Jean Kilbourne seems to have a lot of bias in her essay and comes off a little on the feminist side. At first I thought she was going to be one of those far fetched feminist who equate shaving legs with the slavery of the feminine race. Though she seems quick to point out any hint of objectification, she does point out a lot frightening and disgusting ads and she brings up a lot of really good points, even taking the side of men at some points. The more I read into the essay the more I realized Kilbourne might very well be on to something in her essay. As a women, I am so used to taking every precaution I know of for my safety. I am so used to it, I thought men probably did it too. I asked my husband if he did any of the things I do (checking under the car as I approach it at night, having my keys ready, looking over my shoulder, not walking at night unless with a group, ect...) and he laughed at me and said, "why would I need to?". Kilbourne points out similar senario in her essay. Jackson Katz begins his lecture by asking men what they do to protect themselves from sexual assault and the men are often left puzzled or surprised. While this is the reality of the world we live in, isn't it also a red flag indicating that something is wrong?
Kilboure also depicts 25 disturbing ads in her piece, all depicting women in a way that is very degrading. A lot of these ads aren't just by some off the wall company, they are big name, often designer brands. A lot are advertisements for alcohol. Kilborne points out just how disturbing that is by citing the fact that "between one third and three quarters of all sexual assault involve alcohol consumption." One ad I found particularly upsetting had a caption that said "If your date won't listen to reason try a velvet hammer", what is the message in that? Hello! How many times do you drive through Las Vegas and see similar messages on billboards? How often do you see nearly nude women, advertising completely unrelated things? I have even seen a billboard with a naked women on it advertising a dental office. This type of advertising really does dehumanize and degrade women. It's no wonder that America, according to a 1998 study by the federal government Kilborne cites, has the highest amount of sexual assault out of any industrialized nation. The surprising thing as that women aren't seeing the harm its causing to themselves. The William Kennedy Smith cited in this essay is a prime example as that. The jury, made up of mostly women, acquitted Smith because the victim wore Victoria secret underwear.
Kilbourne also covers the objectification of men, though she seems to feel that the issue is not as big of deal because men are not as vulnerable. Though I resented at first the point she makes here, after thinking about it, she is right. Women, in a lot of ways, are more vulnerable then men. This idea however, has a very negative affect on men who are victims of assault. It is much harder for men to come forward when they are the ones being abused. The objectification of men seems to be trivialized though Kilbourne obviously does not feel that it is acceptible.
All in all Kilbourne, tho obviously opinionated raises many valid points. She brought things to my attention I hadn't given much thought to and because of that I found the essay informative and intriguing.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
Grammer Post
Proper use of quotations. This is something we touched on in clas a little bit but I thought it would be interesting to find all the rules regarding proper quotation.
According to "The Owl at Purdue" http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/577/01/
the rules for using quotations are as fallows:
How to Use Quotation Marks
Using Quotation Marks
The primary function of quotation marks is to set off and represent exact language (either spoken or written) that has come from somebody else. The quotation mark is also used to designate speech acts in fiction and sometimes poetry. Since you will most often use them when working with outside sources, successful use of quotation marks is a practical defense against accidental plagiarism and an excellent practice in academic honesty. The following rules of quotation mark use are the standard in the United States, although it may be of interest that usage rules for this punctuation do vary in other countries.
The following covers the basic use of quotation marks. For details and exceptions consult the separate sections of this guide.
Direct Quotations
Direct quotations involve incorporating another person's exact words into your own writing.
1. Quotation marks always come in pairs. Do not open a quotation and fail to close it at the end of the quoted material
2. Capitalize the first letter of a direct quote when the quoted material is a complete sentence.
3. Do not use a capital letter when the quoted material is a fragment or only a piece of the original material's complete sentence.
4. If a direct quotation is interrupted mid-sentence, do not capitalize the second part of the quotation.
5. In all the examples above, note how the period or comma punctuation always comes before the final quotation mark. It is important to also realize that when you are using MLA or some other form of documentation, this punctuation rule may change.
When quoting text with a spelling or grammar error, you should transcribe the error exactly in your own text. However, also insert the term sic in italics directly after the mistake, and enclose it in brackets. Sic is from the Latin, and translates to "thus," "so," or "just as that." The word tells the reader that your quote is an exact reproduction of what you found, and the error is not your own.
6. Quotations are most effective if you use them sparingly and keep them relatively short. Too many quotations in a research paper will get you accused of not producing original thought or material (they may also bore a reader who wants to know primarily what YOU have to say on the subject).
Indirect Quotations
Indirect quotations are not exact wordings but rather rephrasings or summaries of another person's words. In this case, it is not necessary to use quotation marks. However, indirect quotations still require proper citations, and you will be commiting plagiarism if you fail to do so.
*Use direct quotations when the source material uses language that is particularly striking or notable. Do not rob such language of its power by altering it*
*Use an indirect quotation (or paraphrase) when you merely need to summarize key incidents or details of the text.*
According to "The Owl at Purdue" http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/577/01/
the rules for using quotations are as fallows:
How to Use Quotation Marks
Using Quotation Marks
The primary function of quotation marks is to set off and represent exact language (either spoken or written) that has come from somebody else. The quotation mark is also used to designate speech acts in fiction and sometimes poetry. Since you will most often use them when working with outside sources, successful use of quotation marks is a practical defense against accidental plagiarism and an excellent practice in academic honesty. The following rules of quotation mark use are the standard in the United States, although it may be of interest that usage rules for this punctuation do vary in other countries.
The following covers the basic use of quotation marks. For details and exceptions consult the separate sections of this guide.
Direct Quotations
Direct quotations involve incorporating another person's exact words into your own writing.
1. Quotation marks always come in pairs. Do not open a quotation and fail to close it at the end of the quoted material
2. Capitalize the first letter of a direct quote when the quoted material is a complete sentence.
3. Do not use a capital letter when the quoted material is a fragment or only a piece of the original material's complete sentence.
4. If a direct quotation is interrupted mid-sentence, do not capitalize the second part of the quotation.
5. In all the examples above, note how the period or comma punctuation always comes before the final quotation mark. It is important to also realize that when you are using MLA or some other form of documentation, this punctuation rule may change.
