The Stories We Tell

         

As I was browsing about the internet, I stumbled upon an article stating that a shocking 85,000 United States war veterans received medical treatments for sexual abuse trauma in 2012. However, only a few days ago did the Pentagon finally admit to the problem of sexual abuse in the military. This has really made me think about the stories that people tell in the United States. American soldiers fight for our country to protect our rights and freedom, however, the untold story of the US military is the military's problems with sexual abuse. While it does seem to make sense why the government would keep quiet about an embarrassing problem, it does make you think about how stories are told.

        How we portray ourselves in the stories we tell is very important and telling, and most of the time we are heroes of the stories we tell. This theme of being heroes in our own stories is even present in Robert Schenkkan's The Kentucky Cycle. When JT Wells, a storyteller, come to visit the Rowen's land, he reveals to Mary Anne that "everybody got his stories" , and when she contests that we do not  make ourselves, and explains that we tell the truth. JT responds, " And he's the son of heroes, right?". It is interesting that, even in a play staged in 1890, there is evidence that back then even that we are our own heroes of the stories we tell. 

So, what do you think? Do you think we portray ourselves as the hero of our own story? Why or why not?

Monstato: Frankenfood or Not?

        Just yesterday, thousands and thousands of people took the streets to protest Monsanto, a controversial agricultural company in genetically modified seeds. Organizers said the protest "March Against Monsanto" was held in 52 countries and 436 cities, including here in Chicago. This worldwide protest was done to not only raise and spread awareness about genetically modified foods and the harmful effects of these foods, but also to protect our food supply, support local farmers, and to bring accountability to those responsible for genetically modified foods (MarchAgainstMonsanto). 
      Monsanto produces genetically modified seeds, which grow into crops that are engineered to withstand insecticides and herbicides while improving crop yields, increasing global food supply, and adding nutritional benefits and improving crop yields (NY Daily). Proponents of Monsanto say that three broad categories benefit from Monsanto and genetically modified food: farmers, processors, and consumers. Using Monsanto products and genetically modified foods benefits farmers because it increases productivity and reduces cost by increasing the yield of the farmer's crop, improving crop protection from insects and disease, and increasing crops' tolerance to heat, drought, and other environmental factors. Monsanto products also help processors because by having more crops, it improves the quality and content of animal feed, food, and energy sources. Monsanto also benefits consumers because there are health advantages such as increased protein and healthier oils (Monsanto). However, although this product is beneficial, it also is very controversial. 
     There are thousands of people across the nation and the world who are against genetically engineering seeds and crops because of the many risks that it entails. Because GMO's contains DNA that is alters, its introduces allergens and toxins to foods as well as make crops resistant to antibiotics. Although many crops are genetically modified, there are still crops that do not use genetically modified seeds.  This can pose a problem because if genetically modified seeds and  non-genetically modified seeds are mixed because it can lead to contamination of organic crops. 
Another reason there is a controversy with genetically modified seeds is the health risks. Although Monsanto claims that all of their genetically modified crops are safe, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine has warned consumers of "serious health risks" as indicated by an animal study that measures the effects of genetically modified foods.

       So, what do you think about Monsanto and genetically modified foods.  Should farmers continue to use genetically modified foods, or should people continue there protests to stop genetically modified products? Why or why not? 

What To Do About Affirmative Action

      Whether applying to college or for a job, there is always the thought, “wouldn’t it be nice if there were a way I could make myself more attractive to the admissions department of my top-choice college or the employer of my dream job?”.  That’s what Abigail Fisher thought. Back in 2008, she applied to the University of Texas at Austin. But what kept her out? In her opinion, it was the fact that she’s white, and she is now headed to the Supreme Court.

         Fisher, a white suburban Houston student, asserts that she was wrongly rejected by UT while minority students with similar grades and test scores were admitted, and only because of affirmative action. Affirmative action refers to policies that take into consideration factors such as race in order to benefit  underrepresented groups with a history of discrimination in areas of employment, education, and business. Fisher argues that affirmative action is the reason she was not accepted into UT, and her case is now going to be decided by the Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas.  

