Molly's American Studies

Blog Reflection

2010-05-24T20:04:00.000-05:00

   It's hard to believe that this year is coming to a close! I can fortunately say that I have enjoyed blogging and have learned a lot about the medium through my experiences. My favorite post for this quarter is entitled Arizona's Immigration Law. I picked this post because it demonstrates a better usage of the blogging style than some of my other posts. For example, I used bolding and included a source quote for my readers' convenience. I tried to focus on debating multiple sides so I can further analyze the issue and do not appear polemic. That post is 380 words long, so it is more compact than my favorite post of the first quarter, which was 434 words long. Instead of shortening my analysis, I tried to shorten my source summary in order to make my posts more interesting and reader friendly.
   An issue with my blogging in general is that I am afraid to post my own opinion. When reporting, showing opinions in writing is unprofessional, but blogging is more personal. In the Arizona post, I made the decision to put out my own opinion on the issue itself. By posting my opinion, my goal was to let my readers see inside my mind a bit, and offer them the chance to disagree with me.
   Another thing I need to work on is putting voice into my blogs. Because blogs are more personal, I have the opportunity to be a little humorous and share personal anecdotes. At first I felt that my readers don't care about what I say about myself, but when reading my peers' blogs, I realized that posts with personal insight are far more interesting and entertaining. Although I haven't been entirely successful with this, I try to inject humor and personal stories into my blog posts whenever appropriate.
   Whether or not I will continue this blog is unclear, but I know that I wish to continue the blogging style in some shape or form. I like blogging because of it's conversational qualities- it's not a one way lecture or a serious paper, but a discussion about real-world issues with a general audience. This form of writing is more interactive than the other forms of writing we have done in class, and that is one of the reasons why I enjoyed doing it.
   Whether this is the final post or just the beginning, to all of my readers, thanks so much!
-Molly

Questionable Photojournalism

2010-05-24T18:03:00.000-05:00

One thing i've seen a lot lately is article photos (particularly on websites or the covers of newspapers) that are very unflattering. They pop up everywhere, and I'm beginning to think just about every major political and social figure has had really bad photos of them published in the press.

For example, one political figure facing political scrutiny is Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona. This article, which we discussed in class today, has this photo of her in it.

Now, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want that photo of me put in the paper.

How about putting up a photo of her that looks like this? See, that just looks wonderful, doesn't it? She's smiling, and I think that photo is airbrushed as well.

Let's take a look at another governor in the news. The Chicago Sun-Times posted this photo of Rod Blagojevich:

In my opinion, the way his mouth is open and his general facial expression makes him look stupid. Here is the article if you would like to look at it.

This is a photo of him published in CBS news' celebrity news outlet (link here). He may not look fantastic, but in my opinion, he looks a little bit better than in the other one.

The thing I'm wondering, is WHY news outlets decide to use particular photos of politicians? One thing that Mr. B suggested is that the news sources want to ignite controversy. Another reason is probably to just make the politicians look bad in the literal sense, as well as bashing their reputations and images. What effect does posting a good photo or bad photo of someone have on the reader? On the surface, I just laugh or feel sorry for whoever is in the bad photo, and probably stare at and ignore the good photo. If other people also just ignore good photos, than Mr. B makes a good point- I will be more likely to notice a story attached to a terrible photo because of the photo itself.
Another thing that I noticed is that perpetrators of crimes almost always have bad press photos, while victims have beautiful photos posted. One possible cause is that mugshots are accessible, and almost always look bad. However, if news agencies have to go to the trouble to find a beautiful photo of a victim of a tragic accident, can't they find a beautiful photo of the perpetrator of the crime? No. Why? My guess is that news agencies want to arouse disgust of the crime and sadness for the victims. But why is that? What do you think?

Arizona's Immigration Law

2010-05-23T19:42:00.004-05:00

The news about Arizona's new law is all over the place, so I wanted to take the time to examine the situation. If you haven't heard about it, here is a link to a NY Times article providing background. Here's the summary of the law that this article provides:

It requires police officers, “when practicable,” to detain people they reasonably suspect are in the country without authorization and to verify their status with federal officials.

This law also makes it illegal to be caught without papers such as a green card or drivers license for citizenship. This in itself has several implications- for example, a girl in the AIS day discussion told others that she, like many other people, often forgets things, and that it might not be fair to place misdemeanor charges on someone who is forgetful or disorganized. That being said, I'm not arguing that immigration reform isn't needed; it takes 15 years for some people to legally enter the country, and millions of people try to enter illegally every year.

The argument of people that disagree with the new law is that it might encourage racial and ethnic discrimination because border patrol and immigrations officers ("la migra") will only be looking for people who can't speak English fluently or look Hispanic. Now, I suppose that means that only a select group will be pulled aside. However, in my opinion, just because someone doesn't have my blond hair and pale complexion does not mean that they should be questioned by the police. This law has the potential to cause significant Hispanic discrimination.

My belief is that the key to deterring illegal immigration is in better enforcing the law that prevents illegal immigrants from being hired. Some people think that making the borders impossible to cross solves the problem, but instead that creates thousands of horrible deaths for people who try to do it anyway. Constantly checking IDs won't help either because not every illegal immigrant will be caught, or plenty of legal immigrants will be unfairly questioned. Not giving jobs to illegal immigrants will hopefully end up shifting those jobs to legal immigrants or other Americans. However, I acknowledge that there is a lot I don't understand about the issue. What would you do?

Junior Theme Post Four: AHH!!!

2010-05-03T12:19:00.000-05:00

Sorry for the delay in posts!

My interview with Professor Vaughn went really well- he was very helpful and knowledgeable, and he gave me some great info for my paper.

However, the paper... is due THIS FRIDAY.

I currently have five pages, although I would like seven, and my intro, conclusion, and general organization need serious work. I'm currently having a battle: Do I arrange my paper thematically or chronologically?

I rearranged my paper to be thematic this weekend, but in my opinion, it makes a lot less sense that way. A friend of mine read my draft just for comprehension purposes and asked me why the dates were jumping all over the place. I tried to arrange it by religion, censorship, and economic themes, but the three are so interrelated on this topic that it just sounds dissorganized.

Also, I can just feel that it's not my best writing, which makes me nervous. And i'm not sure if I am fulfilling the assignment either, because i'm not sure how well I am anwering the why.

