it most interesting. Not only that, but he supplied interesting pictures and videos for both posts.

The most disappointing thing about this blog was when Powell would share an interesting argument, but wouldn’t support it. In “Duh: Consumers finally figure out organic is an excuse to charge more“ he argues that organic food isn’t necessarily healthier and that “microbial food safety should be marketed at retail so consumers can choose.” However for the rest of the article he goes into how “Americans need to learn this for themselves” and states several pointless statistics. I was more interested in learning how organic food could be unhealthy and how his retail strategy works. He does this again in “CSPI, Ramsey race to the gutter of food gimmicks.” In this he denounces food shows, which he doesn’t even watch, to be the same as they were ten years ago in that they were “nothing but hackdom.” I understand this is a personal blog where Powell has the freedom to voice his opinions, but considering he is a professor at the University of Kansas, Powell should qualify his claims.

Besides his bits of humor, I don’t think I would willingly read this blog on a daily basis. I suppose this blog is not my cup of "vomit."

http://barfblog.com/

An Opener To a Freer Future

GENERAL VERRILLI: Mr. Chief Justice, and

may it please the Court:
The equal protection analysis in this case

should focus on two fundamental points: First, what

does Section 3 do; and second, to whom does Section 3 do

it?

What Section 3 does is exclude from an array

of Federal benefits lawfully married couples. That

means that the spouse of a soldier killed in the line of

duty cannot receive the dignity and solace of an

official notification of next of kin.

(80:15-25: General Verrilli's opening argument)

On Wednesday morning, March 27, 2013, was a pivotal day for judicial history, for General Verrilli was representing the liberals' postion in United States v. Windsor. This was a court case that could change the future for Gay Marriage through potentially amending the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA). In General Verrilli’s opening argument he both responds to Mr. Clement’s argument, while maintaining a qualified and informative opening in a very effective way.

Firstly, he responds to Mr. Clement’s argument by integrating the moral consequences of DOMA. By responding to Mr. Clement at the beginning of his argument, General Verrilli can show the contrasting flaws in Mr. Clement’s claims. Mr. Clement focused primarily on the federal and state law, and was claiming that federal law should stay out of state policy. During his turn, he discussed with the justices the various policies like the Definition Act, and the boundaries of the Federal Government. To directly counter argue Mr. Clement, General Verrilli appealed to the justices morals through ethical and nationalistic biases. By referencing both the military, and DOMA’s heart wrenching policy that the spouse of a soldier “cannot receive the dignity and solace of an official notification,”  he shows the ethical injustices of DOMA’s Section 3. General Verrilli thereby counters Mr. Clement’s logistics with his ethical reasoning.

Through the use of rhetorical devices, General Verrilli effectively gets the attention of both his intended audience, the Supreme Court Justices, but also the news reporters and American citizens listening in on this court case.  He first leads in with his first paragraph by asking a question with the intent of sounding enlightening, yet also to focus on his thesis: that DOMA discriminates against homosexuals. Obviously the justices, and Mr. Clement knows DOMA through and through prior to the court case, but announcing this rhetorical question boosts his appeal from his unintended audience. Then, in his second paragraph, he uses words like “dignity and solace” to emphasise the nationalistic appeal to the American Military. Although the court justices instantly dismissed his pathos to move onto his main argument, adding in these rhetorical devices at least made his position clear and persuasive.

General Verrilli was also very careful and qualified in how he constructed his opening statement. He was able to appeal with both his diction and structure. Besides the procedural “Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court,” General Verrilli appears qualified through saying words such as “Fundamental” and “Formal Notification.” These words show that he is superior to Mr. Clement’s logistics through him simplifying DOMA to its bare ethics. Sequentially, this is a clever strategy for an opening statement because it shows that both General Verrilli can be factual, and he can set up his ethical analysis of DOMA, for later in his argument. Staying broad in idea, yet specific in fact is what makes this opening statement clear and concise.

For an opening statement, General Verrilli must have put a lot of time into it. It was strategic for it set up his later argument. He was quick and effective without ever pausing or stumbling. He also appealed to his unintended audience through his rhetorical devices and clarity. Hopefully with his argument, the Supreme Court will side with being Pro Same-sex Marriage.

Would You Like That Wrapped?

When I was a child, at one point I was sitting in the middle of an expensive Italian restaurant. It was your atypical shrimp penne alla vodka, priced at eighteen dollars. I munched away at the sweet yet repetitive taste of pasta and vodka sauce. After ten minutes I start to wonder if I have even made a dent into the pile of pasta, for the majority of the pasta was still on the plate . I finally decided that I was too full and tired of vodka sauce. Just as I’m pushing my plate away with a third of the meal left, suddenly the waiter shows up asking the question.  

“Would you like that wrapped?”

Feeling frugal and efficient, I foolishly replied that I would love to get it wrapped. Sure I may have eaten all five shrimps, leaving the bland pile of pasta with vodka sauce, but I thought I could just eat it over the weekend. Little did I know it would mold up in my refrigerator after two months.

Sadly, this cycle of leftovers continued. I could never forget the “beautiful” smell of mold as my mother ordered me to throw the leftovers away and to even disinfect the refrigerator. I would trash blueberry pancakes, shrimp lomein, sushi, and pineapple pizza. Each time I would wonder why I was so lazy, and didn’t touch it.