          This issue brings up the controversy of whether affirmative action policies should continue. It's a divisive topic because many believe America has progressed so that we've become a "color-blind" society. Some would say that such policies like affirmative action are bad for democracy because they encourage divisions along lines drawn by discriminatory rules, thereby replacing old injustices with new ones and dividing our society rather than uniting it. It may be deceiving that we, the United States, are no longer discriminatory towards minorities races, especially if by 2043, the US is projected to become a majority-minority nation (US Census).  But have we really progressed? Although we made history five years ago by electing our first African American president, I believe racial discrimination is still very evident in the United States today, and affirmative action should continue to be implemented because of our nation’s continued racist ways. I think a diverse university, like UT, offers a better education to all its students, so I contend that UT is right to consider race a factor in admissions. However, Fisher and others would disagree. What are your thoughts? Do you think that America has really progressed enough so that policies like affirmative action are no longer necessary? Why or why not?

Our Veterans and Soldiers

Just recently, I was going about my usual business catching up on one of my favorite tv shows, Grey’s Anatomy. However, I was  very surprised when, in one of the scenes, a doctor had a post-traumatic stress disorder episode and began choking a woman. Not only was this shocking and sad to see, but it got me thinking about how evident post-traumatic stress disorder is in our soldiers and veterans today. The statistics I found were way  more shocking and unbelievable than the scenes from Grey’s Anatomy.
         Post-traumatic stress disorder is an anxiety disorder that normally follows when one experiences a traumatic event. Symptoms of this disorder include recurring visual nightmares about these traumatic events, hesitation in discussing these tragic events, and difficulty in completing and taking part in usual daily activities and tasks ( Do Something). This disorder can very often lead to serious problems, including death. According to a report from the United  States Department of Veteran Affairs, every sixty-five minutes a military veteran commits suicide. Unfortunately, not only is it former United States military, but there are also 349 active duty personnel suicides.; that breaks down to almost one suicide a day (Forbes)      This proves to be a very crucial issue, with, after a decade in war, soldier suicides outnumber combat deaths. But what can we do to stop this phenomenon from occuring? These are our American soldiers who are fighting for our freedom, but why aren’t we doing more to help our current soldiers and veterans with post traumatic stress disorder? What are ways in which we, as citizens of the United States, can raise awareness of this growing problem?  After reading about some ways that we can help stop this phenomenon from happening, what do you think would be the best way to go about it?

Freedom of the Press?

Recently, Obama and the White House have been in hot water over recent scandals with Benghazi, the IRS, and the Associated Press. The most striking of these scandals, to me, is the Justice Department compromising the United States’ First Amendment right and spying on the Associated Press. The Department of Justice secretly obtained two months worth of telephone records of Associated Press journalists and more than twenty separate phone lines, a shocking amount of surveillance and spying between the interactions of reporters and anonymous sources, some being from the White House. This scandal is a clear violation of the First Amendment, and affects the United States’ public and t he news we receive. The line between free press and national security is very delicate, established on trust and expectations that both sides will behave in a certain way. However, because the government went behind the backs of the Associated Press, the trust between the press and national security will be hard to maintain and rebuild, and the public will therefore suffer.

Whenever the Government violates an Amendment, it should be taken very seriously, but there has not been too much has been done since this scandal has surfaced. So, what should we do as citizens of the United States when the Government violates our Constitutional rights?

Will It Ever Stop?

          Just yesterday, nineteen people were injured in a New Orleans Mother's day parade. The victims include ten men, seven women, and two children, a boy and a girl. As of now, no one has been arrested for the shootings, but according to the police, there were three suspects running away from the scene of the crime. Despite recent gun violence in the United States, including the Aurora movie shooting,the Sikh temple shooting, the Sandy Hook School Shooting, and the list goes on and on. Because of these recent shootings, there has been a lot of talk throughout the government and social media about gun control and implementing new gun laws (you can read more about this in an older blog post I wrote here). However, despite recents talks about gun control, mass gun violence still continues, so what more can we, the united states, do to help stop these tragedies?