When quoting text with a spelling or grammar error, you should transcribe the error exactly in your own text. However, also insert the term sic in italics directly after the mistake, and enclose it in brackets. Sic is from the Latin, and translates to "thus," "so," or "just as that." The word tells the reader that your quote is an exact reproduction of what you found, and the error is not your own.
6. Quotations are most effective if you use them sparingly and keep them relatively short. Too many quotations in a research paper will get you accused of not producing original thought or material (they may also bore a reader who wants to know primarily what YOU have to say on the subject).
Indirect Quotations
Indirect quotations are not exact wordings but rather rephrasings or summaries of another person's words. In this case, it is not necessary to use quotation marks. However, indirect quotations still require proper citations, and you will be commiting plagiarism if you fail to do so.
*Use direct quotations when the source material uses language that is particularly striking or notable. Do not rob such language of its power by altering it*
*Use an indirect quotation (or paraphrase) when you merely need to summarize key incidents or details of the text.*
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Killer Culture
Wow, I loved this reading. I found it incredibly insightful and informative. I agree with David Kupelian 100%. A majority of our nation is struggling to find an identity. The media is the driving force that leads anyone without a moral back bone to cling to anything, even the most absurd and perverse, all to gain that sense of individualism and identity. I love the part where he says:
The fact is, what has risen out of "the pit" in today's world that bears
a striking resemblance to the ageless spirit of defiant paganism,
spirit now inhibiting millions of people "freed" by trauma (drugs,
illicit sex, bodily mutilation, and so on) from the pain of their
own conscience.
Though David makes his own opinion known he backs it up by citing other pieces and websites that don't even agree with the points he is trying to make. For example when he quotes BME. This is a site that supports and discusses body modification. He uses quotes and definitions from the site to demonstrate how easily we defend the activities people partake in that are arguably insane. He correlates body modification with self mutilation (or cutting). I thought this was fascinating. I have a number of friends who have experimented with body modification, including genital mutilation. I never could truly understood why. Looking back, I see that all of these friends have struggled with emotional problems and have come from very broken homes, As cliche as that sounds. Their parents were almost always inconsistent, self centered, and most of them suffered from emotional disorders. These same friends constantly tried to do things that were different and unique, throughout our entire adolescence and have carried their behavior on into adulthood, trying to find some sort of identity. I always equated it with teenage rebellion and left it at that. Until reading this writing I hadn't put much thought into the way the media feeds this teenage rebellion, nor had I thought of where this rebellion came from. I always saw these behaviors as rebellion against parents, simply because that's what hormonal teenagers do.
The fascinating point David Kupelian makes is that our society, especially or media, encourages this no-limits/self mutilating attitude. The envelope is pushed and pushed and pushed to the point where people feel they need to be infected with HIV to feel unique. I know from my own experiences and background that without some sort of moral back bone to stand against that the culture we live in will truly eat you alive. I was lucky enough to "grow out of it and become normal". I still have a lot of friends caught up in the world of trying to find identity. Some of them are still productive and are going to college and working at steady jobs but a larger number of them still act like teenagers. They party it up almost daily, can't keep down steady jobs, and use a lot of drugs. They partake in body modifications, hate religion, and can't understand how I have changed so much. A lot of them feel that I am the one missing out on life, that I am a sell out. They still argue over what music is still hard core and what bands have "sold out". They are constantly on the hunt for an outfit, movie, or band no one has ever heard of or seen. It is so sad to me and so difficult to watch. It also a little humerus. For the longest time, I thought I was the liberated one, looking back I was a slave to "cool". This writing feels like something I could have written myself.
The fact is, what has risen out of "the pit" in today's world that bears
a striking resemblance to the ageless spirit of defiant paganism,
spirit now inhibiting millions of people "freed" by trauma (drugs,
illicit sex, bodily mutilation, and so on) from the pain of their
own conscience.
Though David makes his own opinion known he backs it up by citing other pieces and websites that don't even agree with the points he is trying to make. For example when he quotes BME. This is a site that supports and discusses body modification. He uses quotes and definitions from the site to demonstrate how easily we defend the activities people partake in that are arguably insane. He correlates body modification with self mutilation (or cutting). I thought this was fascinating. I have a number of friends who have experimented with body modification, including genital mutilation. I never could truly understood why. Looking back, I see that all of these friends have struggled with emotional problems and have come from very broken homes, As cliche as that sounds. Their parents were almost always inconsistent, self centered, and most of them suffered from emotional disorders. These same friends constantly tried to do things that were different and unique, throughout our entire adolescence and have carried their behavior on into adulthood, trying to find some sort of identity. I always equated it with teenage rebellion and left it at that. Until reading this writing I hadn't put much thought into the way the media feeds this teenage rebellion, nor had I thought of where this rebellion came from. I always saw these behaviors as rebellion against parents, simply because that's what hormonal teenagers do.
The fascinating point David Kupelian makes is that our society, especially or media, encourages this no-limits/self mutilating attitude. The envelope is pushed and pushed and pushed to the point where people feel they need to be infected with HIV to feel unique. I know from my own experiences and background that without some sort of moral back bone to stand against that the culture we live in will truly eat you alive. I was lucky enough to "grow out of it and become normal". I still have a lot of friends caught up in the world of trying to find identity. Some of them are still productive and are going to college and working at steady jobs but a larger number of them still act like teenagers. They party it up almost daily, can't keep down steady jobs, and use a lot of drugs. They partake in body modifications, hate religion, and can't understand how I have changed so much. A lot of them feel that I am the one missing out on life, that I am a sell out. They still argue over what music is still hard core and what bands have "sold out". They are constantly on the hunt for an outfit, movie, or band no one has ever heard of or seen. It is so sad to me and so difficult to watch. It also a little humerus. For the longest time, I thought I was the liberated one, looking back I was a slave to "cool". This writing feels like something I could have written myself.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Comma, Comma, Comma
The proper usage of commas seems to be baffling for a lot of English students. I find myself wondering if I am over using them or not using them enough. I find myself trying to put more ideas in a sentence then it can handle. I rely to heavily on my commas instead of writing a new sentence. Sometimes I do just the opposite, I have two sentences that could easily be put into one.