It wasn’t until only a few years ago I finally ate my first leftovers: crab ravioli. It was in that moment that I realized why I didn’t eat leftovers. It tasted dry, cold, and nasty, and reminded me of every time I had thrown away moldy, old leftovers. From that moment on, I would decline getting my meal wrapped. However, each time I answered no to the waiter, I felt guilty!

Does this mean I’m not frugal anymore? Should I just suck up the moldy memories and eat the leftovers? What about those children in Africa or China who are hungry? Many of these questions would haunt me whenever I ate out so I finally reached a conclusion I could live with. If I’m satisfied with how much I eat my meal, then I’m getting my money’s worth. I've learned, through my experience that getting left overs is not worth the stomach ache. If finishing all of my meal leaves me lethargic, then finishing my meal with a quarter left is worth it. Likewise, if I’m to bring leftovers home for a future unsatisfying meal, then I shouldn’t wrap it. I'm not being pompous in deciding not to finish meal, but that I know my limits. Now whenever I eat out, I feel confident in indulging myself however much I want. 

So no, I would not like that wrapped.

"Made in U.S.A." Is An Endangered Specie

There is no avoiding the influence that is China, and many other developing nations. In just one decade of products, goods have gone from "Made in U.S.A." to "Made in China." Looking at old wash clothes, baby clothing, and old pillows, I find made in the U.S.A., but my closet is a whole other story. My clothing comes from places such as China, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, and India (China being the majority).  All but one brand of my clothing in my closet is made the U.S.A. This one brand being "Threadless," an online shirt company that makes many silly shirt prints. It doesn't stop there; all of my electronics, including alarm clocks, iPhone, lamps, and toys are all made in China. What I found most surprising was that many of my tourist fixtures, like a New York Snow globe, or a mini statue the Empire State Building were all made in China. The only products I use in my house that are made by U.S.A. is my toothpaste, mouthwash, shampoo, conditioner, soap, and chap stick. In other words, any product that has liquid and basic chemicals. Based on the many imported goods I end up buying, free trade in the United States must benefit many other country's income. Therefore, although "Made in U.S.A." is dying off as the United States starts relying more on imports, optimistically consumers receive cheaper goods, while America builds better trade relations with other countries. 

Why then do many people believe the majority of products should still be made in America? I've heard two key reasons people may believe this. One: America should maintain nationalism, therefore all products should say "Made in U.S.A." This will somehow make us all more patriotic as a whole. I disagree with this because based on the many products I've cataloged, finding the actual tag and reading the text on the tag is a tedious task, that the usual consumer (including myself) wouldn't usually do. Therefore, it will have a minimal, unconscious effect on how we see our country.  Two: America is losing many of its manufacturing jobs to outsourcing, therefore without jobs, our people are losing money. This is one of the effects of outsourcing that can't be avoided, but evolved from. Society, since the second industrial revolution, has built a job market around manufacturing. Now that outsourcing is causing this job market to be an endangered specie, America must evolve it's job market to suit jobs that can make money. So although with people with lost manufacturing jobs may suffer now, if America is pursuing free trade, society must evolve to a newer job market. "Made in U.S.A." may be dying off, but with free trade, America can live without it. 

Should America Give Up On Technological Jobs?

When I grow up, I want to get a job as a computer programmer, or a job related to technology. However, after looking into outsourcing, I found that getting a job in technology was just a waste of time, for outsourcing would "move" my job to another country. This put me in quite a panic because I thought I'd have to compromise my dream job for something else. Outsourcing has been the supposed silent killer of many jobs in technology and yet somehow our economy's savior, for outsourcing, "gained momentum after the Internet started bringing together every corner of the world"(Ghimire). However, because of this momentum, Me, as well as many other teens should be aspiring for technological jobs now more than ever for progression and innovation of technology. 

Many have said that outsourcing and off-shoring, although has reduced the prices of many products, has put many people impoverished. However, due to the recent recession, "those jobs would have been lost regardless of the outsource option being available or not"(Tony). Our country is slowly losing many of its high-wage workers because many companies are dying off regardless of outsourcing. Outsourcing, many times, is a company's last resort to avoiding bankruptcy. However, because of this recent conspiracy that off-shoring puts technological jobs at risk, many American teens, fear going into technological jobs because they worry it will be off-shored. Because of this questionable information, "students are concerned that their jobs could eventually be outsourced internationally and are therefore deciding to focus on their business skills"(LaMarca). But what many don't realize is that America must change it's direction of technical occupations. Now that many countries are capable of doing many manufacturing and service work, America must move onto being inventors. This is just and observation, but the most popular companies in the world are companies like Google, Apple, and Disney, are filled with inventors, creators and merchandisers. These companies each started with one inventive idea, that has been expanded upon so much so that they are the powerful company they are today. We too, should be looking for jobs like those in Google, or Apple, that are creating many new ideas for the internet, phones, and computers that revolutionize technology.

