"What would men be without women?"

When I saw the quote from Mark Twain at the top of the blog "What would men be without women? Scarce, sir, mighty scarce?" I thought of something I read in my psych book, "the most difficult separation [separation being death] is from one's spouse- a loss suffered by five times more women than men" (133). This makes me wonder why most wives outlive their husbands? Is it just because their life expectancy is longer, which I don't know if it actually is, or something else? Generally women cook the meals and do the house work, so in some relationships the husband would be at quite a loss without help from his spouse. There are many other examples like this, but I wonder if those patterns in a marriage actually has any connection to that statistic.

Back to the Twain quote, I wondered whether scarce meant like less than or something along those lines, or just lost and confused? In the dictionary it means not abundant, but I wonder if that's what he means here? Is he literally talking about the fact that you need both a male and female to have kids-meaning more men?

Ethics? Nature? or Good Business?

In Nevada there's been a roundup of wild horses, because there's studies that if they aren't moved then there will be overpopulation and the resources will run out. While to some this seems like the best choice for the horses, others are concerned and protest that the airlifting and other transportation needed to move the animals can cause harm or death and is unethical.

Some things I wonder are whether they're really concerned with the animals running out of resources, or that the animals instincts will have them migrating to built up land where people just don't want to be bothered by them? Also, would the horses even know enough to migrate or would they die when the overpopulation occurs? It might not even be safe for them if they tried to get to more resources and into land where people are. Another thing I wonder is whether the overpopulation is in any way caused by humans tinkering with the environment.

What do you believe it is in the best choice? Move the animals or let nature take its course, and keep the horses where they are? Is it worth it to have a few horses dies in order to potentially save them later?

A Safe Ride

With New Year's Eve only a few days away I found this reminder from the CTA that they're giving away penny rides on New Years Eve to be interesting. Although people would like to think that underage drinking doesn't happen, it does. Especially on a night like New Year's Eve. Although the CTA doesn't really cater to those under 21, something like saferides which is through the school is 100 percent for students. Although not everyone who calls needs a ride because they are under the influence, part of their purpose is to keep kids from driving drunk.

I have my own opinion on this, but do you think these programs encourage drinking? Or do you believe that it's going to happen so mine as well have something to make sure underage drinkers are safe?

SNL Uh Oh

This week on Saturday Night Live (SNL) there was one controversial skit that was a paradox of the Tiger Woods domestic violence issue which has recently been in the media. What triggered this was that Rihanna was the musical guest, and earlier this year she was involved in a domestic violence case where her then boyfriend, Chris Brown, beat her.

Quotes from the article said how domestic violence is never funny, or should never be made light of. However, there were other comments about how if the genders had been switched (like the Rihanna Chirs Brown example) it would never have appeared on SNL. One man was quoted saying its, "kind of, sort of ok to make fun of...". Because it was a woman beating a man that makes it ok? Because he is arguably the most famous athlete of all time and is strong enough to take beating from a woman that makes it funny? Some in our society believe that this is ok to make fun of. That domenstic violence isn't as violent if the woman is the assaulter.

What does this say about our society? Do you believe this goes along with the notion that men are generally seen as stronger and more superior to women?

Civil Liberities vs. National Secuirty? Seems to be a Common Theme

This Wednesday the class will hear about torture in the War on Terror during our perilous presentation (torturing of Guantanamo Bay detainees). The article which I have attached, is about this topic. Only it is about pictures being taken of the torturing and whether they should be released or not.

A few weeks ago in class we talked about the gay rights petitions that were being signed, and whether the names should be released. They were worried that those who signed the petition could be in some sort of danger to those who opposed their opinion. However, it isn't really the names on the petition, or in this case the people in the picture the government is worried about. In this case, the US government, is worried whether releasing the pictures will endanger Americans. Those who were taking the pictures would understand that if the pictures got out it could cause controversy about what they are doing. Not that that topic isn't already controversial enough.

There are two sides to every story though. One side is saying that if we release the photos of the torturing of the detainees it could endanger US civilians and soldiers. The other side (also within the US government) says that if we release them it will be helpful in the long run. Perhaps because then there won't be rumors flying around now that the knowledge that there are pictures is out. Or to show that we have nothing to hide, and will do what we (the US) has to in order to protect national security.