According to http://owl.english.purdue.edu the comma rules are as fallows:
1. Use commas to separate independent clauses when they are joined by any of these seven coordinating conjunctions: and, but, for, or, nor, so, yet.
2. Use commas after introductory a) clauses, b) phrases, or c) words that come before the main clause.
a. Common starter words for introductory clauses that should be followed by a comma include after, although, as, because, if, since, when, while.
b. Common introductory phrases that should be followed by a comma include participial and infinitive phrases, absolute phrases, nonessential appositive phrases, and long prepositional phrases (over four words).
c. Common introductory words that should be followed by a comma include yes, however, well.
3. Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause.
4.Do not use commas to set off essential elements of the sentence, such as clauses beginning with that (relative clauses). That clauses after nouns are always essential. That clauses following a verb expressing mental action are always essential.
5. Use commas to separate three or more words, phrases, or clauses written in a series.
6. Use commas to separate two or more coordinate adjectives that describe the same noun. Be sure never to add an extra comma between the final adjective and the noun itself or to use commas with non-coordinate adjectives.
7. Use a comma near the end of a sentence to separate contrasted coordinate elements or to indicate a distinct pause or shift.
8. Use commas to set off phrases at the end of the sentence that refer back to the beginning or middle of the sentence. Such phrases are free modifiers that can be placed anywhere in the sentence without causing confusion. (If the placement of the modifier causes confusion, then it is not "free" and must remain "bound" to the word it modifies.)
9. Use commas to set off all geographical names, items in dates (except the month and day), addresses (except the street number and name), and titles in names.
10. Use a comma to shift between the main discourse and a quotation.
11. Use commas wherever necessary to prevent possible confusion or misreading.
12. Don't use a comma to separate the subject from the verb.
13. Don't put a comma between the two verbs or verb phrases in a compound predicate.
14. Don't put a comma between the two nouns, noun phrases, or noun clauses in a compound subject or compound object.
15. Don't put a comma after the main clause when a dependent (subordinate) clause follows it (except for cases of extreme contrast).
According to http://owl.english.purdue.edu the comma rules are as fallows:
1. Use commas to separate independent clauses when they are joined by any of these seven coordinating conjunctions: and, but, for, or, nor, so, yet.
2. Use commas after introductory a) clauses, b) phrases, or c) words that come before the main clause.
a. Common starter words for introductory clauses that should be followed by a comma include after, although, as, because, if, since, when, while.
b. Common introductory phrases that should be followed by a comma include participial and infinitive phrases, absolute phrases, nonessential appositive phrases, and long prepositional phrases (over four words).
c. Common introductory words that should be followed by a comma include yes, however, well.
3. Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause.
4.Do not use commas to set off essential elements of the sentence, such as clauses beginning with that (relative clauses). That clauses after nouns are always essential. That clauses following a verb expressing mental action are always essential.
5. Use commas to separate three or more words, phrases, or clauses written in a series.
6. Use commas to separate two or more coordinate adjectives that describe the same noun. Be sure never to add an extra comma between the final adjective and the noun itself or to use commas with non-coordinate adjectives.
7. Use a comma near the end of a sentence to separate contrasted coordinate elements or to indicate a distinct pause or shift.
8. Use commas to set off phrases at the end of the sentence that refer back to the beginning or middle of the sentence. Such phrases are free modifiers that can be placed anywhere in the sentence without causing confusion. (If the placement of the modifier causes confusion, then it is not "free" and must remain "bound" to the word it modifies.)
9. Use commas to set off all geographical names, items in dates (except the month and day), addresses (except the street number and name), and titles in names.
10. Use a comma to shift between the main discourse and a quotation.
11. Use commas wherever necessary to prevent possible confusion or misreading.
12. Don't use a comma to separate the subject from the verb.
13. Don't put a comma between the two verbs or verb phrases in a compound predicate.
14. Don't put a comma between the two nouns, noun phrases, or noun clauses in a compound subject or compound object.
15. Don't put a comma after the main clause when a dependent (subordinate) clause follows it (except for cases of extreme contrast).
Framing Class
Diana Kendall and I don't see eye to eye on everything she writes about in her essay on the framing of class in the media. I believe the social class exaggerations she talks a lot about at the beginning of her writing is what makes TV shows entertaining. If I wanted to watch something to learn or better understand a social problem I would more than likely watch a fact-based channel like PBS or National Geographic. I don't think the need for in-depth accuracy is quiet as necessary on a Friday night sitcom as it would be on the evening news. Although I do agree that some sitcoms and reality TV do have a negative affect on our culture's perceptions of social class. I do believe that the focus on celebrities and their life styles has gone a little over board. I think, in a small way, may contribute to the gotta have it world we live in.
I think that all the advertisements are fueling our consumer driven world as well, especially for children. Sometimes while I'm babysitting I will sit and watch TV with my nephews. Have you ever noticed all the adds geared towards children on the popular children's networks? Every commercial is a gotta have it toy, snack, game, or clothing brand and the commercials are on almost as long as the actual TV shows themselves. It makes me sick. Some of the commercials even ridicule parents. I think adults being bombarded with enticing advertisements is one thing but to be doing it to children is wrong. The sad part is that I didn't start to notice how many advertisements there were until I stopped watching television. It's like you become desensitized to it.
Another key point that Kendall makes is when she talks about the major news networks. There seems to be a focus only on events that networks think will bring in the most viewers. The coverage of the swine flu is a prime example. It was the same story over and over again. No details were given concerning the actual H1N1 virus, only bold words at the bottom of the screen saying "Possible Pandemic" and various news caster saying over and over again that people were going to die. The fact that millions die from influenza, or the common flu, every year was totally omitted. While other issues were almost totally ignored. Rarely are complex issues covered more than a few minutes, seconds even, leaving the viewer with some questions at best, but mostly uniformed. We really do need more civic journalism. Kendal quotes the Pew Center for Civic Journalism when describing civic journalism, "A belief that journalism is an obligation to the public life- an obligation that goes beyond just telling the news or unloading lots of facts". We need the news to be more engaging and informative and less about big rating stories.