I, as well as many other aspiring teens, when deciding their career or major in college, should be looking for something that is creative, and expansive. If we aren't the ones to be in the call centers, then we should be the ones making call centers more efficient. In other words, we shouldn't be the "machines" doing all the work technology can do, but being the ones inventing the technology to fill in those jobs. Outsourcing is just another way of making companies more efficient. We should look for jobs the same way Frederick Winslow Taylor did in 1909 when he revolutionized the job market with his book, The Principles of Scientific Management. When he made this book, in the time of the second industrial revolution, machine was replacing many manufacturing jobs, Frederick's theory was that instead of firing many manufacturers, they should put them in higher management to make manufacturing more efficient. Frederick's principle was that, “In the past the man has been first; in the future the system must be first”(Taylor). Although it's a century since his book, we should also apply his thinking when applying for jobs. We shouldn't be picking jobs that machines or other people can do, but jobs that are making the machines, or people more efficient. Therefore, for those who are interested in technology, like myself, should be looking for a job that are creating new ideas, and not ones that are carrying out ideas (like service jobs or manufacturing). America should definitely not give up on technological jobs, for creating technology is the way of the future. 

Works Cited:

Tony. "(Important) Computer Science Jobs Are Not Outsourced." CompScicablog RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

Ghimire, Bhumika. "IT Job Outsourcing." IT Job Outsourcing. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

LaMarca, Tina. "Outsourcing America's Future." N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

Taylor, Frederick Winslow. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Norton, 1967. Print.

Outsourcing Hurts American Programmers

In the United States, off-shoring and outsourcing has been the killer of many computer programming jobs. Many of these jobs have been dying off because countries like India are willing to do the same jobs at lower wages. The city Bangalore in India for the past fifty years has been encouraging and supporting computer science studies, so when these American jobs were outsourced, Bangalore became the center of many new higher paying computer science jobs for India. Even Americans who have received bachelor's or higher degrees for Computer Science are losing their jobs. American Legislators have recently created economic policies allowing more global free trade, thereby giving many companies freedom to offshore many of their jobs. While this brings America and India a lot of money, many Americans lose their job. America shouldn't outsource jobs because Americans deserve to keep their jobs, as well as bring business and progression in the Computer Science field.

Computer Science isn't a manufacturing type of a job. It requires brain power and math skills, and many computer science jobs are the backbone for many companies' business and profits. During the recession, many companies gave away these jobs to India because it would be more profitable to the company. This is partially why so many people in the recession lost their job. "About 92 percent of Tata Consultancy’s 250,000 workers worldwide are Indians, according to the company"(Helyar).  This means that most of Tata Consultancy's jobs are out of the country. This includes many call centers, and computer programming jobs. Outsourcing jobs is keeping many Americans from money they could be making. Many American's are forced to work in new fields just to stay afloat in our economy. Michael Zurich being fired from his software engineering job, "became a math teacher in 2010 after a fruitless 18-month job search"(Steele). Being fired from a high paying job is detrimental to many American's lifestyles. For workers, having a stable job is the easiest way to supporting a family. 

In essence, Outsourcing is bad for America. It's not out of patriotism that it is, but because economically Americans are getting the short end of the stick.  Even though the company may be making more money by off-shoring their jobs, Americans are losing their jobs in the process.  

Works Cited:
"Outsourcing Turns Inside-Out as Indians Open U.S. Centers." Bloomberg. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2013.
"Offshoring Ensures Loss of Good U.S. Jobs." Philadelphia Inquirer. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2013.

The Dialects of the Internet

Many people on the internet like to diversify themselves through various typing quirks. Because technology has encouraged a more typed language, than a spoken language, many people fall into various habits in typing with friends or on forums. Since friends are typically not judgmental of not using Standard English, people feel there is more lee-way to type more informally. Once the barriers of formality are broken, many new ways of typing emerge. Firstly, when entering the world of typing informally, many people fall into typing what is most efficient:

Efficient Typing Quirks:

1. Typing with abbreviations and never capitalizing: brb; gtg; omg; lol; etc.

2. Replacing words or feelings with letters, symbols or numbers: c u l8r; i <3 u.

3. Taking out as many vowels and consonants as possible: wht hw do w hve 2nite?

This Efficiency Typing Quirks, although quick to type, may show a level of un-intelligience. Although it can be considered quirky, and punny at times, in an online community there is elitism in the way you type. Efficient Typing Quirk users are usually considered beginners of the online messaging world. 

The next most commonly used informal typing quirk are ones that show personal emotion. When talking face to face in Standard English, there is facial and body language people pick up on to understand a wide range of emotions. When speaking Standard English on the phone, the tone of your voice can indicate a smaller range of emotions. Although, in typing messages, all emotion is lost. If everyone were to speak in Standard English to their friends, they'd need to explicitly state that "I feel angry" to indicate emotion. This is way too formal and lackluster. Since your friends can’t see you, making emoticons, using many punctuation points, or using all caps becomes a key indicator of how you are feeling.

Personal Emotion Typing Quirks:

1.I AM SO EXCITED FOR TOMORROW!!!; I'M SO CONFUSED???

2. I am so excited for tomorrow :D;  I'm so confused O_o.

3. People may also show emotion through announcing various actions: *Dances with excitement for tomorrow*; *Tips head in confusion*

This typing quirk is more respected in online communities for it requires a broader vocabulary, and use of imagery.  It is also very useful in using sarcasm. With Standard English, sarcasm is represented by using quotes around what you want to be sarcasm. This system of showing sarcasm is very inefficient because many could confuse your statement with an actual quote. With Personal Emotion Typing Quirks, it is easier to explicit point out sarcasm. Using some form of Emotional Typing Quirks in typed messaging is a very integral part of communication.