This topic is very complex, but lets think back to the petition example. In class we said those who signed should be proud of their belief and shouldn't be ashamed to publically back up their opinion. However, could it potentially endanger those who signed it? Is it constitutional?

Now, bring that back to the pictures. Do you think it is a constitutional right that the pictures should be released or is national security more important in this case than civil liberties?

Gitmo Moved to the Mainland?

For our Perilous Times project, I am looking at civil liberties with the Guantanamo Bay issue, so this article caught my eye. However, this article doesn't have to do with the inmates civil liberties, but rather where to put them. For some background, the government is trying to shut down Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay), but no one in the US wants suspected terrorist in their state. Obama has found a new state of the art, maximum security prison in Thomson, IL. The prison has been vacant for years and the less than 600 population of Thomson would be happy to see the detainees come in. It would bring jobs and really boost their economy. But Illinois officials do not want the detainees to come to the state because they believe al'Qaida will target Chicago. There is no simple answer, with over 200 detainees. Some wonder if they should put them all in the same spot, or different prisons. There is talk of freeing the detainees but that is a whole other question. There's a lot of questions and other legistics but there is one question which seems to be a most controversy:

This town could use this prison, and it is the perfect facility, but Illinois officials say is that worth national security?

Our elected officials can't even figure out what to do, so just give your opinion.

Yes, I am a Packer Fan

Today the Green Bay Packer's lost to the Minnesota Vikings...bummer. But the emotions ran high even before the game as Brett Farve played at Lambeau Field for the first time since he switched teams. Many fans had mixed feelings, including my sister whose a die-hard packer fan...but she kinda wanted to see good ol' Brett do well. From the time Farve ran on the field until the start of the first quarter boos from the stands filled the stadium. One fan said "personally I'm booing while I'm crying", while others had signs that said: "We'll Never Forget You, Brent" and a banner flying behind a plane reading "Retire 4 Good". He is a hall of fame legend and no doubt that legend was built on the Green Bay Packers. I mean he's an ingredible player, I guess you can be a fan of him and your team. But I need a question so I guess you could ask where should your allegeance lie? With the team or the star? Lucky for the fans those signs are protected under free speech, is it possible though that someone crosses the line? (its land of the cheese heads...I'm sure someone could think of a sign that gets them kicked out).

I've got 20 years of experience..I've got over 1000 facebook friends...

In an article called "Mentoring from the bottom up" they talked about a specific situation about how the younger business workers teaching their bosses and superiors how to use the social networking sights for business. We know sites like facebook as a way to stay connected, share pictures, and funny other gadgets with our friends. Or to procrastinate on homework...sometimes for hours with mindless activities...

Well anyway, now the next generation of workers are coming into business with knowledge that their bosses don't have yet. Using these tech skills to incorporate them and help businesses move with the times. Social networking sites, twitter, and even texting are new for the older generation who are running many of the companies that now want to learn how to use these technologies.

The teachers and mentors are now becoming the students, "She has like 500 friends. It's so cute" one quote from the article that the younger teacher tells us about her older student. It's kinda funny, and its alittle funny that the teacher is half the students age.

In this economy when there are so many job cuts the older generations are trying to find jobs with the younger generation just out of college etc. Are they at a disadvantage, or is their life experience enough to put them ahead?

Airbrushed to Perfection

The need to be skinny has trickled down through magazines, TV shows, and movies all the way down to the minds of the common public. Really hitting home with adolescent girls. In magazines we see the models who have been airbrushed to perfection. However, not only do we see their bodies being mutilated but any blemish or undesirable mark is removed. Recently there has been controversy over this Ralph Lauren add. Before even reading the article I was shocked by the picture. They explain how the models waist appears smaller than her head, a wildly unrealistic feature in any person. I know that the article gets into stuff about copyrights with the picture but honestly it doesn't matter what way you look at this its wrong to have that up for whatever reason they may have. Some of the links on the article are surprising to see, one compares Beyonce in a commercial showing how they've lighted her skin and hair for TV. And people quoted in the article wonder was that really necessary? What's really the point of all this?

Many programs such as Tyra Bank's, America's Next Top Model have recognized the issue of what's "dangerously skinny" by allowing "plus sized" models on the show, never more than one or two but at least those that want to model have a chance. One of which actually won a few seasons back. You also hear her tell some contenstents that they should watch their diets because they look too skinny. Also TLC's What Not to Wear helps people change their wardrobe to fit their lifestyle more appropriately and help flatter their indivdual body type. However, they make the clothes fit to them, you never hear Stacy or Clinton (show hosts) tell someone they should lose weight.