A picture from CNN of the New Orleans Shooting

One possibility is heightening the level of responsibility for the gun seller and gun purchaser of the weapon. In a recent study, it was found that 83% of felons possessing guns did not buy a handgun or obtain a handgun legally, but instead obtained it in an illegal manner, such as the secondary market or theft (gun laws). Although it is difficult to prevent gun theft, by heightening the level of responsibility for a gun seller or purchaser, it would make it less likely for a gun to makes its way into an illegal market. Ways of heightening owner responsibility of a gun and the responsibility of selling a gun would be to make, for example, a legal gun owner, who sells a firearm to someone who should not have it, help accountable for the crime that buyer may commit. Similar to someone selling a firearm to someone who should not have it, a gun owner who legally carries weapons should also be held accountable if they give a gun to someone without a license and commit a crime. Although implementing laws that would make gun buyers and sellers more responsible for their guns may seem insignificant, small steps towards controlling illegal gun ownership is vital in stopping mass gun violence. In what other ways do you think gun violence could be prevented? Do you think that establishing new laws that would make gun owners and sellers more responsible for their guns would be beneficial towards preventing mass gun violence tragedies like the one today in New Orleans? Why or why not?

A slippery slope?

Recently, I came across an article on Huffington Post that stated one of the Boston marathon terrorist suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev would not be read his Miranda rights. This shocked and immediately interested me because of how this relates to my junior theme topic of wrongful convictions. Miranda rights are the rights stated to a suspect after their arrest and utilized by law enforcement to make a suspect aware of their rights as a US citizen (mirandarights.org). In many cases of wrongful convictions, innocent adults and children are convicted of crimes they have not committed because they either are not read there Miranda rights or do not understand their Miranda rights. However, in the case of Dzhokhar Tsarvaev, he will not be read his Miranda rights because because the government is invoking a public safety exception. A public safety exception is when the police can interrogate a suspect without offering him or her the benefit of their Miranda rights if he or she could have information that is urgent for the safety of the public. Although it may seem strange to say that a terrorist suspect should be read their Miranda rights, it does make you think about the power the government in regards to your rights as a United States citizen.

A photograph of Dzhokar Tsarnaev

It is completely understandable why Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not be read his Miranda rights because of the extreme danger he put thousands of people in during the Boston marathon and the chase to capture him, but it raises the question on how much control the government has in choosing who gets read their Miranda rights. If the United State government can take away the rights of  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, why wouldn’t the government take away any of our rights at any point? This controversy has really made me think long and hard about our rights as citizens in the United States and still has me switching viewpoints whenever I stop to think about it. On one end, the government is protecting our safety, however on the other end, the government is taking away the rights of people. Also, once an exception has been made, the government will try to broaden the exception because of political pressure and general hysteria, so will the public safety exception start a slippery slope? So, should the United States government continue to implement the public safety exception to protect the public immediate danger from bombing suspects like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?

What Do We Do?

A photograph from Duke Law of Lamonte Armstrong and his
legal team that helped free him. 

How would you feel if you spent years locked away in a prison cell for a crime you were innocent of committing? Confused, lost, and a little bit fearful of the unknown, just as Lamonte Armstrong felt? Well, Armstrong no longer has to feel that way. Just last July, Lamonte Armstrong was released from prison after being locked up for seventeen years.  In 1998, Armstrong was wrongfully convicted of murdering a university professor after she was found dead in her Greensboro home. Armstrong maintained his innocent throughout the trial-- from the time the police first interviewed him to the his guilty verdict. ONe of the main pieces of evidence against Armstrong was an informant testimony. However, just six years later, the informant himself was charged with a murder (Duke Law). But what can our American criminal justice system do to help stop innocent people like Lamonte Armstrong being wrongly convicted and incarcerated for years? Well, it turns out there are a lot of  simple changes that could potentially help solve the problem. 
       Armstrong's main piece of evidence against him was the informant testimony, however, rarely do people falsely testify without getting something in return; although there are many motivations, most often they do so for money.  Simply not offering compensation an informant's testimony can drastically reduce wrongful convictions caused by false informant testimonies. Another simple change the double-blind administration of police lineups would help prevent false eyewitness identification. A double-blind police lineup is when neither the administrator nor the witness knows the identity of the suspect, and so the administrator cannot influence the witness in any way (National Institute of Justice). Solutions to the problems do ont stop here. There are hundreds of different ways in which our American criminal justice system can reduce the number of wrongful convictions, but why isn't our American criminal justice system implementing these simple changes?