I think that all the advertisements are fueling our consumer driven world as well, especially for children. Sometimes while I'm babysitting I will sit and watch TV with my nephews. Have you ever noticed all the adds geared towards children on the popular children's networks? Every commercial is a gotta have it toy, snack, game, or clothing brand and the commercials are on almost as long as the actual TV shows themselves. It makes me sick. Some of the commercials even ridicule parents. I think adults being bombarded with enticing advertisements is one thing but to be doing it to children is wrong. The sad part is that I didn't start to notice how many advertisements there were until I stopped watching television. It's like you become desensitized to it.
Another key point that Kendall makes is when she talks about the major news networks. There seems to be a focus only on events that networks think will bring in the most viewers. The coverage of the swine flu is a prime example. It was the same story over and over again. No details were given concerning the actual H1N1 virus, only bold words at the bottom of the screen saying "Possible Pandemic" and various news caster saying over and over again that people were going to die. The fact that millions die from influenza, or the common flu, every year was totally omitted. While other issues were almost totally ignored. Rarely are complex issues covered more than a few minutes, seconds even, leaving the viewer with some questions at best, but mostly uniformed. We really do need more civic journalism. Kendal quotes the Pew Center for Civic Journalism when describing civic journalism, "A belief that journalism is an obligation to the public life- an obligation that goes beyond just telling the news or unloading lots of facts". We need the news to be more engaging and informative and less about big rating stories.
Money
I thought the little quote by Wallace Stevens above the poem was interesting. It simply says "money is a kind of poetry". I began to wonder what he was trying to say.
According to Mark Flanagan at About.com the definition of poetry is "an imaginative awareness of experience expressed through meaning, sound, and rhythmic language choices so as to evoke an emotional response. Poetry has been known to employ meter and rhyme, but this is by no means necessary. Poetry is an ancient form that has gone through numerous and drastic reinvention over time. The very nature of poetry as an authentic and individual mode of expression makes it nearly impossible to define."
According to Wikipedia poetry "often uses particular forms and conventions to suggest alternative meanings in the words, or to evoke emotional or sensual responses"
Doesn't money evoke emotional or sensual responses? Doesn't it create an imaginative awareness of experience? I suppose it's not too far of a stretch to call money poetry. The poem "Money" by Dana Gioia gives us an interesting take on the affect and emotions money may evoke. In the first few line Gioia lists a bunch of slang for money. Each term originated during a time of economic struggle. It's funny how much we think about money when we don't have any. We think about it enough to give it pet names. Once we have it, it "burns holes in our pockets." I find that I often spend money quickly. Especially for example, when pay day comes and for the past two weeks (the time between paychecks) I have been dead broke. I can always think of things I need to spend money on or want to spend money on, especially when I don't have any.
The last part of the poem Gioia says "Money. You don't know where it's been, but you put it where your mouth is. And it talks."
Money really does talk. Especially the things bought with it. How often do you see a fancy house or car and automatically assume the owner must make a lot of money. How often do you assume that person does something important and is a person of status? On the opposite end of the spectrum. How often do you see someone in a dumpy apartment or a hoopty and assume they are low-income, of low status, and probably don't do anything very special or important for a living? We automatically correlate the possessions a person has with the amount of money and the status of that individual. Their money or lack of money really does a lot of the talking.
According to Mark Flanagan at About.com the definition of poetry is "an imaginative awareness of experience expressed through meaning, sound, and rhythmic language choices so as to evoke an emotional response. Poetry has been known to employ meter and rhyme, but this is by no means necessary. Poetry is an ancient form that has gone through numerous and drastic reinvention over time. The very nature of poetry as an authentic and individual mode of expression makes it nearly impossible to define."
According to Wikipedia poetry "often uses particular forms and conventions to suggest alternative meanings in the words, or to evoke emotional or sensual responses"
Doesn't money evoke emotional or sensual responses? Doesn't it create an imaginative awareness of experience? I suppose it's not too far of a stretch to call money poetry. The poem "Money" by Dana Gioia gives us an interesting take on the affect and emotions money may evoke. In the first few line Gioia lists a bunch of slang for money. Each term originated during a time of economic struggle. It's funny how much we think about money when we don't have any. We think about it enough to give it pet names. Once we have it, it "burns holes in our pockets." I find that I often spend money quickly. Especially for example, when pay day comes and for the past two weeks (the time between paychecks) I have been dead broke. I can always think of things I need to spend money on or want to spend money on, especially when I don't have any.
The last part of the poem Gioia says "Money. You don't know where it's been, but you put it where your mouth is. And it talks."
Money really does talk. Especially the things bought with it. How often do you see a fancy house or car and automatically assume the owner must make a lot of money. How often do you assume that person does something important and is a person of status? On the opposite end of the spectrum. How often do you see someone in a dumpy apartment or a hoopty and assume they are low-income, of low status, and probably don't do anything very special or important for a living? We automatically correlate the possessions a person has with the amount of money and the status of that individual. Their money or lack of money really does a lot of the talking.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Serving In Florida
When I first heard the title, I thought the author would be writing about serving jail time. I'm not sure if the title was intended to take on that meaning but when I think about the job's described in this writing, They really could be equated with serving jail time. Ive had my fair share of time in the food service world, and though my experience was much more pleasant than Barbara Ehrenreich's, I could still see a viable argument that food service jobs, and jobs like them, are just about as pleasant as time spent serving a sentence. People constantly barking orders, not even being allowed a bathroom break without premission, And you are surrounded with unhappy people with no real future other than their current reality. To make matters worse, You are handling the crankiest people the world has too offer with a smile on your face. By the time your paycheck comes you wonder how on earth you can stand to withstand the torture for such minimal compensation. Even after tips, there is absolutely no way an individual could support themselves entirely, not even at an uncomfortable level. Barbara dive's into this world and soon finds her self consumed in a struggle to simply get through the day.