Using typing quirks have become very widespread. Typing quirks are a lot like spoken dialects because they are understandable by all of that language, even if one doesn't speak the dialect themselves. The main difference is that typing quirks are not region based, but interest based. Because everyone is formerly taught to type and write in standard English, no matter what ethnicity or gender one may be, they are recognized as any person the internet. Therefore, many typing quirks are based off what internet communities and forums one may belong to. If someone were to talk to you which goes on the forum "4chan", and someone were to talk to you who goes on "Reddit", the one from "4chan" would probably have a more vulgar typing style. Likewise, if you were to speak with someone from "Hellokitty Online", and someone from "Call of Duty", the one from "Call of Duty" will probably have a more efficient typing quirk, while the one from "Hellokitty Online" will probably have a more emotional typing quirk due to the playing style of the games. There are obviously exceptions, but generally stereotyping these quirks is based on interests.

Having these typing quirks are very important to the internet. Other than just the utility of being able to show your emotions or write something quickly, typing quirks provide individualism on the internet. Since the internet is a haven for informality and expression, typing quirks provide all users of the internet to have freedom of speech (or in this case typing). Writing in Standard English may help with explicitly stating one's ideas in a more systematic, respected way. However, writing with a typing quirk makes the internet more personal. I agree with the use and expansion of typing quirks because the internet symbolizes creativity and freedom. 

Taking into account the vast amount of typing quirks, there is code switching on the internet. The reason I wrote this blog primarily in Standard English is because I see Standard English as a way to organize my thoughts. On forums I usually write in Standard English because it's most comfortable and logical for my thinking. However when I talk to friends, I usually speak in an emotional typing quirk because I have a closer connection with them. Anyone may speak however they like on the internet, though the mainstream Standard English is what most people will understand. In other words, there is code switching on the internet depending on the medium one speaks. 

Speak what you see as most comfortable while you're on the internet, and show off your personality however you like!

Social Change Proposal: Opening the CGS Doors Once More

My Proposal

We are living in a society that lives in so much fear of the unknown, that the very place we work and learn at has taken away our civil liberties. In the past month, ever since the Sandy Hook shooting incident, Brien McMahon High School has limited all students to using only one entrance in the morning. Supposedly, this is to lower the chance of a homicidal psychopath from entering the school.  In actuality, using this one door system has caused more harm than good. In the mornings, what would take no time at all to enter the CGS entrance, now takes everyone seven extra minutes to wait in traffic. No matter if it is 7:15 or 7:25, anyone who plans on being dropped off in McMahon is subject to heavy morning traffic. Therefore, my proposal is that Brien McMahon should reopen the CGS doors in the morning for the sake of efficiency, and making school seem like a safer place..

I plan to reopen the CGS doors through writing a letter to Principal Koroshetz because she is the head administrator at our school. The reason I’m doing this is because I believe closing more doors in the morning doesn’t detract from the possible danger we are perpetually in. Just because the Sandy Hook incident was in the same state, doesn’t instantly mean all Connecticut schools are in more danger. In fact, in that incident, the killer entered through a window, and not a door. Therefore, if we were to try and raise security in our school, I recommend taking a different approach. Secondly, by closing the CGS door, there is a seven minute traffic in the morning, and our school is denying easy access to a half of Brien McMahon’s classrooms. In essence, if there were to be a dangerous person at our school, having only one door won’t change the person’s homicidal motives.

Within my letter I shall introduce myself and the problem and how it affects me and the student body. Through this, I will be establishing my ethos, as well as my argument. This will at least notify the Ms. Koroshetz of this problem of inefficiency. In my next section I will be explaining my personal qualms, along with other student’s problems with the door policy. Giving small anecdotes, will show her that this one door policy is making usually punctual students late. This appeals to pathos because Principal Koroshetz values students who are punctual. In my third section I will go into the logos behind why we shouldn’t be a school run by fear. This ties into my main claim because I will be explaining how closing doors doesn't make our school any safer. Overall I think this structure is effective, because it appeals to both emotion and reason. If she won't agree with my second body paragraph, she can at least agree with my first body paragraph. I think she will be understanding of the issue at hand, and hopefully with her power, she will open up the CGS doors once more.

Stripping Down Bacon

Where is the fine line between an ad being offensive, or accepting? When I first saw this advertisement of Bacon Lube, I was thoroughly disgusted by both the idea of bacon being erotic and how this may be socially unjust. I thought it was trying to portray a woman as an animal, thereby wrongly reinforcing mans' dominant gender role in society. I also thought that because media has made meat a symbol of manliness, it was discriminating its non-meat loving audience. Though that is not the case at all. Through this ad  not appealing visually to many audiences for both its sexual humor, and meaty scent, this ad is encouraging and accepting a meat loving audience.

This product was made by J&D Foods, a company that was created only five years ago. Their slogan literally is: "everything should taste like bacon" and they have carried this out in many silly products such as bacon lipbalm, bacconaise, bacon popcorn. Considering such a silly prowess for a company, I had to ask myself, 'who would actually want to buy this?' For this ad, it wasn’t about it’s main audience: the American people, but primarily it’s meat loving demographic. In order to sell this product, this ad relies on couples who are goofy, and kinky, and are craving for a meaty night together. Just because this lube has a bacon scent does not mean it is creating stereotypes about men and meat. Likewise, seeing a woman with a pig snout doesn’t mean that she is suddenly an animal that the man intends to subordinate. This advertisement is made primarily to put a new, silly spin on sex.