No Sympathy for the Victim

       A judge announced on Sunday that two high school football players, Trent Mays and Ma'lik Richmond, were found guilty in juvenile court of raping a sixteen year old girl at a party in August. The boys were sentenced to a minimum of one year in juvenile detention, but a possibility to stay in detention until the age of 21.The rape case has brought international attention to the perpetrators of the crime and the small city of 18,000. But what about the victim?

        On Sunday, just minutes after the final verdict of the Steubenville rape case, CNN broadcasted a controversial coverage of the rape case. CNN anchor Candy Crowley and Poppy Harlow, to many observers, seemed to be sympathizing with the perpetrators. Anything about the victim? Nope, neither of the broadcasters even mentioned the emotional tolls the victim has and will face because of her rape. Harlow even went so far to say, "It was incredibly emotional, incredibly difficult even for an outsider like me to watch what happened as these two young men that had such promising futures — star football players, very good students — we literally watched as, they believe, their life fell apart". The way that Harlow describes that the perpetrators lives "fell apart" suggests that the perpetrators are almost the victims in the case, and that they had no control about what was happening to them. However, this is not the case at all. It was their actions which caused them to be put in the situation they are in now.  The CNN reporters have been slammed for their coverage and comments on the Steubenville rape case, with thousands of people signing an online petition demanding an apology from the reporters. This recent news coverage has got me thinking, why are so many people talking about the perpetrators of this crime and not the victim? What does this say about our American society?

        Dr. Jeffrey Gardere, a clinical psychologist at New York’s Touro College offered one theory as to why so many people stand behind the rapists and not their victim. Sexism. Dr. Gardere argues that there are people sympathizing with the perpetrators of the crime because they believe that she is somehow at fault. Gardere believes that people think this way because of the society that we have been brought up in. Gardere suspects that, although our society has made strides to overcoming sexism, we still have a lot of sexist thinking that our society must overcome. However, do you believe what Dr. Gardere argues is the real reason why people, like CNN reporters Candy Crowley and Poppy Harlow, are empathizing with the perpetrators of this attack? Do you believe we still live in a sexist society? Why or why not?

Real-Time Bidding and Our Future

A graph showing an advertiser's benefits of using real-time bidding  

    Have you ever been on Facebook or Twitter and an advertisement pops up that you are actually interested in? Well, you can thank real-time bidding for that. Real-time bidding is a somewhat new advertising technique where online advertisements are bought and sold. For example, an Internet user spends a lot of time browsing the web on financial web sites. When that user uses the internet, a program tracks what types of thing the user searches for and what type of websites he or she visits, which compiles into his or her user profile. When the user visits a site with real-time bidding (RTB), the RTB system matches the user profile with many advertisers and they bid on the ad, with the highest bidder winning. Everyday, thousands and thousands of people are using the Internet everyday, and with this new 

advertising technique, it has benefitted advertisers very much. 

    But, what does this say about society and where we are heading in terms of technology? With real-time bidding now becoming a part of our everyday lives on the Internet, it shows that, as a society, we are moving more and more towards a digital world. How do you think this new advertising technique will affect the United States? Do you think real-time bidding will be beneficial for consumers, or do you think that it will have a negative effect on consumers because there, at times, can be too much information (and not always correct information) about the consumer?