Barbra finds that her all consuming struggle begins to change her. Her spirit and body are slowly being worn down to the point where she no longer thinks about anything aside from the task at hand. She enters into survival mode or as she calls it a "flow state."-"Where signals pass from sense organs directly to the muscles, bypassing the cerebral cortex, and a zen-like emptiness sets in." I'm not sure how people make life-time careers out of this type of labor. I think I would argue that Barbara Ehrebreich would wonder the same thing. She could only stand a month of this type of work. She did point out how consuming it becomes though. You become so set in your ways, simply to survive, that even the thought of escape doesn't come to mind. Once you find yourself struggling, it is so hard to be happy, to feel like you could change your situation at all. More often than not, these people make a career out of this work not by choice but by necessity, there is no other option.
I found myself relating so well to this writing. When I worked as a server I became so judgmental, critical, stressed and focused. It felt as though I had a painted grin on all the time. I would guess the amount of tip I received not based upon the quality of service I was providing but by the type of person I was serving. More often than not, I knew a bad tipper when I saw one. You really do find yourself becoming drone-like. I didn't even have to do my work to survive, it was simply to get money for school and fun-time expenses. Barbara reveals a world most of us find depressing. She reminds us that these are people serving us, not machines. How often are we the bad tipper or the ignorant motel guest?
Barbra finds that her all consuming struggle begins to change her. Her spirit and body are slowly being worn down to the point where she no longer thinks about anything aside from the task at hand. She enters into survival mode or as she calls it a "flow state."-"Where signals pass from sense organs directly to the muscles, bypassing the cerebral cortex, and a zen-like emptiness sets in." I'm not sure how people make life-time careers out of this type of labor. I think I would argue that Barbara Ehrebreich would wonder the same thing. She could only stand a month of this type of work. She did point out how consuming it becomes though. You become so set in your ways, simply to survive, that even the thought of escape doesn't come to mind. Once you find yourself struggling, it is so hard to be happy, to feel like you could change your situation at all. More often than not, these people make a career out of this work not by choice but by necessity, there is no other option.
I found myself relating so well to this writing. When I worked as a server I became so judgmental, critical, stressed and focused. It felt as though I had a painted grin on all the time. I would guess the amount of tip I received not based upon the quality of service I was providing but by the type of person I was serving. More often than not, I knew a bad tipper when I saw one. You really do find yourself becoming drone-like. I didn't even have to do my work to survive, it was simply to get money for school and fun-time expenses. Barbara reveals a world most of us find depressing. She reminds us that these are people serving us, not machines. How often are we the bad tipper or the ignorant motel guest?
Saturday, June 13, 2009
"I just want to be average"
“I Just Wanna Be Average” By Mike Rose
At first, I had a really hard time trying to figure out the point that Mike Rose was trying to make. The first part of this writing was all just a story about his educational experience. I wondered how this mediocre student described in the story became the well educated and respected author he now appeared to be. The story he described sounded like scenes from one of those movies like Dangerous Minds, or Freedom Writers. I guess in a lot of ways his story does parallel those movies. He was counted amongst a group of students the education system had written off. No one expected much more from him then some sort of vocational career. I remember kids like that from my high school. They sat in the back of the class and joked around, often acting as the class clown. Most of the time the teachers would ignore them, they were headed nowhere anyway. I just wonder how many of those students had the same potential the author of this essay had, and I wonder how it was over looked.
It amazes me the impact a good teacher can have on students. I’m sure that we have all had at least one or two teachers who truly inspired and encouraged us. I know that I did, and without them I would never have gotten all the things I did out of high school. I don’t want to blame the failing education system on bad teachers. The past readings we have done make strong arguments that a lot of the problems facing our education system are bigger than that. It ultimately depends on the student if they pass or fail. The truth is, there are probably hundreds of thousands of kids written off by the system who have more potential then we could have ever dreamed. It makes me wonder what kind of great minds could have been unlocked had the right teacher come along. I wonder too, if every teacher had the same kind of ability as Mike Rose’s teacher, Mr. MacFarland, what kind of great minds would our education system produce. Mike Rose gives us a firsthand account of the difference a good teacher can make.
I found this writing to be a lot more uplifting and positive then the other two readings we have done concerning the education system. His writing was a little jumbled and confusing at first but towards the end he makes a clear point. A good teacher, who captures the interest of a class room, can do more for a student than an entire school full of unprofessional, unmotivated teachers. A good teacher is worth ten thousand mediocre teachers. They encourage and challenge students to not only be “normal” but to rise above any preconceived expectations.
At first, I had a really hard time trying to figure out the point that Mike Rose was trying to make. The first part of this writing was all just a story about his educational experience. I wondered how this mediocre student described in the story became the well educated and respected author he now appeared to be. The story he described sounded like scenes from one of those movies like Dangerous Minds, or Freedom Writers. I guess in a lot of ways his story does parallel those movies. He was counted amongst a group of students the education system had written off. No one expected much more from him then some sort of vocational career. I remember kids like that from my high school. They sat in the back of the class and joked around, often acting as the class clown. Most of the time the teachers would ignore them, they were headed nowhere anyway. I just wonder how many of those students had the same potential the author of this essay had, and I wonder how it was over looked.
It amazes me the impact a good teacher can have on students. I’m sure that we have all had at least one or two teachers who truly inspired and encouraged us. I know that I did, and without them I would never have gotten all the things I did out of high school. I don’t want to blame the failing education system on bad teachers. The past readings we have done make strong arguments that a lot of the problems facing our education system are bigger than that. It ultimately depends on the student if they pass or fail. The truth is, there are probably hundreds of thousands of kids written off by the system who have more potential then we could have ever dreamed. It makes me wonder what kind of great minds could have been unlocked had the right teacher come along. I wonder too, if every teacher had the same kind of ability as Mike Rose’s teacher, Mr. MacFarland, what kind of great minds would our education system produce. Mike Rose gives us a firsthand account of the difference a good teacher can make.
I found this writing to be a lot more uplifting and positive then the other two readings we have done concerning the education system. His writing was a little jumbled and confusing at first but towards the end he makes a clear point. A good teacher, who captures the interest of a class room, can do more for a student than an entire school full of unprofessional, unmotivated teachers. A good teacher is worth ten thousand mediocre teachers. They encourage and challenge students to not only be “normal” but to rise above any preconceived expectations.
Grammer Blog on Capitalization.
I have always had a tendency to misuse my capitalization. It's probably something I should have figured out how to do way back in elementary school but for some reason I never got the full picture.