I believe that this ad, no matter how disgusting, is actually encouraging equality. With a lot of media nowadays, it creates unfair stereotypes of men and women through advertisements discriminating their opposite audiences. This media works at the self-esteem of us individuals who aren’t the correct shape, or aren’t pretty enough, in order to get us to buy their products. However, with this product, it wouldn’t be affective to encourage such discrimination because it is such a bizarre product. It also shows equality through this picture's choice in colors. Through making the picture black and white for everything except the bacon, race isn't a focus within this advertisement, but only the product is. Similarly, this advertisement effectively attracts it's audience through showing how sexually appealing a pig can be. Through the man looking so overwhelmed with just the scent of bacon, shows how effective and alluring the smell of bacon can be.

This product also is a subtle statement in the progression of accepting others in society. Although at first glance it is a joke, American people can observe that there are meat lovers who would buy this product. Whether it be “manly men” who enjoy the scent of bacon, or an erotic couple, putting this product on the market makes anyone who sees it, aware of how liberal America is in terms of its censorship.  Having such liberties in selling erotic products improves society because then society can learn of the many cultures and demographics that are constantly forming throughout the world. Because America is a melting pot of many cultures and sub-cultures, allowing media to showcase controversial products spreads awareness and acceptance of these many demographics. 

In essence, Bacon Lube is a step in the right direction to a more culturally accepting society. Through not discriminating genders, and spreading awareness of many cultures, the media is in the right direction for equality. Just because a product looks controversial in that it has sexual connotations, and possible gender roles, doesn't mean that it is socially unjust.

The Future of Political Correctness

I used see political correctness as being too extreme, because it doesn't accept any sort of prejudice. This wasn't to say that I was prejudice, or conservative, or a bigot just because I was against political correctness, but that I felt society couldn't help being prejudice. To always be politically correct seemed too ignorant of the fact that prejudice is unavoidable in society. After doing this project, I've found out that this "hypothesis" is partially correct, but also partially wrong. Political correctness should be our goal for society, however being politically correct in present day is only worsening society.

After exploring my four types of media, I've learned that the media is a powerful source for our prejudice, but also media is a powerful source for our acceptance of equality. For example, racist satire, like the "Smirnoff Tea Party" music video, is actually helping society recognize stereotypes, and see the ridiculousness in racism. Similarly for Homestuck, it's because of it's large diversity in cultures of each character that it's many viewers can recognize, and even empathize with alien ethnicity. Even in Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends it always ends in respecting each other, and valuing friendship over cultural differences. On the other hand, for the child obesity ad, it has the opposite effect. It victimizes "big girls" for having child obesity. This spreads a message of hate and ignorance on how to treat people with obesity. These four types of media all has racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice, but my first three examples incorporate these harmful themes as a way to fix society. Ironically my last form of media primarily has the intentions changing opinions of society, but it is actually harming society most. If we go by the philosophy, "out of sight, out of mind," if all four of these forms of media were politically correct, prejudice wouldn't change because society wouldn't know how to treat other cultures, plus it wouldn't be amusing for its audience.

Conversely, political correctness should be a goal for society. Society should be striving to reach equality. With America, and especially Norwalk,CT, being a melting pot for all races, genders, sexual orientations, shapes, sizes, etc., it's important to strive to have equality. How else will society coexist? After analyzing all these forms of media, the important theme I've noticed in what makes media either harmful or accepting is whether it is recognizing stereotypes and accepting them, or if it is creating stereotypes and hating them. In the "Smirnoff Tea Party" commercial, they aren't creating the stereotype that rich white people from New England always ride yachts, play tennis, and live in mansions. It's an understood, foreknown stereotype which the commercial completely satirizes. However for the child obesity advertisement, it is creating the stereotype that parents are making their children obese, and that the obese should be discouraged by society. This is an example of how media is creating a hateful stereotype that misrepresents the obese demographic. The media should accept all forms of society in order to reach equality, instead of scaring, and forcing people to believe discriminatory thoughts.

Society won't forever be prejudice against other cultures. In our globalizing world, where media is constantly growing with the more technology we make, I see it will soon be unavoidable to ignore other cultures. Because of media, in just the past fifty years, we've achieved more acceptance in racism, than it took America a century to after the Civil War. So in other words, political correctness is spreading, and so long as the media recognizes, encourages, and accepts other cultures, our country will increase in equality.

Obesity is a Menace?

The media is bigoted. Corporations will stop at nothing to make it's consumer buy their products. And so it is understandable they try to use idealized visions of beauty to victimize obesity. But what happens when there are associations who decide to make advertisements on what is beauty? Whether they have good intentions or not, they're not selling a product, they are selling an opinion. They are using worse scare-tactics on an audience that should have the freedom to decide how they conduct their lives.

Child obesity is a problem in the United States. And as this advertisement is trying to "warn," it is the parent's fault. However, this is then turned into a one sided view of parenting, and how it's meant to be run. It's not because our nation is surrounded by large serving sizes, fast food, and consumerism that our country is filled with child obesity, but it's because of  our country's bad parenting, according to this advertisement.