Thankfully though, I have all of the required sources and a surplus, which is good, but I just need to make the paper more analytical and more cohesive.

How are you all doing?

JT, Number Three

2010-04-22T19:29:00.000-05:00

      I found a person who is willing to be interviewed for my paper- Professor Stephen Vaughn from UW-Madison, a communications professor who has done extensive research on film ratings.

     However, I'm still stuck with some elements of my paper; I wrote some history components, but that's not really the point. I'm supposed to answer my why question, and I think I need a better thesis to keep moving forward. Here's a couple ideas;

        MPAA ratings protect the film industry from government censorship and help parents shield their children from immoral content.

       MPAA film ratings classify films by what is morally appropriate and what is not, and are instated in order to teach americans appropriate moral behavior.

    My introduction is in an inadequate draft form, and needs revision, and most of my current history components will probably not be used. However, I'm very excited about the interview, and am hoping that will help point me in the right direction.

I know this is a short post, and i'll say more at another time. Thanks for reading!

Second Junior Theme post

2010-04-18T20:41:00.000-05:00

   So far i've been reading from some books and on the internet, and I feel that I have a basic understanding of when and how the MPAA ratings system has been created. However, I am not sure why yet- and that's the most important part, so I'm a little stuck.
   I've emailed Northwestern's Film/TV/Radio division of their communications department, asking if any professors would be willing to be interviewed. I'm going to wait until monday or tuesday, and if I don't hear back, I will call the MPAA office in Los Angeles.
   I haven't written very much of my paper yet, so I'm in that transition point, and I think I'm going to write down a bit of the history component as I understand it, and hopefully I can add the why parts later as I come to a conclusion. I feel i've been doing a decent amount of work, but i'm concerned that I will have a really rough crunch time if I don't make some more progress.
   Additionally, I'm not sure how to go about answering my why question yet (as in how to map the paper out) so that's adding to my general uncertainty. Do I start with what the rating system is currently, and then describe how we got there? Do I start with when the hays code was first instated, and then say how it progressed to our current system?
   I'll keep posting as I start writing components, and i'll let you know how my interview search is coming. Thanks for reading!

First Junior Theme Post

2010-04-07T12:02:00.000-05:00

Hello Readers!
     I'm not exactly sure how the posting about junior theme thing is supposed to work, but all I know is the function of this blog is shifting gears for a bit, and i'm just going to roll with it.
    For those who don't know, Junior Theme is the big paper of junior year- the uber paper, the head honcho, or whatever you want to call it. For the next month, i'm focusing on one topic and writing a paper on it.
   Thankfully, I have an approved topic- film ratings. I knew I wanted to write about film, but I didn't know what I wanted to focus on and how I would keep the focus on American films. Doc OC asked me if I knew what the Hayes code was, and I didn't. A google search later, I realized I knew little about and would be interested in writing about film ratings. My current why question is;

     Why are films rated by the Motion Picture Association of America's (MPAA) standards?

     As I learn more about my topic, I can refine the question, but that's what I have. And here's what i've learned so far:

      The Hays code was enforced starting in 1934, and was a strict set of rules prohibiting subjects in films such as nudity, the ridicule of laws or religious officials, drug use, and interracial marriages. After that was abolished in the late sixties, the letter rating system was created, starting with G,M,R and X. M then switched to GP and again to PG, PG-13 was added in 1984, and soon after that, X was changed to NC-17.Then they added explanations for why a film got a rating, which takes us to our current rating system.

So, that's about where I am now, and I'll post more at another point. If there's anything you'd like to hear more about, comment and let me know.

America and Soccer

2010-03-17T17:53:00.000-05:00

      I've always wondered why Americans aren't interested in soccer. Most of the people I know who love following soccer are either people who play the sport or people who have lived in another country. I was surprised to find an article on CNN today that covered the topic, and apparently i'm not the only one to realize; few Americans are actually interested in soccer. Why?
     The CNN article's theory is that when soccer was being spread widely in Britain, America was a new country and wanted very little to do with anything British. Instead, Americans created our own version of football based off of rugby; and American football is rarely played in the rest of the world. America has essentially avoided soccer in the attempt to create our own identity. To what extent can sports shape the identity of a country?
             I personally believe that America has formed it's own identity. My reasons why are for another day, and I'm fairily positive that many others out there disagree with me. Either way, would a universal American embrace of soccer enhance our identity, change our identity or prevent us from forming one? I feel that a lot of the world's countries bond through the support of their soccer teams, and that America could better connect with the rest of the world if more of us payed attention to it. Here's a metaphor for you; Sports are a universal language, and soccer is spoken frequently through the rest of the world. Would America benefit from being more multilingual?

How will our decade be remembered?

2010-03-15T20:19:00.000-05:00

   Whenever I look at specials or features honoring certain decades, I wonder; How will our decade be remembered? Most recently, I saw a video on the twenties, which featured things such as Model-T Fords and flapper dancers. What will our decade documentaries be on?
      When it comes to technology, I would mention the rise of touch-screen phones and devices, such as the Iphone and smart board. For music, definatley the Ipod and how itunes has changed the music industry. For movie and televison figures, I would mention Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Hillary Duff, Miley Cyrus, and Zac Afron. For Political icons, I would mention President Bush and President Obama. For economy, I would mention the recession and the events leading to it.
      One time at camp, my friends and I were talking about how people will dress when they try to dress as people from our decade. For a girl, we suggested a jean mini skirt (shorter the better), UGGs, two tanktops in neon colors (one worn over the other, but both visible), a North Face, big sunglasses, a wristlet or clutch purse, and an ipod. We didn't talk about guys, but I would suggest baggy pants or shorts (worn low), skater shoes, and a t-shirt. What do you think the 2000's costume outfit will look like?
   What am I missing? If you saw a documentary on the 2000's meant for future generations, would you be proud of what you see? How was this past decade different from others?
   One of the ways our generation has separated itself from others is by it's growth alongside the internet; the internet is an integral part of young people's interactions, and boomed to an overwhelming extent in this past decade. Do you think this is a positive change, or not?