Well according to www.grammarbook.com These are the rules for capitalization:
Rule 1. Capitalize the first word of a quoted sentence.
Rule 2. Capitalize a proper noun.
Rule 3. Capitalize a person's title when it precedes the name. Do not capitalize when the title is acting as a description following the name.
Rule 4. Capitalize the person's title when it follows the name on the address or signature line.
Rule 5. Capitalize the titles of high-ranking government officials when used with or before their names. Do not capitalize the civil title if it is used instead of the name.
Rule 6. Capitalize any title when used as a direct address.
Rule 7. Capitalize points of the compass only when they refer to specific regions.
Rule 8. Always capitalize the first and last words of titles of publications regardless of their parts of speech. Capitalize other words within titles, including the short verb forms Is, Are, and Be.
Rule 9. Capitalize federal or state when used as part of an official agency name or in government documents where these terms represent an official name. If they are being used as general terms, you may use lowercase letters.
Rule 10. You may capitalize words such as department, bureau, and office if you have prepared your text in the following way: The Bureau of Land Management (Bureau) has some jurisdiction over Indian lands. The Bureau is finding its administrative role to be challenging.
Rule 11. Do not capitalize names of seasons.
Rule 12. Capitalize the first word of a salutation and the first word of a complimentary close.
Rule 13. Capitalize words derived from proper nouns.
Rule 14. Capitalize the names of specific course titles.
Rule 15. After a sentence ending with a colon, do not capitalize the first word if it begins a list.
Rule 16. Do not capitalize when only one sentence follows a sentence ending with a colon.
Rule 17. Capitalize when two or more sentences follow a sentence ending with a colon.
I had no idea there were so many rules having to do with capitalization!
Well according to www.grammarbook.com These are the rules for capitalization:
Rule 1. Capitalize the first word of a quoted sentence.
Rule 2. Capitalize a proper noun.
Rule 3. Capitalize a person's title when it precedes the name. Do not capitalize when the title is acting as a description following the name.
Rule 4. Capitalize the person's title when it follows the name on the address or signature line.
Rule 5. Capitalize the titles of high-ranking government officials when used with or before their names. Do not capitalize the civil title if it is used instead of the name.
Rule 6. Capitalize any title when used as a direct address.
Rule 7. Capitalize points of the compass only when they refer to specific regions.
Rule 8. Always capitalize the first and last words of titles of publications regardless of their parts of speech. Capitalize other words within titles, including the short verb forms Is, Are, and Be.
Rule 9. Capitalize federal or state when used as part of an official agency name or in government documents where these terms represent an official name. If they are being used as general terms, you may use lowercase letters.
Rule 10. You may capitalize words such as department, bureau, and office if you have prepared your text in the following way: The Bureau of Land Management (Bureau) has some jurisdiction over Indian lands. The Bureau is finding its administrative role to be challenging.
Rule 11. Do not capitalize names of seasons.
Rule 12. Capitalize the first word of a salutation and the first word of a complimentary close.
Rule 13. Capitalize words derived from proper nouns.
Rule 14. Capitalize the names of specific course titles.
Rule 15. After a sentence ending with a colon, do not capitalize the first word if it begins a list.
Rule 16. Do not capitalize when only one sentence follows a sentence ending with a colon.
Rule 17. Capitalize when two or more sentences follow a sentence ending with a colon.
I had no idea there were so many rules having to do with capitalization!
Against School
When I first began reading John Gratto’s Against School I thought it was a leaning on the side of outrageous. I felt like I was listening to a conspiracy theorist more than an authority on the education system. I have to say as I read more and more of his essay, I started to see a correlation between his thoughts on the education system and the actual problems affect our nation’s schools. Is our nation’s school system really striving to make good people? Does it really go out of the way to foster leadership, individualism, or even help an individual become the best that they can be? I took class on social problems; my professor taught me that every social problem exists because it benefits someone in some way. The same may hold true for our education system. If a nation is dummed down, it would be easier to control and mislead its people. This means that a poor education system could be more useful to our nation then a good one. Maybe we are blaming the wrong things for faulty education in this country. Maybe the teachers, the lack of funding, and the parents aren’t to blame after all. Maybe it’s simply in the structure of our American school system and maybe it’s that way on purpose. After all, it was derived from the Prussian education system. Or maybe we simply ignore the fact that it’s an obsolete system that needs to be revised. It would take a lot of work and rethinking to truly change the system. Grattos thoughts are interesting takes on the education system I never thought of before.
Gatto makes another good point when he says our nation is in essence eliminating maturity. I really liked the way John Gratto puts it when he says “Maturity has been banished from nearly every aspects of our lives. Easy divorce laws have removed the need to work at relationships; easy credit has removed our need for fiscal self-control; easy entertainment as removed the need to entertain oneself; easy answers have removed the need to question”. There is so much truth in that statement. There is no doubt; we as a nation always seek the easy route. I know I am personally guilty of it.
John Gratto makes a lot of points that seem to be way out there, but he also reveals a lot of truths. We are a nation with a faulty education system based on an even worse education system. We are gradually being stripped of maturity. We are consumers by and large and we have a tendency to not want to think for ourselves. I’m not sure that John Gatto and I see eye to eye totally but I agree with him on that part. I like his final point, that we should teach our own to be leaders and critical thinkers. We need to be aware of our educational systems short comings and we need to fill in the blanks. We ourselves need to become better examples.
Gatto makes another good point when he says our nation is in essence eliminating maturity. I really liked the way John Gratto puts it when he says “Maturity has been banished from nearly every aspects of our lives. Easy divorce laws have removed the need to work at relationships; easy credit has removed our need for fiscal self-control; easy entertainment as removed the need to entertain oneself; easy answers have removed the need to question”. There is so much truth in that statement. There is no doubt; we as a nation always seek the easy route. I know I am personally guilty of it.