No Fracking Way

A picture of fracking protesters

What’s not to love about an energy source that provides cost savings for customers, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and the potential for 2.7 million jobs?  The natural gas boom has arrived.  America is sitting on an enormous supply of natural gas, which is important as we strive to be energy-independent. If the story stopped there, it would easy to be an unapologetic proponent of natural gas.  The problem is the extraction.  Hydraulic fracturing, known as “fracking,” involves the high-pressure pumping of millions of gallons of water, sand, and chemicals deep into shale to draw out pockets of natural gas.  That might not sound so bad at first... if you don’t stop to think about it.  Yes, it’s the thinking that will get you every time, isn’t it?  When I first heard that fracking was beginning in Illinois, I wanted to do some research.  What I discovered was shocking.
The problem boils down to water and chemicals.  First, fracking uses an excessive amount of water. In 2011, the EPA reported that fracking the 35,000 wells in the U.S. uses 70 to 140 billion gallons of water each year, which is equivalent to the annual water consumption of 40 to 80 cities each with a population of 50,000. Because of climate change, water is becoming scarce. (The drought has even affected our crops. To read more about it click here for a link to a previous blog of mine).  Although what is pumped through the shale is mostly water, it also contains nasty chemicals, which could potentially get into aquifers and contaminate water supply.
      But what got us, the United States, to this point of putting our environment in danger for natural gas? Being wasteful, of course. If you are like almost every American, you keep water running while brushing your teeth; you keep the lights on when you leave a room. In short, you just assume that there is always more water or electricity, right? The United States is a country that consumes and wastes a lot of natural resources, especially fossil fuels and water. (A shocking statistic from the Environmental Protection Agency even states that leaks alone account for an average of 10,000 gallons of water wasted per household a year). This wastefulness has led the U.S. to resort to processes like hydraulic fracturing to fulfill our demand for cheap energy. So, what does this problem say about our American societal values? Why do we put our own needs before the environment's needs? 

Stranded at Sea

Just a month ago, the Carnival Triumph experienced major problems aboard their ship after a fire disable the engines, leaving 3,000 passengers and 1,000 crew members stranded at sea for four days without toilets or washing facilities. But that has not been the last of Carnival’s ship troubles. Last Saturday, the Carnival Elation had to be escorted by a tug-boat because of a problem with its steering system. Four days later on Wednesday, the Carnival Dream encountered a technical issue involving a malfunction of the ship’s backup emergency diesel generator. And today, the Carnival Legend just returned to its Tampa port after experiencing problems that affected its travel, and stopping passengers from visiting the Grand Cayman Islands. 
But why are situations like these happening aboard cruise ships? Can these dangerous situations be avoided?

As seen in the graph to the right, the Cruising industry has been growing around the world, with more people going on cruise ships today more than ever before. In a recent study from the Cruise Line Association, the cruise line industry is responsible for the generation of $40.4 billion dollars. Even with so much money in the industry, cruise liners are still experiencing many technical difficulties that put passengers in danger in the middle of the ocean. But why can’t big cruise liners, like Carnival, use a portion of their earnings to make cruise ships safer for their passengers? Do you think that big cruise liners, like Carnival, should make their ships safer by using a portion of their earnings to make their ships safer?

"Spring" Ahead

        Just a few days ago, most of the world turned their clocks one hour ahead for daylight savings. However, I expect most people, just like me, struggled waking up the next morning. Who knew losing just one hour could do that to you? Although it is just one hour most of the world gains or loses each spring and fall, this practice has been a controversial topic debated by both by the general public and politicians alike.
       Daylight savings was introduced by the Europeans during World War I, and first implemented in the United States in 1918. The original idea of daylight savings is that more hours of daylight would conserved more coal for the war. This also meant that communities could be more productive because people could work longer, and when work was done it was still bright enough to run errands and stimulate the economy. Experts, like Dr. David Prerau, argue that daylight saving today still allows our society to work more productively. However, others claim that daylight saving is practically useless, with barely any data showing that daylight savings reduces energy. Other studies even show that daylight savings can be damaging to your health. A recen study from the University of Alabama in Birmingham says that there is a 10 percent increase in the risk of having a heart attack when your sleep schedule is disrupted for even just an hour. 
      So, what do you think about daylight savings time? Do you think that we should stick with tradition and keep daylight savings or not have daylight savings? Why or why not?