WASPs Finally Honored

2010-03-10T19:25:00.000-06:00

     The Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASPs) that are still alive were honored for their service today by recieving Congressional Gold Metals. 65 years ago, these women took care of flying duties within the U.S. so their male counterparts could fly on WWII's front lines. Their salaries were less than the men's, they did not receive benefits or honors, and if they died during service, the U.S. flag would not be put on their coffins. Is this metal ceremony a modern-day form of reparations?
       I think that this is a modern day form of reparations. Although I orignally did not approve of reparations, upon understanding that they were not always monetary, I changed my mind. I don't know what effect the metals will have on the WASPs themselves, but I know that I know more about them because of it, and that in itself is valuable. These women are probably ecstatic to finally be honored for their service. If if that isn't the case, anything that spreads the word about the contributions of these women is very valuable. As an American female, I was proud when I found out about their role and their accomplishments, and I think it's safe to say i'm not the only one, men and women alike.
      However, how long is too long to wait for reparations? If we should have given the WASPs medals (or other forms of reparations) earlier, is now too late? Because these women are still alive, I think it's not too late; even if their sons or daughters were given medals in their honor, I think it's not too late. How do you feel?
      Should the American goverment give reparations? If so, to whom and for what?

Luxury=Inaccessible?

2010-03-08T20:32:00.000-06:00

   While watching the academy awards last night, I saw a Hyundai ad that captured my attention. It featured basketball players shooting hoops with a Louis Vuitton designer brand basketball (which I didn't even know existed), police eating caviar, and average looking people eating lobster at a cafeteria table. The question asked in the ad is, "What if we made luxury available to everyone? Would it still be called luxury?"
      How do you define luxury? Is luxury an object of high quality, or and object only a few can afford? The Hyundai ad suggested that it's brand name should be the word for "luxury but affordable." Does a such thing as luxury and affordable exist? My dictionary describes luxury as "the state of great comfort and extravagant living." Great comfort could imply high quality, and extravagant living is inaccessible to many, so that definition doesn't answer the question. What do you think?
   This is a big question, so i'll keep it to the subject matter of cars. According to Wikipiedia, luxury vehicles have "pleasant or desirable features beyond strict necessity- at increased expense." From this definition, it looks like luxury is both quality (extra features) and inaccessibility (increased expense). Perhaps, then, Luxury means both high quality and expensive. Do you know of anything you would consider luxury that is only one of the two? If so, let me know.
   Well, if luxury must be expensive, than luxury and affordable does not exist. This ties into our class discussions on class; owning luxury items can be added to our definition of the higher class. Luxury items would add to a person's wealth, too, and higher wealth equals higher class, so it all makes sense. What do you think?

Dissecting Dominick's

2010-03-04T20:25:00.000-06:00

For a teenager, I go to the grocery store a lot. For example, when I was told to get milk, I checked the expiration dates and picked the milk with the expiration date farthest away. Of my own accord. Anyways, when Mr. Bolos said that sometimes grocery stores had "exotic aisles" I didn't recall seeing any but decided that I would keep my eyes open for one. It turns out, this particular Dominicks had an aisle labeled as kosher food, Mexican food, and rice.

Correct me if I'm wrong; in order for food to be kosher, it has to be made a certain way and adhere to certain cleanliness standards. If that's right, I think it makes sense to have a kosher isle so that customers can be sure that their food adheres to the kosher guidelines. In the same category, I think that Gluten free or Vegetarian isles are a good idea.

However, I'm not so sure why Mexican food in particular has it's own category. Mexico is one country; if Dominicks has part of an aisle that is devoted to one country, shouldn't there be more aisles for other countries? Or, maybe expand that to continents; Asian food, European food, South American food, etc.

If most stores are arranged according to food groups (produce, dairy, wheat, poultry/meat, etc) why do many of these stores spontaneously have an aisle arranged for nationalities?

Why do you think the store was organized this way? Is it helpful for customers or demeaning? How would you arrange a grocery store?

Should a Child be Given a Life Sentence in Jail?

2010-02-24T22:49:00.000-06:00

      Although a child under 14 cannot be sentenced to the death penalty, 12 year old Jordan Brown from Pennsylvania is facing life in prison without parole if he is convicted of a double homicide. More information is in this article.
      If he is innocent, he will be cleared of charges, but if he is deemed guilty, should he be sentenced to life in prison? As Americans, how willing are we to accept reconciliation? To what degree should children be held accountable for their actions?
   If Jordan is guilty, would it be acceptable for him to spend some time in prison and then have parole once he has reconciled for his actions? From my own personal standpoint, I think that people can redeem themselves after they have made mistakes, but it's hard to say what exactly qualifies as redemption. If Jordan did commit the murder, someone's life was ended because of him; how can someone make up for that, and who has the power to say whether or not he has reconciled for his actions? If the family of the deceased or a jail warden gets to determine whether the guilty feels bad enough about it, I think the pardons will depend more on the pardoners than the person committing the crime. I think that Americans like the idea of reconciliation, but when it comes to real life situations, we become hesitant. What if Jordan is sorry for what he did and then he spends his whole life in prison when he could have been a productive citizen? What if we only think he's sorry, and then he murders someone else?
      And there's a whole other issue; he's 12 years old. Is he fully accountable for his actions? Should he be punished as an adult? People aren't numerical sets of data or statistics; some children could probably be held accountable for most of their actions, and others not at all. Similarly, does age make a difference? How much more accountable would he be if he was 13? 11? 6? I think that children do get gradually more mature as they age, but because everyone is different, I don't think it's possible to make one rule that applies to all kids. However, if there isn't a rule, similar situations might be viewed differently in court.
      It's complicated, and I'm not sure what I think Jordan's verdict should be; what do you think?

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

2010-02-22T21:52:00.000-06:00

   According to a CNN poll , 69% of Americans are okay with openly gay citizens serving in the military. This is a dramatic increase from 1994, when a similar poll stated that %53 percent of Americans were okay with openly gay citizens serving in the military.
   For those who are unfamiliar with this, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is that any members of the military who are gay must not admit it, and they cannot ask their fellow comrades about their sexual orientation. This policy was put into place in 1993, and now some members of the congress, such as Senator Joe Liberman, are trying to get it repealed.
   From one angle, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy discourages homosexuals from discussing their personal lives, which could add to professionalism in the workplace. However, in my opinion, this law has much greater implications; those who have partners of the same sex must not acknowledge them or any family they have raised together, and they have to hide a part of themselves that their heterosexual colleagues do not have to worry about. In my opinion, I firmly believe that any willing citizen should be allowed to participate our armed forces, no matter their orientation, religion, ancestry, or gender and be able to do so admitting what those are. However, I acknowledge that others may not agree with me; Do you think the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy should be repealed?
   The statistics I mentioned earlier and the movement to repeal the policy both demonstrate that Americans are becoming progressively more accepting of homosexuals in our society. Whether you think this is detrimental or that it isn't happening fast enough, what does this change say about America as a whole?
   From this information, I feel that America is becoming more tolerant of gays and lesbians. It may not be a rapid process, and I still think our country (and many others, for that matter) still has plenty of things to work on in the search for equality. However, if these statistics do adequately represent how Americans feel, I think we are heading in the right direction. What do you think?