John Gratto makes a lot of points that seem to be way out there, but he also reveals a lot of truths. We are a nation with a faulty education system based on an even worse education system. We are gradually being stripped of maturity. We are consumers by and large and we have a tendency to not want to think for ourselves. I’m not sure that John Gatto and I see eye to eye totally but I agree with him on that part. I like his final point, that we should teach our own to be leaders and critical thinkers. We need to be aware of our educational systems short comings and we need to fill in the blanks. We ourselves need to become better examples.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Idiot Nation
I have to say, going into this reading I was expecting the worst. Michael Moore tends to get on my nerves, quiet frankly. This essay really surprised me however. There were a considerable amount of statements I found myself agreeing with. Michael Moore is famous for his bluntness and extreme left wing views. He was very much himself in this writing. I like that it gives his writing more personality, even though I don't necessarily like or agree with what is being said. This style of writing could either entice a reader or totally turn them away. Without even knowing who the author is, within the first few paragraphs you get the sense that they are strongly opinionated and very sarcastic. I found myself wanting to learn more about the state of our education system. I wanted to challenge Moore's beliefs as well as my own. I even got on google and began pouring myself into statistics.
The numbers presented in this essay shocked me, even though I already knew there were flaws in the education system. 44 million Americans without the ability to read above a fourth grade reading level is scary. Although I'm not sure what that number is based off of and I'm not sure if that includes individuals with disability. The point is, this statistic got me wanting to learn more. Another statement that caught my attention was the quotation from our former president, "And to the C students, I say you, too, can be president of the united states". What a sad statement, I want the leader of my country to encourage people to be the best and brightest they can be, that statement doesn't sound very encouraging. Further more I want my president to be one of the best and brightest, not just a mediocre student with good connections. I want that for everyone who makes major decisions on my behalf. Another interesting point that Moore brought up was when he referenced a test given to 556 seniors from 55 universities, only 53% of them answered "high school level" questions right, this made for a great plat form for the failed education system. I really am curious to see how well Dixie State College students would do on that same test. I would like to see how well I would do on that test. Another issue Moore brings up in is standardized testing itself.
Standardized testing was an issue I remember becoming a big deal my senior year of high school. The sophomores would be the first class required to pass the Washington State standardized test (we called it the WASAL) there was alot of discussion about the fairness of this test. Many parents were furious. I thought, after taking the test, it would be ridiculous to allow anybody to graduate high school who couldn't pass it. I wasn't exactly what you would call a good student and I found the test very do-able. If a student couldn't pass it, they weren't ready for the real world and definitely not ready for college. Standardized testing is a good way to see how well a school is teaching. It can pin point flaws in an academic system. It should be a source of accountability. This accountability shouldn't just be for the teachers though. It should apply to everyone in that students life and community. I like how Moore takes the side of the teacher without dismissing the importance of standardized testing. Although I did not like the way he downplayed the importance of accountability. Over all I think Moore raises a lot of really good points in this essay.
The numbers presented in this essay shocked me, even though I already knew there were flaws in the education system. 44 million Americans without the ability to read above a fourth grade reading level is scary. Although I'm not sure what that number is based off of and I'm not sure if that includes individuals with disability. The point is, this statistic got me wanting to learn more. Another statement that caught my attention was the quotation from our former president, "And to the C students, I say you, too, can be president of the united states". What a sad statement, I want the leader of my country to encourage people to be the best and brightest they can be, that statement doesn't sound very encouraging. Further more I want my president to be one of the best and brightest, not just a mediocre student with good connections. I want that for everyone who makes major decisions on my behalf. Another interesting point that Moore brought up was when he referenced a test given to 556 seniors from 55 universities, only 53% of them answered "high school level" questions right, this made for a great plat form for the failed education system. I really am curious to see how well Dixie State College students would do on that same test. I would like to see how well I would do on that test. Another issue Moore brings up in is standardized testing itself.
Standardized testing was an issue I remember becoming a big deal my senior year of high school. The sophomores would be the first class required to pass the Washington State standardized test (we called it the WASAL) there was alot of discussion about the fairness of this test. Many parents were furious. I thought, after taking the test, it would be ridiculous to allow anybody to graduate high school who couldn't pass it. I wasn't exactly what you would call a good student and I found the test very do-able. If a student couldn't pass it, they weren't ready for the real world and definitely not ready for college. Standardized testing is a good way to see how well a school is teaching. It can pin point flaws in an academic system. It should be a source of accountability. This accountability shouldn't just be for the teachers though. It should apply to everyone in that students life and community. I like how Moore takes the side of the teacher without dismissing the importance of standardized testing. Although I did not like the way he downplayed the importance of accountability. Over all I think Moore raises a lot of really good points in this essay.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Changing American Families
Changing American Families by Judy Root Alutte
I found this reading to be incredibly fascinating. It’s amazing to me the coloration between economic status and the culture it creates. The media portrays all the socio-economic differences all the time. As Alutte puts it “are so pervasive they sometimes become invisible”. Even though this is an issue dealt with on a daily level, because of that I never gave much thought to it. Even the idea that there are so many different socio-economic classes is surprising to me. I never knew the differences between classes could be so decisive in terms of how a family operates. I always bunched up working and middle class and I never really picked apart the differences between African American middle class and White middle class. To me they were somewhat different, that’s about all I knew. I thought it was almost comical how I see the differences every day through media and personal experiences but this essay made me look at the issue with new eyes.
The fact that very little research has been done on the upper class surprised me greatly, I would expect that they would be well researched. It was strange that their culture seemed so secretive. It was even more surprising to learn the importance of family name, marriage, and social accountability. It reminds me of the way royalty would behave. The social parties to encourage marriage amongst the children of the elite and the idea of preservation of the family estate contradicted the way I viewed the upper class. I assumed they had an endless supply of money and spent it that way. I also found the difference between white middle class and black middle class intriguing. The white middle class encourage their children to “fallow their hearts” so to speak and that their success is their own. On the flip side, African Americans feel that their success is not just their own, but their entire race’s success. The middle class brought an image to my head of one of those men at the airport, cell phone to the ear, laptop in one hand, brief case in the other. The working class seemed to be the one I think of when I think of the All American family. The idea of marrying for love, and separating work and home, It seems Ideal to me.