Technology in the Classroom

In almost every classroom at New Trier, you are bound to see a student with an iPad sitting on their desk in front of them. With iPads becoming more prevalent throughout New Trier, I wonder, what do they do to help us students? Is there much of a difference then using traditional teaching materials, like pencils, paper, and textbooks?

           Some experts argue that using new technology in school prepares students for a technological future. With technology becoming a part of everyday life, it is very important for students to learn how to use it. By using technology in the classroom, students in the future who used technology will be able to enter the workforce with experience with technology, where knowledge of technology is essential for success. Proponents of technology in classrooms also believe that by embracing digital devices, such as laptops and iPads, classrooms around the country and the globe can connect to one another very easily to share insights and boost learning while gaining communications skills with people they normally would never interact with. Access to the internet with new technology enables students to a greater range of resources, with online databases such as Proquest and Abc-Clio,than would otherwise be available. Although technology does have its benefits, others do not believe technology should be added into schools. 

While some experts and students embrace technology in the classroom, others argue that the traditional educational route is more effective. For example, the Association of Waldrof Education in North America believes that hands- on experiences, like music, dance, and writing, is more effective because they believe the experience allows students to develop their intellectual and emotional capacities. Not only do some experts believe that hands-on experiences are more effective, but others believe that using technology  in the classroom makes for a very big distraction. In a recent survey (http://tablets-textbooks.procon.org/)  87% of Elementary and Middle school teachers believe that digital technologies are creating an easily distracted generation with short attention spans. Even though there are negatives to using technology in the classroom, technology is becoming more and more of a part of our daily lives. 

Although there are many pros and cons to using technology in the classroom, technology is being used in many schools today. But how will this new technology in schools shape our future? Do you think that using more technology in school will have positive or negative effects on students? Does technology help or hinder students?

Venezuela and the United States—What is their future?

      Hugo Chávez , one of the most visible, vocal and controversial leaders in Latin America, was President of Venezuela from 1999 until his recent death on March 5^th.  To his proponents, Chávez was seen as a hero, having established government programs to combat poverty rates and illiteracy. But to his opponents, he was seen as a dictator who mismanaged the country’s vast oil wealth and allowed inflation and crime to spiral out of control. The United States and Hugo Chávez did not have good relation, with Chávez once referring to the United States as “a bad person,”“an assassin” and “a violent invader.” 

       During Bush’s presidency, relations between the United States and Venezuela were especially tense. Chávez most famously opposed George W. Bush, the antithesis of his beliefs. Perhaps most famously, Chavez called George W. Bush the devil and claimed the U.S. president left a sulfur smell around the U.N. speakers’ podium. .Relations worsened when Chávez accused the Bush administration of "fighting terror with terror" during the war in Afghanistan after 11 September 2001. Even after George W. Bush's presidency, contentious relations still continue. 

A photo of Chávez from New York Times

In September 2008, Venezuela broke off diplomatic relations. However, relations were reestablished under President Barack Obama in June 2009. But despite Venezuela's stated desire for improved relations with the U.S. and its appeals for mutual respect, tensions between both nations are still high because of the United States' foreign policy under both Bush and Obama.

     However, Chávez's recent death sparks questions about the future of Venezuela and also the relations between Venezuela and the United States. Will Chávez's death have any impact on the United States and its relations with Venezuela?

Without Chávez's socialist control, can the United States begin to improve their relations with Venezuela? 

Finally Banning Slavery?

       148 years after the 13^th Amendment was ratified by most states in the US, lawmakers in the Mississippi watched the movie “Lincoln”. After seeing the movie, these lawmakers looked up historical accounts of Mississippi’s 13^th amendment. Lawmakers soon realized that the amendment was ratified after three-fourths of the states backed it in 1865. However, Mississippi was among the states that rejected the 13^th amendment. In 1995 lawmakers voted to get the amendment ratified. But the problem was the state never sent official word to the U.S. archivist, and therefore the ratification was never recorded.  