Childish Vs. Childlike

2010-01-31T21:14:00.000-06:00

   I volunteer at my church by being a lector, which is a person who reads the bible out loud. This morning, I was given a part of the first letter of Saint Paul to the Corinthians to read, and a line in it caught my attention.
   It reads, "When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things."
   When I first saw this, I was a surprised; I often like characteristics and experiences associated with childhood, and I don't think it's easy to just shed those things and leave them behind.
   I like to joke that I'm made of of two different people; a five year old and a thirty year old. The five year old side of me likes shiny things, birthday parties, disney movies, and playgrounds. That side also has an intense imagination. The thirty year old side is where I balance my responsibilities and attempt to get things done on time. At least, in my defense, 30 and 5 average out to be slightly over my age.
   My first opinion on the reading today was that it advised readers to stop having that five year old side, but then I realized there is a difference between being childish and childlike. Additionally, I think our society gets the two confused.
   Let me start with the definitions; according to my dictionary, childish is "silly and immature," whereas childlike is "having good qualities associated with a child." I think that our society often groups enjoying play, imagination, and enjoying activities we did as children into "silly and immature" when those things don't belong to either category.
   I don't think our society actually thinks imagination or play is bad; James Cameron used his imagination to develop the world in Avatar, which has grossed almost $2 billion worldwide, and Apple's App Store, where plenty of games are available, has 140,000 apps.
   However, I think that adults are afraid of being associated with the negative aspects of children, such as wining or selfishness, so they are afraid to behave like kids in general.
   How do you think our society views adults having "childlike" characteristics? Should we see things that way?

Google; Helping Hackers

2010-01-25T12:36:00.000-06:00

       Today, I read an editorial by Bruce Schneier about how Google ended up helping Chinese hackers in a "politically motivated attempt" to find information. In order to help law enforcement personel, google created a "back door" acess system to Gmail. This system was created in order to help governments catch criminals, but it was just used by criminals to research governments. While i'm not exactly sure what happened, one thing is clear; something entended to keep us safe has made the internet a lot more dangerous.
Like the article suggests, this is similar to the NSA's phone wiretapping. Here's where my question to you comes in; at what point are these information-getting and security invading practices crossing the line? At what point do these safety procedures become unsafe?
     If you were a society to make a law regarding when the invasion of privacy is okay, how would you write it? Would you say it is okay when there is a warrant? Is it okay whenever as long as the invasion is by the government? Or would you say invasion of privacy is never okay under any circumstances? Is there an option i'm missing?
      How and at what points should companies assist a government's invasion of privacy?
      I tend to think that "back-door" access are unsafe. Whether it's wiretapping or entrance into someone else's email, companies should not make special systems because they could be hacked or abused. However, if there's a dangerous criminal on the loose, and his email hints his location, I can't say i'd be opposed to looking at it. It's a fine line, and I don't know where I stand. How do you feel?

"The State of the American Woman"

2010-01-11T11:46:00.001-06:00

     While browsing TIME's website, I saw an article headline which I knew would discuss our current Women and Children in America unit; "The State of the American Woman: What Women Want Now." The article compared today's world to that of the 1970's. Their central argument was that there have been significant, unrecognized changes in the battle for women's equality, and that men believe the sexes are equal but women do not. First of all, in the work world, do you feel that men and women are equal? Are you a man or a woman, and how has that effected your response?
      Personally, I know that women still make around 77 cents for every dollar a man makes, but my experiences in the work world have been quite positive. Let me explain; I am still a high school student, but I work as a receptionist once a week in an office that has about the same amount of men as women. However, the men do have the higher up positions. Yet, I am the youngest person in my office and one of the newest people, so that would explain my positioning in the office hierarchy. On another note, I am one of the increasing numbers of varsity female athletes.
     For the past eight months, my mom has been the breadwinner in my family, not my dad; he got laid off eight months ago, and my mom went from part time teaching to full time teaching to fill in the gaps. According to the article, my family is one of many where this has happened.
     How do you feel about gender in the workplace? Do you think things are equal, or not? What, if anything, do we still need to do to make things equal?

Hawaii cuts school days

2010-01-04T11:36:00.000-06:00

        Taking desperate measures to reduce costs, Hawaii is cutting fridays from the school calendar for at least the rest of the year and possibly for the next two years. Here's a bit more info if you'd like know.
        Do you think this is an appropriate measure to save funds? Is it practical, or beneficial? As a student, i'd admit to liking having fridays off, but I don't know how it would help me or hurt me as a student. I'd have more time to sleep, and relax, and my life would be less stressful. However, some of my more experience and discussion based classes, like spanish, english, or band, would seriously suffer from the lack of class time; part of the integral learning experience of those classes is to interact with others, so class time is precious.
       Also, this isn't solving the problem of lack of money; it's postponing the issue. By shortening the school week, Hawaii is spending less money, but Hawaii is not learning to spend less money while keeping 180 days in the year. Also, this doesn't make any money, it just avoids spending. There's a difference.
      How would you solve this problem? Would you congratualate the Hawaii state government for a practical solution, or tell them that something seriously needs to be changed?