It's obvious that some worry about what kind of media people are being exposed to. Children and teens are always being told about healthy diets and the dangers of eating disorders. We talked in class about why certain laws are put into place because something must have triggered this need. Well our media has triggered this need to discuss body image in schools' helath classes.

So if we all recognize this, why are our models super skinny and our celebrities all made up constantly? Can our society move away from this or is this just how our world has evolved? Do our fashion industries, magazines etc really care about how what we see affects us, or are they just trying to hypnotize us with this unrealistic image of what we want to be so they can make the big bucks?

I'ma get on this TV, momma...

An earlier post I had discussed Kanye's outburst at the VMA's. This article I saw online seems to show that maybe we have some closure with this topic. But at the end Kanye has been said to have "declared he was taking time away from the public eye to "analyze how I'm gonna make it through the rest of this life and improve." It was also announced that his upcoming tour was cancelled. He has apologized so what is there to analyze?

By coincidence I was listening to "School Spirit" one of Kanye's hits from his 2004 album "The College Dropout". In this song the first verse he makes references to his Mother saying he's "gonna get on TV" and he refers to "light skinned blacks" saying he'll make sure they don't come back in style. I wonder what he means come back in style? Is it possible he believes that blacks should stay with blacks so there aren't "mixed" children? What does he mean by style, that maybe he is being swept up in the spotless of being famous and everything is now about "style". If he is talking to his Mother are those his believes or hers? Also, does he owe this song to his Mother? Is he going to do something great for her even though he didn't stay in school?

This album also came out in 2004, since then his Mother has passed away and this past summer he held a charity concert for kids to stay in school. Now he is "taking time from the public eye...". Is it possible that he has not been acting the way his Mother would have wanted him to? The day after he was on Jay Leno (skip forward alittle in this clip to see the actual footage from the show) and was left speechless after being asked what his Mother would think of the VMA's incident. Is it possible that this event made him think about his Mother, his charity to keep kids in school, and maybe even back to his old song? He tried to please his Mother telling her he'd be famous bring "true black" back in style while she was alive, and now he feels he has not done what she would have wanted, clearly shown on Leno, even those she is dead.

If your not really interested in Kanye, one could ask do we feel worse about not pleasing loved ones that have passed more than those who are still with us?

This is just for fun, any fans of Jake and Amir?

To take a break from homework I was watching some Jake and Amir. Check out this clip, its just a funny connection to the race conversation we had in class today

It's the dating service one on the website, scroll down the page of the link its the last one.
If you don't want to watch the whole thing skip to 1 minute 50 seconds it gets you a lot closer without missing anything. Except its super funny so I recommend it.

Enjoy!

Are We Overachievers?

After watching an episode of Gossip Girl, I remembered I had to blog and simply could not think about what I should write about. I read the note at the top of "an American studies" blog, about our up coming assignment. Saying level 4 of course you're overachievers! Obviously somewhat of a joke, I get that Mr. B/OC. However, there is probably some truth to that for some of us. I realized this is not a topic of much importance but at New Trier, it kinda is. For example when they were changing the rankings from weighted to unweighted, the level four kids had a fit, we are doing more work we deserve more credit. But a level two student might say hey this work is just as hard for me, just cause its not as high a level. And then there are those kids who just make us so mad who don't try and get the grades just cause they happen to be silent geniuses as well as to put it bluntly sometimes slackers. There are some who are motivated by parents, college, and some who really could care less and just like school for the social scene. I'll give you an example I myself am not a fan of school, at all. My favorite thing with the word school is probably school dance. Or Alice's Coopers hit song "School's Out" but I figure if I'm there mine as well do a good job and get something out of it. So the question is are you an over achiever? What actually motivates you to do well? Is it a willingness to learn and be challenged? A need for knowledge? Or the hope to get into a top college and simply make the grade.

*I am not actually expecting people to tell the class they are an over-achiever considering the word gives off somewhat of a negative connotation, it was sort of rhetorical. And if you know you are, no offense really, cause it probably pays off for you.