     How can we avoid situations like this in the future? Is it too hard to ratify the constitution in the United States? How can we, the United States, make it so important amendments, like the 13^th amendment, is ratified by all states?

How do Super Bowl Ads Define Us?

I am always very excited to watch the commercials, sometimes even more excited than I am to watch the game (unless, of course, the bears are playing in the game). In the past, I haven’t paid much attention to each commercial, but this year was different. I looked at each commercial with a different perspective than normal and was surprised at what I noticed.

The commercials, as usual, were very entertaining. However, the types of products were advertised was very interesting to me. Most of the commercials advertised are for beer, cars, and chips. So, what does that say about our society as a whole?

Take for example this Godaddy.com (To watch click here)  commercial with Bar Refaeli. Immediately, this commercial grabs the attention of millions of viewers by using Bar Refaeli as the star of the commercial, a very “desirable” woman. Even more so, the commercial shows Refaeli passionately kissing a “nerd”.  This commercial sparked a ton of reactions on twitter and other social media websites. But, what does this say about the United States? That we are a sex-driven culture?

           Another example is the Audi Commercial, which we recently discussed in our American Studies Class. (To watch click here) The commercial shows an unhappy teenage boy who has to go to prom alone, but is totally transformed when the dad gives him keys to his new Audi. With the Audi, the boy excretes confidence, and walks into prom and “steals a kiss” from the prom queen. Stop. Right there. Is this commercial promoting that if you have a fancy car, you can “steal” a kiss from an attractive girl, that, because you have an expensive car, that you have the power to take something from a woman? The commercial continues when the boy drives home from prom, a black eye that was given to him by the prom king, letting out a loud scream, and ending with blackness and the caption “ Bravery is what defines us”. But, what does that mean?What does this say about American culture? That cars are what define us? That cars are what makes us brave?

        How do you think Super Bowl Ads define us, the United States? Do you think, after close scrutiny, super bowl ads promote positive or negative messages?

Final Exam: 400 Years Later

         The contemporary artifact, Natasha Trethewey’s, “Kitchen Maid with Supper at Emmaus, or the Mulata” addresses a common theme from American Studies: the dehumanizing effect of slavery. Trethewey, a mulatto herself, bases her poem on a 1619 painting by Diego Valazquez, the year that enslaved people came to America for the first time. 

         Throughout the poem, Trethewey compares the Maid to kitchen objects. When Trethewey describes the Maid, she says, “She is the stack of bowls”. It is very interesting that she uses the metaphor to describe the maid as a bowl, dehumanizing the Maid by comparing her to an object. A bowl is an inconsequential item that’s purpose it to serve people. By comparing the maid and the bowl, it shows that maid’s sole purpose it to serve. Throughout the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Douglass describes multiple instances where he feels dehumanized. Similar to how the Maid was compared to a bowl, Douglass writes of a time when he is being evaluated as property and “ranked with horses, sheep, and swine” (Douglass 27). By using the word “ranked”, Douglass illustrates that he is being seen as an equal to animals. Even in the contemporary poem today, the Maid is being dehumanized by being compared to a bowl, as Douglass was being dehumanized by being ranked with dirty animals, like swine. Enslaved people were not only dehumanized, but stripped from their families: “The threat of sale, which disrupted family ties, was perhaps the most powerful disciplinary weapon” (Foner 399). The word “family” is interesting here because, not only is Foner referring to blood family, but also to the close bond of enslaved people on plantation. It is seen in Trethewey’s poem that she is alone because there is only a small shadow behind her, and no reference to any other person. Not only does Trethewey’s poem connect to the dehumanization and loneliness that Frederick Douglass constantly felt throughout his life, but it also connects to Aunt Jemima and the “happy” slave SAMBO.