American Christmas Songs

2009-12-14T11:41:00.000-06:00

       This past week, I was listening to "White Christmas" on the radio while thinking of an Australian I got the chance to meet, and something occured to me; In Australia, Christmas is in the middle of the summer. They're not going to be singing of white christmases "like they used to know" because, well, unless they lived in the northern hemisphere or traveled, they've never had white christmases. Then it occured to me that there must be christmas songs with American origins, and that every country with a christian population probably has it's own christmas songs.
       It turns out that "White Christmas" was written by Irving Berlin in the 1940's. Similarly, "The Christmas song" (Chestnuts roasting on an open fire) was written in 1944 by Mel Torme and Bob Wells. Alledgedly, "White Christmas" was written in Arizona and "The Christmas Song" was written during a hot summer somewhere else in America.
      The question i'd like to ask you all is, Do you think that these American Christmas songs actually represent our christmas experiences, or do they represent the christmases we wish we had?
      "White Christmas" mentions writing christmas cards wishing others to have happy holidays, which I do, and althought I don't roast chestnuts, I remember eagerly waiting for Santa like in "the Christmas song." How do you feel about it? Do any christmas songs you like actually relate to your experiences or not?
     Finally, Why do you think people write christmas songs? If you wrote a christmas song, what would it be about?

Separating Learning by Gender

2009-12-09T15:50:00.000-06:00

      This news story posted this morning tells the story of a school in Virginia that decided to create a middle-school program that separates the students into classrooms separated by gender. The program has existed for three years and test score results have allegedly improved. Based on your own experiences, do you think you would learn better in a co-ed or gender separated environment?
     I attend a co-ed, public school, and I am comfortable in a co-ed environment. I had the option of going to a private, all-girls school nearby, but I chose not to. I feel that it's important to learn in a co-ed school because life is a 'co-ed' experience- there's no state or planet that has all women or all men.
     However, one of the issues brought up when discussing co-ed programs is gender stereotyping. Some people argue that teaching boys and girls together teaches them stereotypes, and others argue that teaching them separately is teaching them with a stereotype. What do you think?
     I have the opportunity to fence on my school's co-ed fencing team, and that has actually helped me to view gender stereotypes differently. To put it bluntly, guy or girl, I can beat you. Or come very close. However, I wonder, if I had taken fencing classes with only girls, would I see stereotyping (or the sport) differently?
     Another thing to consider is learning style; there is scientific evidence that boys and girls use their brains differently, but does it make so much difference that learning in separated gender schools should be more common.
      Also, if I understand correctly, when our parents and grandparents were our age, most private schools were either all boy or all girl schools, yet over the past 30 or 40 years, many of those private schools have become co-ed. Why was this decision made, and why is this Virginia district trying to reverse it?

Commentary on President Obama's address

2009-12-01T22:49:00.001-06:00

   While watching President Obama's address to students at West Point, one particular theme rang out to me; the unity of America. Going in, I knew that Afghanistan would be the main topic of the speech, so the amount of focus the president placed on what was going in the U.S. surprised me. Although he explained his plan to dispatch roughly 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan, he also discussed the "polarized backdrop" in America. Additionally, the President and his speech writers have an extraordinary vocabulary, and I felt that some word choices were quite fascinating.
   During the speech, President Obama said that "we were united" by the attacks of september eleventh, and suggested that America has grown apart since then, severely divided by party lines. However, he said that he believed americans can "still come together by a common purpose", and can be united by the "creed that calls us together". I find it fascinating that President Obama decided to look back to the start of our country's existence and reference the Constitution as a means to bring us together. I interpret this to mean that the President believes Americans, although divided by political beliefs, uphold similar ideals of freedom and equality to those in the constitution. I agree. What do you think?
   Additionally, I thought it was interesting that the President said that removing troops from Iraq is a "testament to the character of the men and women in uniform." I'm not sure what he means by this. According to the Oxford American Dictionary, character is "the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual", "strength and originality in a person's nature" and/or a "person's good reputation." Does this mean that the President thinks that it is original to end the war, or that it helps the reputation of America? Personally, I think the character of the troops might be more visibly demonstrated in combat rather than at home, but I may be wrong. What do you think about his use of the word character?
   Also, here's one last question for you all; the president's speech is called "A New Way Forward." What is the message that you think the president is trying to send with this title?

Teens and Twitter

2009-11-23T21:23:00.000-06:00

   I'm using this week's post to blog about something i've wanted to bring up for a while; teens and twitter. A NY Times article published in August reported that only 11% of twitter users are aged 12-17. Additionally, the article suggested that teens do not use twitter because they don't need to advertise themselves, and they can use facebook or other sites to better communicate with their friends. I'd like to ask you all a question; Do you use twitter? Why? If not, why don't you?
   I started using twitter about the time this article came out. Honestly, I just started because twitter was all over the news and I wanted to know what the big fuss was about. I decided I liked twitter when I started following celebrities. I found it interesting to know what my favorite musicians and tv and movie personalities were up to.
   However, I understand why people don't want to use twitter. In my case, it's almost impractical for me to use it; no one is going to care what I have to say, and if I message celebrities, they won't respond. Similarly, I personally know only about ten of the people I follow, because nobody I know uses the application.
   What does the lack of twitter participation suggest about people my age? It is something significant or is it just because Twitter isn't popular?

Guantanamo prisoners moved to Illinois?

2009-11-16T20:12:00.000-06:00

This news story suggests that the Federal bureau of prisons is considering relocating a few of the Guantanamo bay prisoners to Thompson Correctional Center in Illinois. Members from the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Prisons visited the facility today. Representative Mark Kirk remarked that he felt moving the prisoners to Illinois would make the state "ground zero for Jihadist terrorist plots, recruitment and radicalization." If the Bureau decides to use the facility, it will house mostly federal prisoners and a few from Guantanamo Bay.

I'd like to ask my readers who are residents of Illinois this question; How do you feel about the possibility of this prison housing previous Guantanamo inmates? If any of you are not Illinois residents, do you think Illinois is a better place, or is there another state you think would make more sense? And, finally, are you saying this because of where you live?

Personally, I don't like the idea of Guantanamo inmates moving to my state, but I'm fairly sure everyone feels that way. What makes a state better or worse for a high-securtity prison? Is it it's resources or facilities, it's proximity to cities, it's population density, or something else? I'm not sure that the location of a prison would particularly sway anyone to attack there rather than somewhere else, but I'm not qualified to know.

How much danger does a prison actually cause to it's location? If that doesn't make sense, let me rephrase; Is a state in greater danger of a terrorist attack if terrorists are held in that state's prisons? Again, I don't think that's something we can figure out on our own, but what do you think?

Also, If you had to pick one state for the prison location, where would it be and why? I tend to think Wyoming or Alaska because of their relative isolation, but I'll bet people from Alaska and Wyoming feel differently. How do you feel about it?