In this advertisement, the girl is antagonized as being a criminal and menace to society. The picture is black and white, she's wearing gender neutral clothing, she's crossing her arms, frowning, and has a bland hairstyle, all in an attempt to show she's some sort of convict of beauty. Then in big red, dangerous letters, it says "WARNING," as though this girl has committed some sort of felony. But the injustice doesn't stop there; this advertisement has a double meaning when it says, "It's hard to be a little girl if you're not." Because this is a visual ad, and not some form of letter, or activism towards corporations, this message intended for the people who feed the girl: her parents. Now the "WARNING" also has a double meaning, because now it is warning parents that this is what their kids may become. Because of this double meaning, now the advertisement's main audience, the American people, will see fat children as a menace to society, and then the parents of these children as the creators of this menace. Socially, this ad is creating more harm, than good, through all the hatred it is spreading.

This advertisement is bigoted propaganda at its finest. Although child obesity is a health problem in the United States, making ads for the sole purpose of making society more insecure is neither helping the American ideology, and the Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, the association who created this advertisement if you were to look closely at the small letters, carry out their social goal of bettering society. Because obesity is such a sensitive subject, ad agencies shouldn't scare people into fixing social problems, but instead go about it in a more encouraging, mindful manor.

Let Me Tell You About Homestuck!

Homestuck Webcomic: http://www.mspaintadventures.com/?s=6

Amongst a sea of simple comedies there lies one webcomic that takes an alternate route altogether. This webcomic known as Homestuck is an expansive "interactive" adventure updated on average several times a day. As one of the longest running webcomics online with a cast of over 50 characters there are plenty of values being presented.

We see a variety of different people within Homestuck as diversity is a part of the plot. All of the characters which comprise its cast are designed to fit internet stereotypes. Even with a cast so large the webcomic's writer does a good job of fleshing out his characters as the stereotypical cat obsessed anime "fangirl" and white wannabe rap artist are more than just the mold they were made from. The anime fangirl is also a fierce hunter and a strong woman who falls short only when it comes to her own love and the wannabe rap artist eventually confesses he is a poser and longs to be a hero like the rest of the characters who he idolizes. Among the other characters in Homestuck are a ghost buster’s fanatic, human goth girl, young physicist with a world destroying dog, homosexual mechanic, a British adventurer, a cupcake baking heavyset dame, a recovering alcoholic obsessed with wizards, twelve aliens all of different social statuses, their twelve ancestors, all of the human character’s parents and guardians, a band of twenties esque black mobsters based on the suits of cards, a mafia of green skinned mobsters based on billiard balls, three omnipotent creatures, a time traveling demon, lovecraftian horrors, and an alien girl who’s desire to be of another race serves as a metaphor for trans-gendered people. Needless to say it’s got the whole diversity thing down pat.

As a webcomic Homestuck does need that hook to keep the reader’s attention. Part of its hook is its award worthy brand of humor. Though many of its jokes may be insensitive to certain members of its diverse audience this is all in good fun. The writer has even gone so far as to lampshade the negativity of a few of the more belligerent characters through a social justice advocating always politically correct tool of a character. Said character does nothing but rant on for literally hours and hours (you are not expected to read his text) about the social injustices being committed by his peers and how they should “check their privileges” in case they may “trigger someone.”

The author, from the start of the comic has also implemented many fan suggestions for the plot. As with the theme for all his web comics, Homestuck is supposed to be represented as an interactive game. The author sees it fit that the viewers should have a say in what may happen next in the comic, and so implements many fan suggestions. Because of this system, and the comic's long, descriptive plot, there is a lot of culture behind the fanbase for this comic. It has grown to such a height of popularity, that when the author decided to make a kickstarter (a site that helps creators fund projects with support from anyone in exchange for the product along with merchandise when it is launched) for an actual PC game of the webcomic, he made up to 2.5 million dollars in one month, when his original goal was only $700,000. All this money is purely from the fan base.

Through its diverse cast, Homestuck has created an admiration and respect for what we may see as too alien, or weird for it's audience. He pushes the envelope of freedom of speech, equality, and creativity while still maintaining a distinct humor, among many more values. Homestuck, despite being a long read, is has many liberal, socially justified aspects that is worth reading to better our society today.

The Propaganda in a Tea Party

Smirnoff Tea Pary Commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6XsIL0jIBI

There is no denying it. This commercial is controversial on every account. It degrades white women, it degrades black women, it degrades white men, it degrades black men. It has everything from preppy white women throwing themselves at preppy white men, to accusing rich New England white men of stealing money through stocks. From the body language of the men and women in this music video, it is purposely orchestrated to look like as if the they are black gangster rappers. And yet, it is through all of its extreme satire, that all of this commercial's discrimination has the reverse effect on it's intended audience: American adults, including New England. Because of it's discrimination and fusion of opposite demographics and heavy use of satire, this advertisement is not meant to be taken seriously. But are these the commercials that should be broadcast? The answer is yes.

Smirnoff Vodka is listed as the 84th global brand in the interbrand's top 100 global brands for 2010. The London based brand is worth 3,624 million dollars and makes up more than a fifth of the industries vodka sales. So what is it doing, making one very offensive commercial? The answer is that it grabs attention, and is so humorously racist, and sexist, that all audiences unaffiliated aren't offended. Even the people who are discriminated can at least see the satire, and laugh at the stereotype. Making such a commercial attracts a large market around the country, and even the world. But should we be endorsing such humorous racism, sexism, and prejudice? How is that bettering society?