The immigration socio-economic group seems to be the one with the most controversy surrounding it. It is incredible how the entire familiar culture of Mexican-American immigrants is shifted. The way the husband began to do everything on his own and the need for the wife to become the leader of the home reminded me of military home life. While dad is out on duty, mom is in charge. While dad is gone he takes care of himself. The gender and familiar rolls become unclear and so new ones are formed. The chores are shared and decisions made together. African Americans pioneered this idea in our society and this idea was used against African Americans during the civil rights movement. It’s interesting how new or different cultures from our own can be seen as anything more than just that. There are so many parallels between each class. The one thing all of these classes have in common is their ability to adapt, survive, and carry on a lineage. The preservation of family and success for future generations seems to be key no matter the motivation.
I found this reading to be incredibly fascinating. It’s amazing to me the coloration between economic status and the culture it creates. The media portrays all the socio-economic differences all the time. As Alutte puts it “are so pervasive they sometimes become invisible”. Even though this is an issue dealt with on a daily level, because of that I never gave much thought to it. Even the idea that there are so many different socio-economic classes is surprising to me. I never knew the differences between classes could be so decisive in terms of how a family operates. I always bunched up working and middle class and I never really picked apart the differences between African American middle class and White middle class. To me they were somewhat different, that’s about all I knew. I thought it was almost comical how I see the differences every day through media and personal experiences but this essay made me look at the issue with new eyes.
The fact that very little research has been done on the upper class surprised me greatly, I would expect that they would be well researched. It was strange that their culture seemed so secretive. It was even more surprising to learn the importance of family name, marriage, and social accountability. It reminds me of the way royalty would behave. The social parties to encourage marriage amongst the children of the elite and the idea of preservation of the family estate contradicted the way I viewed the upper class. I assumed they had an endless supply of money and spent it that way. I also found the difference between white middle class and black middle class intriguing. The white middle class encourage their children to “fallow their hearts” so to speak and that their success is their own. On the flip side, African Americans feel that their success is not just their own, but their entire race’s success. The middle class brought an image to my head of one of those men at the airport, cell phone to the ear, laptop in one hand, brief case in the other. The working class seemed to be the one I think of when I think of the All American family. The idea of marrying for love, and separating work and home, It seems Ideal to me.
The immigration socio-economic group seems to be the one with the most controversy surrounding it. It is incredible how the entire familiar culture of Mexican-American immigrants is shifted. The way the husband began to do everything on his own and the need for the wife to become the leader of the home reminded me of military home life. While dad is out on duty, mom is in charge. While dad is gone he takes care of himself. The gender and familiar rolls become unclear and so new ones are formed. The chores are shared and decisions made together. African Americans pioneered this idea in our society and this idea was used against African Americans during the civil rights movement. It’s interesting how new or different cultures from our own can be seen as anything more than just that. There are so many parallels between each class. The one thing all of these classes have in common is their ability to adapt, survive, and carry on a lineage. The preservation of family and success for future generations seems to be key no matter the motivation.
What We Really Miss About the 1950's
What We Really Miss About the 1950’s was a very different analysis of the 1950’s. Stephanie Coontz points out the things we actually miss about the 50’s while shedding some light on some of the myths concerning the social status of America. I admit that when I first began reading this essay, part of me wondered what there was not to miss about this decade. It seemed like such a simple time. Images of immaculate cookie cutter homes in quiet suburban neighbor hoods came to my mind. Shows like Leave it to Beaver depict what I imagined every home being like. Before reading this essay I felt the same sense of nostalgia Coontz writes about most American’s feeling. Stephanie Coontz points out that it really was a good time for a lot of Americans. It was a time of change and prosperity in the face of all the social problems of the 30’s and 40’s. She also points out that not everything of the 1950’s was all that we tend to think it was.
I was shocked to learn, for example, that “teenage birth rates were almost twice as high in 1957 as in the 1990’s”. Although Coontz points out that most of those births were between married couples and that having a baby instead of furthering a career wouldn’t make life as difficult as it would today. This is probably because there were a lot more jobs available for people without a college degree. There were much clearer gender/familiar rolls. This on one hand made for less complexity amongst families. The perfect nuclear family where the father of the house hold was the bread winner, while the woman was the perfect little home maker. On the other hand, this put a lot of pressure on both men and women to fit into a mold. This The idea of fitting into this social norm was intensified by the influence of TV shows like Leave It to Beaver and Father Know Best. These TV shows acted, as Coontz puts it, like “advertisements, etiquette manuals, and how-to lessons”. This idea was also brought up in our last reading where Gary Soto tried to get his family to behave like the family depicted on Father Knows Best. These families were usually white, wealthy, and perfect. No one expected their family to act like the families from these sitcoms but they were what people would often compare themselves and others too. This idea of keeping up with the Jones’s kept the neighborhoods beautiful and seemed to keep families together. After all divorce rates were low and there were a lot of babies being born. The question is, did these families stay together for the right reasons?
The 50’s aren’t considered such a happy period for nothing. There were indeed a lot of things that were happening then we wouldn’t love to have now. It was a time when families stayed together, when work productivity lead to better pay; it was a time when a person did not have to go to a college to be successful. On the flip side, It was also a time of inequality, A time when peace and prosperity was achieved by discrimination and ignorance. Stephanie Coontz reminds us that things weren’t quite as perfect as they seemed.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
A little about myself
So, I'm Jeanna Brewer. I was born and raised in Washington State. I moved to St. George 2 years ago to live with my sister. She was having health issues and I needed a fresh start. It seems to have worked out well for the both of us. Soon after moving to St. George I found my job at the old hospital, where I still work as a phlebotomist (the person who draws your blood). I love my job, It's got all the satisfaction and challenges I can handle. My co-workers are fun and interesting people who are quick to smile, even on the bad days. Something you need when the job gets tough and somedays it can be really, really, tough. I was just married this past march to my amazing husband, Dan Brewer. He and I met at Lip Trix, the skate shop he works at. He found me a new pair of snowboarding boots and a husband. We spend a mojority of our time out doors. We do everything from hiking and biking to snow boarding and skate boarding. If we arent out exploring or boarding we are with my nephews, trying hard not to act our age. Im slowly working my way through my prereqs for nursing. Maybe someday, when I finally finish school, we plan to settle in Colorado. I guess you could say that's me in a nutshell. This class promises to be a challenge but I'm excited. It will be interesting to learn about everyone in the class and hear all the different veiws we have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