Mom, will you read me some subliminal messages?

2009-11-09T22:26:00.032-06:00

   In class today, we looked at the hidden messages inside a Puritan poem designed to teach children the alphabet. The poem had some subtle and not-so-subtle allusions to christianity or the bible in each phrase.
   I went back and found one of my favorite Alphabet books as a kid; Chicka Chicka Boom Boom. It's a song, too, but mainly I remember my mother snapping into English Teacher mode and reading to me out of a very bright and colorful book. In the story, all the lowercase letters of the alphabet race to the top of a coconut tree, and then the uppercase letters have to come rescue them.
   I consider the plot itself to have a subliminal message; don't do dangerous things, like climb trees, because then your parents will have to come rescue you. At one point in the text, the uppercase letters "hug their little dears, then dust their pants". This line sends the message that parents are loving and look out for their children, 'cleansing' them of whatever they fall into. Additionally, d leaves the tree with a skinned knee, e has a stubbed toe, and g is out of breath. From this, I construe that the writer wants us to believe that adventures like climbing a tree, and straying from our parents, will only hurt us.
   What does the writer plan to accomplish with this? In my opinion, he wants to encourage children to be obedient and respect their parents.
   I have some questions for you. Do your favorite childhood stories have subliminal messages like these? Where else do adults send subliminal messages to children? Do you approve of these subliminal messages or do you think they are misleading?
   Did I think about these things when I first heard the book read aloud? No. My Mom was just reading me a bedtime story.

Reconstructing our Image

2009-11-03T17:49:00.000-06:00

   Yesterday and today, I had the fortune of attending a leadership conference within my athletic league. The keynote speaker, Michael Brandwein, presented us with an interesting idea; our self image and how we see ourselves should not be shaped on what we did years ago because we are constantly changing. When brainstorming ideas for what to blog about this week, what I heard about today came to mind. As Americans, is our image based on events from decades or centuries ago, or are we constructing our identity by how our nation behaves today? As Mr. Brandwein put it, What do we see when we look at ourselves?
   The things about America that some Americans value most were given to us during the writing of the constitution; the right to free speech, the right to choose our own religions, and the right to life and liberty. America became, and still is, a country with people from very different backgrounds, races, and religions.
   However, some may argue that we are currently desperately trying to reshape how the world sees us. As a country, we have just elected President Barrack Obama, our first president of African-American hertiage. Some members of congress are trying to reform Healthcare policies and remove remove our soldiers from the middle east. On January 23, 2009, President Obama signed a document saying that Guantanamo Bay will be shut down within the year.
   Over the past two days, another point was stressed at the conference; Every thing we do sends a message. What message is America sending?
   I feel that America is trying to prove to the world that it is a righteous nation. Every country most likely wants other countries to believe that they are making the right decisions, but the election of the first black President, the shutting down of Guantanamo Bay and the current attempt to end the war tells me that America is trying to reconstruct it's image. These acts send me the message that America is trying to become more tolerant and peaceful. Are we?
   What do you think?

Atheist Ads to be posted on NY Subway

2009-10-27T18:46:00.001-05:00

During November, a series of pro-atheist ads will be put up in the New York Subway system. This CNN article suggests that these signs are not intended to offend other religions, but instead expose the people of New York to the religous option of Atheism. The photo at the top is an example of one of these ads. Although it will not be possible to know the actual response to these ads until they are posted on Monday, I'd like to try to predict it.

Do you think any negative response to these ads will be stregthened because the subject matter is atheism? I tend to think that the response to these ads will probably be stronger than if they promoted Christianity or Judaism, arguably the two most well-known religions in america, but probably not as strong a response as if they were ads about Islam, a religion that people sometimes try to connect to terrorrism. How do you feel when hearing about this? I personally have absolutely no problem with these ads in the subway, but I understand that some people might feel differently. Is public transportation an appropriate outlet for advertising religious views? I think it can be seen in two ways. I tend to feel that any public place is an appropriate place to expose people to different views. Another way to see it is that people may not be able to avoid taking the subway if they think the ads are objectionable, and therefore should not be shown ads that have to do with personal matters.

Finally, I'd like to ask one very broad question; Is America becoming more or less tolerant of different religious views? I'm not sure; I feel that within my surroundings people are typically quite tolerant, but I know that fears and ignorance still build prejudice. While it may be impossible to totally eliminate religious prejudice, as a nation, are we progressing? I think that these ads are a step toward awareness of a particular view, but how will NYC respond?

An Army Drill Sargeant School's First Female Commander

2009-10-20T19:21:00.000-05:00

      While reading a news article, I read that Command Sergeant Major Theresa King has become the first female Commander at U.S. Army’s Drill Sergeant School in Fort Jackson, South Carolina. Now, she is essentially the 'principal' at the school, oversees 78 drill instructors, and is responsible for training all of the drill seargeants at this school.
     While Commander King sets a powerfill example, women represent only 14% of the active-duty soldiers, and only 9.6% of the top three enlisted positions. What does this say about our society? I'm glad to know that women like Commander King are recieving higher positions, but there is a long way to go before the army has a similar amount of women to men. On the other side of the spectrum, there are many careers that that are just as dominated by women as the army is dominated by men; for example, 91% of all nurses are women.
    Personally, I've never truly considered joining the armed forces. As a woman, I'm not allowed to join front-line, direct-combat units because of Department Defense policies. However, I am allowed to enlist should I choose. As Americans, is the lack of women in the army due to lack of interest, or because enlisting is deemed socially uncacceptable?
  Perhaps as children we aspired to be like princess' instead of GI-Joe, but for our generation I don't think I can make that generalization. As a kid, my favorite 'princess' was really Mulan- who, as you may know, pretended to be a man so she could fight in the chinese army. Additionally, she's just plain awesome, but that's really beside the point- in an age where women are becoming increasingly more equal to men in the work world, why aren't there more Commanders like Commander King?

Connections between Social Networking and Socioeconomic Class

2009-10-13T17:07:00.003-05:00

I read an interesting article on CNN about parellels between socioeconomic classes and the networking sites they choose. This article stated that "people in more affluent demographics are 25 percent more likely to be found friending on Facebook, while the less affluent are 37 percent more likely to connect on MySpace." Also, people who use Twitter are most commonly in cities, and 38 percent of LinkedIn users make over $100,000 a year. What does this say about the use of Social Networking sites?