Advertisements are the art of propaganda. And in this case, because it is a satire, endorsing racism, sexism, and prejudice is actually bettering society. Democratically, it means the media is expressing its freedom of speech. That does not mean it is advocating we should be prejudice but it is the opposite. It is because it speaks of racism humorously that then society is able to see racism in a more ridiculous way.  Just because a commercial says lines such as "Haters like to clown our ivy league education, but they're just jealous, cuz our fathers run the nation," doesn't mean the rappers are triggering hatred, but instead are misrepresenting the New England stereotype through rapping. If anything, since this commercial is so popular, it shows the American people do believe that too many of our presidents are this white New England stereotype, and that people should vote for another ethnicity. This is why this line is funny. It may be implicit, but this advertisement is encouraging American, democratic morals.

This song ad for Smirnoff raw tea ends up cleverly attracting all economic classes because it looks refined in the music video for the New England demographic, although the lyrics say it is also for the gangster demographic thereby making a large economic middle ground between the opposite consumers. It is no wonder Smirnoff is such a successful company, considering it's commercials grab so much attention.        

The Qualification of Imagination

Although foster homes may be associated with orphans and a place for abandonment,  the message in Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends is very much the opposite. Foster's Home For Imaginary Friends encourages freedom and the support of imagination since it is imagination that both creates their adventures, and what literally made tangible imaginary characters. Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends primarily tackles the social issue of equality in ethnicity, disability, and gender in a satirical, yet child friendly way.

When it's a mansion purposely made to accept, house, and take care of used, disposed imaginary friends, Foster's imaginary residents easily mimic many social problems children may face from going into foster homes. To bring these social issues to light, the show's main character, Bloo, arrogantly, superficially, and condescendingly bullies his emotionally damaged friends Edwardo, Wilt, and Coco. Edwardo is a giant scary purple monster, who is actually very sensitive, so much so he cries at least once per episode. Wilt is disabled, through having only one arm, and he is very apologetic. Coco is a bird/plane/tree that is very maternal and only says the word: "coco".  For Bloo, all these features become the fuel for his insensitive name calling. Although this may sound very negative for child viewers, eight year-old Mac, being Bloo's creator, acts as Bloo's moral compass, in that he suppresses Bloo's ego and has him follow the rules (most of the time). Even if Bloo's personality never changes, by the end of each episode through some form of adventure, negotiation, or 'learning from mistakes', Bloo's bigotry is flipped to accepting his friends for who they are (although Bloo still maintains his sarcastic humor). In the episode, "Bad Dares Day," this was no exception. In the episode, Mac and Bloo start of daring each other small dares that eventually escalates to making an all out dare competition between everyone in the Foster's mansion. In the nature of daring, both characters competitively and even sadistically exploit many other imaginary friends' weaknesses, secrets, hobbies, and personalities until there's one final victor. It wasn't until the final round that Bloo and Mac could see that these dares were driving them apart and were crossing the emotional line. Because they recognized friendship overcomes competition , they both then are declared the victors of the competition. Dares, in this episode, symbolize counter equality, through the humiliation, and ultimately hatred for others because they broke emotional boundaries. However, because they learned from their mistakes, the moral of the story is that daring may be fun, but you shouldn't cross emotional boundaries.

On the other hand, through the nature of imaginary friends looking alien to the audience, this message of equality may be lost. In fact, several characters challenge racism vs. equality. For example, a few characters have foreign accents, such as Eduardo's Mexican accent. Although the writer may have intended this accent to give Eduardo more character and quirkiness, it can bring upon racism towards Mexicans and how they speak English, or that through Edwardo showing weakness and sensitivity, Mexican people may be interpreted as also being weak. Similarly, every human character in Foster's Home is white, except for Goo, who is a black girl with ADD. Although it may be unintentional, all the white characters, Mac, Madame Foster, and Frankie, all share authoritative, and respected roles in the house. On the otherhand, in "Go Goo Go" Goo is banned from Foster's, and is originally detested by most of the imaginary friends for having an hyperactive imagination which makes her create imaginary friends from the top of her head. Just as silly has her name is, and the fact that her family allows her to follow Mac everyday, shows Goo's parents have no real handle on Goo's life. This may be sending a bad interpretation of how Black families are run. Conversely, it can also be interpreted as not being racist, but merely recognizing other cultures/races. Goo and Eduardo may represent that in Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, they accept people of all colors, sizes, and looks. Because of Mac in "Go Goo Go", Goo was un-banished from the house, and Mac helped Goo become respected and liked. Not to mention, Eduardo overcomes his sensitivity to help his friends. I would like to interpret the show as not being racist, because although initially it appears biased, in end of each episode, the antagonized character is accepted.