        Trethewey writes, “She is the echo of Jesus at table, framed in the scene behind her white corona”. A corona is a bright, light halo. It is intriguing that Trethewey describes her with a corona because, by conflating the maid’s cap with Jesus’s corona, it puts the maid in a positive light, even though the Maid lives a bitter life. Similar to the Maid, Aunt Jemima, a pancake ad figure, was also put in a positive light. Aunt Jemima was seen across the country and can be described as “heavy set, wears a bandana, and smiling in every Aunt Jemima product” (Anna Rowe voicethread). Although Aunt Jemima was seen smiling on every product, it was hinted by the pancake company that she was a slave laborer, therefore hinting eerie similarities to SAMBO, the supposed “happy” and “thankful” slave. By stating that Aunt Jemima was seen “smiling” in every photograph, it portrays her as being happy, even though the life of an enslaved person was extremely tough. 

       So, why is Natasha Trethewey writing a poem based on a painting nearly 400 years old? Trethewey’s poetry echoes her life experiences, and this specific poem reflects on discrimination and segregation she has experienced throughout her life growing up in Mississippi. Even after the passed 13th Amendment, Deconstruction, and the Civil Rights Movement, discrimination towards African-Americans still lingers in the United States today. As we have discussed in American Studies we, the United States as a country, have the belief that we are always improving. But how far have we really progressed if racial discrimination can still be seen in our country today, almost 400 years after the first slaves were brought to America?

The Effects of a Nasty Flu Season

It’s that time of year again, but it came five weeks early. The flu season is back, and causing problems for thousands of people across the country. On Monday, 11 Illinois hospitals had to go on hospital bypass status, meaning they could not handle any more patients without life-threatening illnesses, said Melaney Arnold, spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Public Health. In Boston, mayor Thomas Menino has just declared a state of emergency in his city, with eighteen deaths across the state from the flu. Although the flu may seem harmless to everything but a human being, it isn’t.

http://www.laserdentistmichigan.com/images/
Cartoon-of-Cold-and-Flu1.jpg

According to the Center for Disease Control, average seasonal flu outbreaks costs U.S. employers $10.4 billion in direct costs of hospitalization and outpatient, not including the lost productivity of the sick employee. With this statistic, it begs the question, what will happen to the economy if the flu season worsens? A major flu outbreak in the United States could put a lot of strain on the already struggling U.S. economy .

If the United States were to experience a pandemic across the country, researchers are the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calculate that deaths in the United States could reach 207,000 people, and could cost the economy up to $166 billion, or about 1.5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This could hurt the entire country as a whole as well as particularly impacting states with high levels of tourism and entertainment the most. During health pandemics, thousands of people choose to stay at home rather than expose themselves to germs at highly populated places, like airports, train stations and big cities.

So, is there anything the United States can do to stop the widespread spread of the flu? Can the United States do anything to prepare the economy if this flu season turns into a pandemic? 

Performance-Enhancing Drugs and the MLB

From Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens to Manny Ramirez and Marlon Byrd, and even speculation of our own former Chicago Cubs player Sammy Sosa, performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball has been prevalent in baseball for many years since the 1980’s. Although there were many players who used drugs throughout the nineties, anti-doping policies were not implemented into the MLB until 2003. 

wisegeek.org

Today, the MLB and the players union reached an agreement to add random, in-season human blood and testosterone testing. The new testing will create extensive profiles to establish a player's baseline testosterone level and increase its ability to detect the use of testosterone. Although the new testing is very beneficial to many MLB players and fans that want a fair game, will the testing really stop players from using performance-enhancing drugs? 

Just one year after anti-doping policies were introduced to the MLB, many baseball players continued to find ways to use performance-enhancing drugs with the help of player unions.  In 2004, George Mitchell, and American businessman, made it public that he was concerned that the players union was give warnings of upcoming random drugs tests, allowing the players to stop the use of the drugs before the test and therefore passing the tests. The players union was not allowed to do this and broke an agreement they made with the MLB. While protecting the dirty players, the union essentially casted off the players who chose to remain clean. 

Looking at what has happened in the past with player unions telling players when there are testings, do you think the addition blood tests and enhanced technology will really make a difference in the use of performance-enhancing drugs throughout the MLB? Why or why not?