On a personal level, I have a Facebook and a Twitter. If you are interested, my twitter is @mchunt23, but that's beside the point. I am a white, high school student who lives in an affluent subarb of Chicago. I fit the study perfectly- I live in an affluent demographic and a city. However, why do these parallels exist?

One of the guesses presented in the article was that now, people join the networks their friends are on, but that explains why these divides continue, not why they began. However, facebook was originally for the students and faculty of colleges, universities, and organizations recognized by the site. Those registering had to provide a valid email associated with those organizations to get a page. That means that the first people to use the site were those who went to college- and college is an expensive luxury that not all americans can afford. So, the people who used the site were typically from more affluent backgrounds, meanwhile those from less affluent backrounds went to the all-welcoming myspace. Now, facebook is open to all, but people joined the sites where their friends were.

While this is an totally uneducated guess, I believe that Twitter users are mostly in cities because the site spreads by word of mouth. Therefore, in areas with more people, more people will hear about it. LinkedIn is a site for buisness recruiters, and similarly, people in more affluent jobs might be more likely to hear about it. However, that is only a hunch with nothing to back it up.

What do these sites say about us? What does the use of these sites reflect about our time period and society?

Dogfighting Videos Create Free Speech Battle at the Supreme Court

2009-10-06T19:09:00.003-05:00

       While searching the news, I found two articles, from CNN and The New York Times, about a case (U.S. vs. Stevens) the Supreme Court discussed this afternoon. The Supreme Court is debating whether or not Mr. Robert J. Stevens should be prosecuted for producing videos glorifying dogfighting. Dogfighting itself is a felony in 48 states, but Mr. Stevens would be prosecuted under a highly controversial statute written in 1999 . The statue says that a person could receive up to 5 years in prison for sharing or making profit from videos with animal cruelty. This case has become a battle between free speech activists and animal rights activists, and the Supreme Court itself appears divided. Do you think Mr. Stevens should be prosecuted for creating these videos?
      It's a sticky situation; I believe that making films glorifying dogfighting is horrifying, but as an American he has the right to free speech. If it was possible to find evidence that he participated in the dogfighting itself, and prosecute him for that, it would be a no brainer. CNN pointed out that under this statute, videos with clips of dogfighting meant to deter the animal abuse could also be prosecuted. If he gets prosecuted, it would be the first time someone would not be protected by the first amendment for making media of nonsexual violence.
      I do not think videos of this nature should be condoned. According to the New York Times, the veterinarian that testified said that the videos "depicted terrible suffering" to animals. Should Americans be allowed to show videos of animals being maimed and tortured?
      However, I think that although the first amendment is a double edged sword, it is one of our most important rights as Americans. America was founded on the principle of allowing all to represent themselves and be free- the right to say whatever we want and the right to believe whatever we want are crucial in upholding that American ideal.
      What does the aforementioned statue say about Americans? To me, the fact that we have to make a law contradicting one of our most valued laws means that there are obsene amounts of videos out there depicting animal torture.To put it bluntly, that is sick. Maybe watching these films is a way to get out violent tendencies without actually acting on them, but I'm still struggling to see this issue in an ubiased way. Additionally, I think that this law is not just a reflection of Americans, but the world. What do you think?
     One final question; as a whole, should exceptions be made for our first amendment?

Discussion of Texting Bans in America

2009-09-29T19:29:00.000-05:00

     On the MSNBC news site, I read a news story about how congress and the Obama Administration are considering putting a nationwide ban on texting while driving. Currently, several towns in the chicagoland area have bans on texting while driving, and by 2010, the entire state of Illinois will ban texting while driving. Should the nation follow?
     I believe that the nation should ban texting while driving because texting is a task that requires use of at least one hand and also involves looking at the phone screen, so any texter texting while driving has only one or no hands on the wheel and is focusing on the screen rather than the road. Also, there have been deaths from accidents connected to texting while driving. On a personal level, if i'm texting in the halls, I bump into people, so i've never even tried to text while operating a car.
    In class, we have been discussing how laws reflect the culture enforcing them. How does the illinois enforcement of texting bans, and the possible nationwide ban of texting, reflect us as an american nation? First of all, these laws reflect that texting is now a phenomenon. I vaguely remember news stories from when texting was a new thing, and now it's quite commonplace to text. My parents even text me on occasion. But on another level, I think that we are becoming enveloped in our newly technological world (think about it; our parents didn't have sophisticated computers growing up) and we are reaping the significant benefits but also seeing the negative effects of a world obsessed with communication. What do you think texting bans say about us as a nation? Should texting be banned throughout the country?

A woman is pregnant, but with another couple's child

2009-09-23T12:23:00.000-05:00

      I saw a two stories on the today show (one from the pregnant mother, and another from the the biological parents ) this morning about a woman who underwent In Vitro Ferilization, but was implanted with another couple's baby. This woman, Carolyn Savage, and her husband Sean, didn't want to abort the baby, so she is going to give birth in two weeks and give the baby to the biological family.
      What would you do if you were in this situation? Would you want to raise the baby yourself or give it to the biological family? What would you do if you found out another woman was pregnant with your biological child? Mrs. Savage, who already has three children, has been told that due to health reasons that this must be her last pregnancy.
      Personally, it's hard for me to say what I would think or how I would feel, because I can't even begin to picture myself in this situation. From an outsider's standpoint, I feel that Mrs. Savage is doing the right thing by giving the baby to the biological family, but this raises more questions. Do either parents have the right to say that the child is theirs? A person shouldn't be owned by anyone. If the families weren't able to talk it through and if the pregant woman didn't agree to hand the baby over, who should be one to determine who raises the baby?
   As Americans, should a woman have rights to her children because she gave birth to him/her or because she is the biological parent?

What is causing the decline in Pop Culture's quality?