Foster's Home for Imaginary's Friends also tackles the equality of genders. In the hour-long movie, "Destination Imagination", Frankie (the granddaughter of Madame Foster) is the mansion's maid, daycare, and chef for the entire house. Mr. Harriman, being the house's business man, and authoritarian, treats Frankie ungratefully for not doing her chores well enough. As a symbol of feminist activism, and rebellion, when Mr. Harriman receives a box with a trapped imaginary friend and puts it in a closet because of a note saying "Don't open", Frankie breaks the rules and opens the box, and falls inside into her ideal dream world. She opened the box because she saw it unjust to trap an imaginary friend based on a note. In her dream world, she is treated like a princess, and decides not to return to her job for how un-thankful it was. The house then descends into dirty chaos without her, and no matter however many maids Mr. Harriman hires, Frankie was irreplaceable. Finally, after a large adventure to save Frankie from her dream world, Mr. Harriman admits Frankie was needed. Upon her return, Frankie makes a policy that every imaginary resident shall be given chores. I interpret this as feminism, in that Frankie was able to stand up for her job, even if her job is typically a female job. This also sends a message of activism for employees, that they should stand up to their employers if they want rights as workers.

Foster's Home for Imaginary friends is a balanced show of having both satirical humor, and liberal morals of equality. The writers are not afraid to tackle moral issues such as race, gender, and public appearances because it is in the sequence of each episode, and implicit message of the title that all the characters learn to accept each other's differences. So, though it may have a blue arrogant bigot, Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends is socially just in how it encourages equality.

Unrealistic Dreamers Speech Outline

Matthew Wagar’s Rhetorical Analysis Outline

of Haruki Murakami - As an Unrealistic Dreamer: Catalunya International Prize speech: 10 June

Purpose: Because of what happened in WWII, and Japan's fundamental princeples, the Japanese government and power companies should feel ashamed that they let greed and “efficiency,” come before the safety of their people when the earthquake destroyed the nuclear power plants; Japan shouldn't use nuclear power anymore.

Intended Audience: The people of Barcelona
Real Audience: Fans of his writing, the japanese people, the world

Context: Haruki Murakami is a critical novelist who usually focuses on themes of alienation and loneliness. Although born in Japan, he grew up reading a lot of western literature, therefore his writing is influenced by it.  Three months after it happened, he is talking about the Earthquake  that caused multiple nuclear power to explode.

Introduction: To establish his ethos, he starts off friendly and humorous, by complimenting on Barcelona’s women, and stating his successful job. He then flips that whole lighthearted move around to get to his serious topic. This bait and switch was a great use of pathos.

Section 1: Nature and Japanese Ideology
Purpose: Haruki wants to reassure the world that the Japanese people are prepared both physically and mentally for the many natural disasters that hit Japan. He does this through saying the Japanese ideology has always been prepared because Japan is so prone to natural disasters.
Appeals: He Establishes his ethos by gaining the trust of both his intended audience and his real audience.
Technique: Logic: Mujo, the mentality of the Japanese; apostrophe; Juxtaposition of regarding finding beauty and nature, and the disaster that nature causes.
Effectiveness: This was very effective because he didn’t need to refer to any statistics or sources. Because his ethos was solid as a japanese writer, he was able to tell the japanese ideology.

Section 2: World War II
Purpose: Haruki is trying to tell the Japanese energy companies, and government that they shouldn’t have relied on efficiency through nuclear power for what happened in WWII. “Let all the souls here rest in peace, for we shall not repeat this evil.” Haruki is pointing out that we have repeated this evil and that the Japanese should feel ashamed for they are not the victims anymore.
Appeals: He uses logos and pathos to try and make his Japanese audience feel ashamed, blindsided, and guilty. He wants his audience to realize that nuclear power is not meant for Japan based on the past. In this part of the speech he is trying to convince his audience to believe Japan has wronged itself.
Techinique: Logic; apostrophe; antithesis;
Effectiveness: Refering to World War II is his strongest point. It is literally the climax of his speech and the key detail his audience will be left with. Since the post World War II era was a time of immense reform of Japanese ideology, Haruki really hit the heart and really gets his Japanese citizen audience on his side.

Section 3: Corrupted Government/Finding An Alternative: Unrealistic Dreamers
Purpose: Haruki accuses the Japanese government of being too selfish and greedy to be efficient that it lost sight of it’s morals, culture, and people. He then encourages and insists that Japan resorts to other energy sources.
Appeals: Haruki finally reaches his conclusion on how government should change. In this section he is both trying to convince his audience that the government is corrupt for its views on efficiency, and we should find an alternative energy source than nuclear power. He also tries to persuade his audience to be “unrealistic dreamers” who try to be rebels towards the government and go for more natural energy sources.  
Technique: Metaphor: Unrealistic Dreamers: The people who believe that Japan can still dream for an alternative energy source.
Effectiveness: Although is Haruki’s main section to persuade his audience, I find it may be lost on his Japanese audience because he develops a conspiracy theory about the Japanese government and the energy companies. He is sort of a hypocrite in saying that Japan was orderly and developed before government decided to be efficient, and the efficiency is what made government greedy. Considering efficiency is what made Japan the huge super power it is today, so juxtaposing with what Japan was before its efficiency kick seems a bit confusing and weak.

General Evaluation: Through Murakami's use of rhetoric, he's trying to persuade both his intended audience of Barcelona, and the japanese people that nuclear power is destructive, and Japan must use an alternative form of energy. Murakami wants to rebuild Japan's morale, through reminding Japan of its mentality after World War II, and the cultural values of Mujo. However, it's unfair for Murakami to demonize nuclear power and efficiency, because it is through these policies that Japan has become the world power that it is today.