First Lady Represents

Although President Obama is making an effort to make an appearance in front of the Olympic Committee, First Lady Michelle Obama as of now will represent Chicago. As a native Chicagoan she is a perfect candidate. However, when the news first came out that the President would not make an appearance, some were very skeptical. I was watching the news when the issue first came out, and Mayor Daley seemed confident that the First Lady would do a great job representing the city.

When they interviewed committee members, however, they had other thoughts. They believed that it would hurt the cities chances if the president did not make an appearance. The reason that the president did not feel he could make it was because he did not want to take time away from working on the health care plan.

When I first heard the committees comments I thought it to be somewhat of a slap in the face to the First Lady. They said that by the President being there it is like having a world wide celebrity show up. However, I feel like although the First Lady is not our Commander and Chief she deserves as much respect. I just wonder if the race to win is so close that the Committee feels that every city needs to pull out all the tricks, or do they actually feel that Michelle Obama is not as fitting to appear as Obama would be?

Luckily, the presidential adviser said that she "embodies the Olympic spirit". And many others believe she is perfect to represent Chicago. Hopefully the pair will show to give Chicago the best chances and as a team they can win over the committee.

do they think they're so much better?

Why do celebrities always think they can get away with stuff just because they're famous. What prompted this for me was a friend telling me about Kanye's "dis" at the VMA's tonight. After Taylor Swift, a young country singer, wins the best video award Kanye takes a microphone and says that Beyonce, in short, had a better video. The details are unclear because it was so recent.

But if someone in a high school for example were to win an award, its unlikely that someone goes on stage and says that their friend should have won right as the winner gets their award. At the VMAs I believe that they should all have a respect for everyone in their industry. Of course you might have a favorite, but it's always polite to keep it to yourself. At the Grammys Awards, or Oscars, they always show the nominees, even the ones that don't win, and it is just common curtisy that even if they don't win they act respectable when they know the camera is on them. But there are always a few that believe because they are famous and have a giant ego it makes it okay for them to do whatever they want. They think because they are a hot shot everyone wants to know their opinion.
Why do they feel that because of their status, they are above common curtisy?

P.S. Taylor Swift is amazing!

We Are the Future

Our parents and other adults always tell us that we are the future. Problems like the environment, for example, will be long term and what their generation and generations before them have done is what we need to fix now and when we are running the country. When we get older, in not too many years, we will be responsible to figure out a solution to turn around this trend that has put our world at risk.

This is one reason which we did not discuss about President Obama's speech which I thought about after the discussion. An article discussed how the President wants kids to stay in school to help their country. Some may say that this is just the governments "agenda", however I thought, and I know it's kind of a long shot, but maybe it's a cry for help. Obama's ratings have gone down, the whole country is in somewhat of a state of panic because of the recession and maybe Obama just wants some help, from anyone. If we can become more educated we can give a voice and fix the mistakes that were made before us.

Besides a cry for help, I just thought maybe it's a warning. Stay in school, get as much knowledge as you can, use the resources schools give to you because you as a country will need it.

These ideas literally just came to me as I began writing the beginning which is why they aren't very detailed. So I guess since this is for us, we can ask before and after the speech why exactly is he giving it? Lets try and read his mind and think about what prompted the idea.

Disney Stars Gone Bad

It is inevitable that children are growing up faster. In the fast paced world that we live in where new iPods come out all the time; kids are exposed to this kind of technology at a young age. Whether that is bad for kids, I can't really say. But this isn't titled cell phones or technology, its about the beloved Disney Channel stars we have watched for years. Whether your embarrassed to admit it or not, we all watched Shia LaBeouf play Ren's trouble-maker younger brother, and Hilary Duff with her cartoon conscience. One thing these shows had in common was that there was an innocence in every episode, and a lesson to be learned.

Disney's more recent shows like Hannah Montana, and the High School Musical phenomenon have similar morals instilled. But their stars cannot be said the same for. At a younger age they are doing acts described as provocative and raunchy, such as the most recent display at the Teen Music Awards. The Hannah Montana star, Miley Cyrus, performed what was seen as a pole dance. There has been controversay whether it was actually meant to be taken that way. But why should young children have to decipher that? Less recently there was an incident of Vanessa Hudgens, a High School Musical star taking somewhat questionable pictures of herself. Its these kind of acts that are corrupting young children. The show is called "Teen" Music Awards, but do we really want teens and younger children doing those kind of things?