2009-09-15T22:52:00.000-05:00

   As an avid reader of the Entertainment Weekly magazine, i'll admit that one of my favorite parts is reading the editorials by Stephen King. I'm always surprised to find that even though he is almost fifty years older than I am, I frequently agree with, understand, or connect with his points of view. In my defense, however, I believe that this is due to his extraordinary ability of connecting with his readers rather than me having a mind similar to that of a sixty year-old. The editorial in this week's magazine, What's Next for Pop Culture?, struck a chord in my mind. He discussed the decline in the quality of movies and network tv, the decline of paper books, and the decline of radio programming. His essential argument is that the changes in pop culture today are for the worse, and in his own words, "When crap drives out class, our tastes grow coarser and the life of the imagination grows smaller."
   One of the examples of the decline of the movie industry that Mr. King provided was that several high quality movies are only experiencing small releases while movies like Transformers:Revenge of the Fallen are released on thousands of screens.
   Why is this? In my opinion, it is because people don't want the movies to be an intellectual experience anymore; instead, movies are just an escape from the negative things in our world. I think that this has to do with the recession. Why? The recession is making things harder for a lot of americans. The movie industry itself is doing pretty well despite the recession, but people come to the theaters wanting more cheerful and less analytical films because of the added stress the weak economy brings.
   Have we lowered our standards? I think so, but is that our fault? I think that our standards would be higher if studios chose to produce films for the quality of writing and idea rather than viewer grabbing potential. Does quality of writing result in viewer potential or not?
   Is the economy actually related to this change or does this change reflect America as a whole? Could it be that Americans nowadays consistently prefer films like Transformers to more philosophical films? Is it a reflection on my generation or on Americans as a whole?

A School District's Reaction to Obama's Speech

2009-09-08T17:52:00.001-05:00

      Today at 12:00 Eastern Pacific time, President Obama made a speech to students urging them to "set your own goals for education" and to stay in school. However, schools in Wheaton sent a message (which can be found on the blog An American Studies) out to the parents in the district saying that the president's speech "will not be broadcast to students" because the district did not have "an opportunity to preview his presentation and we do not have time set aside during the school day to watch the speech".
      First of all, why would it be nececary to preview a speech, made by the president, for an audience of kindergarten through 12th graders? I suppose it is understandable for one to question the content of a speech before it is made, however I find it extremely unlikely that President Obama would say anything innappropriate. President Obama, to my memory, has never sworn in any of his speeches, so why would he start in front of a group of kids?
     Was it so risky that the nature of the speech might be inappropriate that it wasn't worth broadcasting a speech that might teach a very helpful lesson? With anything that might have questionable content, two things should be considered; a) how important is the lesson being taught? and b) how questionable is the content? If the content outweighs the lesson, then it would make sense to not show the material. However, if the lesson outweights the content, why in the world would you not show it? Also, who should be the one to decide which is more important?

How far will we go to achieve good grades?

2009-09-04T15:11:00.001-05:00

   A news story from CBS broadcasted on Tuesday told the story of a teacher in a New Jersey high school who accepted donations to one of her favorite charities as a form of extra credit. Allegedly, the charity was fake, and she took the money and kept it herself, receiving an estimate of $1,400 from her students during the 2008-2009 school year.
   As citizens of America, we are in the fortunate group of countries where a high school education is so commonplace that many students take school for granted. This particular news story makes me wonder; Is achieving the "grade" the only academic goal that matters to high school students? That is, does it matter whether we acquired the knowledge of how to solve an algebraic equation, or the only important thing that we got an A in the class?
     By paying for grades instead of studying or instead of improving them by work, we are achieving the end without any work or means. Is the means, the actual learning and acquiring of knowledge, worth anything to anyone anymore? Are learning and work important, or just the good transcript?
    How important is it to teens today that they receive good grades? Is paying to improve your grade is an act of desperation or an act of laziness? Originally, I believed it was an act of desperation; why spend money on your classes when you could spend money hanging out with friends or to buy something like an Ipod or a phone? However, in a affluent neighborhood like the one I live in, would it be worth five bucks to not study for a test or to skip some homework? I'm not sure. What do you think?

Triage and Euthanasia in Katrina Aftermath

2009-08-31T19:26:00.001-05:00

This past tuesday, a horryfing report published in the New York Times was published regarding an event that happened four years ago this week during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Memorial Medical Center in New Orleans was left in a very difficult situation; the power went out, the surrounding area was flooded, the elevators did not work, and there were not enough medical materials to treat the 136 patients that needed to be evacuated from the hospital. At a loss for what to do, Memorial resorted to triage; the act of organizing patients into groups in as a way of to deciding the order of treatment and evacuation. The patients were organized into three groups, with the most able bodied patients leaving first, and the D.C.R (do not resuscitate) patients slated to evacuate last. However, the hospital was not able to evacuate everyone because of a police protection deadline. Out of the 41 people who passed away during the process, over half of them were given drugs designed to speed up death. Some of the patients believed to be euthanized were not near death. Nine of these deaths were brought to trial, and four were ruled homicides. This leaves me with two major questions: 1) what is the most ethical way to preform triage, and 2) in that situation, was the use of euthanasia ethical?

Any situation where triage is necessary is clearly difficult, and there is no universally decided on plan for American Hospitals. To Memorial's credit, they were able to get critical and pregnant patients out before the power outage, but after that, they put the most able bodied people higher up on the list. I think that was the wrong decision. If you have fewer resources, everyone needs food and water, but the more able bodied people will need fewer medical resources than bed-stricken patients. The few medical resources you have could then be used for a longer time. Also, the patients in worse condition are then more likely to get to better medical care when placed elsewhere, increasing their chance of survival. The able bodied patients are probably more likely to survive the wait for evacuation than the bed-stricken patients. I do not agree with Memorial's decided order. However, to their credit, since not everyone was evacuated, by putting the healthier patients first, they saved the lives of people that they believed would live longer over the people who they thought had less time to live.

In this situation, was the use of euthanasia ethical? It is a sticky situation; one of the healthy patients who was euthanized, Emmett Everett, was 380 pounds and in a wheelchair. The reasoning provided was that the nurses were needed elsewhere and could not carry him down five flights of stairs. However, reports say that he was perfectly healthy and did not complain. In my opinion, the doctors murdered this man. Was it for the best? I would not have made the decision to give him the drugs, but if they couldn't get him out before the building was abandoned, he still would have been left to die. I think that it was wrong to euthanize the patients, but I'm not sure which decision would have ultimately been kinder to them.

One more question for you to consider; Dr. Anna Pou, the doctor who authorized the lethal dosages, was not indicted by a jury for her actions but faces wrongful death suits. Do you think she should have been punished for giving the lethal dosages?

Photo Caption: the evacuation hallway at Memorial Medical Center