The Wealth of Information and Students

In this age of social media and wealth of information we are drown in nonsense. Everyday we are flooded with articles on how to impress the other sex and the most recent stupid thing President Trump has tweeted. In the Brave New World, Aldous Huxley discussed his concern that "there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one." and that "the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance". In this new age we see this coming to pass. Most highschoolers nowadays won't even pick up a book, and if they're forced to then Sparknotes and audio books are the way to feed this information into their brains. We've lost all meaning of learning information for ourselves, as we can Google our homework and and memorize without understanding. Students are contributing to dumbing themselves down. With the rise of drama YouTube channels and the lust for pleasure, we are leading to self oppression by limiting the information we feed ourselves. I came into Troy High being mocked for picking up a book instead of texting, for loving history, and for actually having to study for my grades. For students it's about the grade and not about learning. When I came to school, a girl approached me and gave me some "pointers". 1. Sparknotes is your bestfriend, 2. everything is on Google, and 3. don't eat the school lunches. But no, you can't gain experience from Sparknotes, you can't learn a new perspective or gain a wealth of information. You can't Google your way to a brain, you can't gain intelligence from not doing work yourself. We are attracted to ease, to having that extra second to do whatever it is that we do. Ease gets you nowhere, it's challenging yourself that helps sharpen you and make it so you don't drown in this "sea of irrelevance." 

censored

When the announcements played as I sat in Physics, I was shocked when a video was played with school faculty and students pledging to end "The R Word". I understand why people would want this medical term to be avoided, why they would feel offended, and why they'd pledge to stop saying it. Ultimately, they don't want students to be hurt or offended, and they took a drastic measure to avoid this. So drastic, that my peers have been pressured to pledge to put an end to a word just based off of how others feel. Now, while they may not frequently use this word, they now must tiptoe around their vocabulary and make sure that what they say is okay to everyone else. The simple "superman" to "superperson" as seen in The Word Police is something that must be carefully crafted as not to hurt anyone. Now, politically correct words are usually targeted at schools and the youth, such as seen through this announcement video. If the children have politically correct words, perhaps they'll grow into adults that won't offend one another? By attempting to water down the world around us, we overlook intent and focus on restricting speech. What people say isn't significant, it is the actions that people take. Last year as I prepared a piece for the Cranbrook gallery, I had been bouncing ideas off my mom as to what I should create. One morning at 1am my mom woke me up to an idea that had come to her in the night. She presented a sketch of a naked woman standing with her arms and legs apart. Naturally, this startled me, my mom being a Baptist woman, but what startled me more was that the word "censored" was placed somewhere unexpected. The word censored was placed over the womans mouth. Words are held to a higher standard than actions. It is our words that truly are censored, just look at YouTubes recent policy to ban the swearing of content creators. We carefully tiptoe around using offensive diction. We punish children for saying words or phrases that culture collectively deems as bad due to an unofficial ranking of how offensive it is. But, censorship causes us to restrict what we think, and to stifle original thought. Say what you will and take responsibility if you offend someone. As long as your intent is in the right place, referring to someone by the wrong pronouns the first time or swearing once or twice may be a disappointment but it shouldn't cause a huge issue.

Hypocrite

It seemed ironic, our class sitting in the Socratic circle discussing how we as a generation need to help our environment, but when we arrived home from school that day we continued to leave our environmentally destructive footprints. The entire idea of protecting the place that we live in has lost all meaning. We say that we must "protect the environment" constantly, through every kids show and emblazoned across every media platform. But, we will still leave the lights on when we leave in the morning and use more paper than we need. We ridicule those who don't recycle their plastic bottles from lunch, but we don't think about the manufacturing of the product and we don't think about the other things that we do everyday that make such impact. This weekend while at the DECA State Competition in Detroit, litter was scattered all over the street. Half used water bottles were thrown away, and paper was strewn all over the floor at roleplay events. Horrified at this waste, I realized that people are passionate about something they don't really think of as their problem. We are hypocrites. We seek to achieve the minimum; the "safe" amount of pollution instead of as little as possible. Do we really care about the fate of our children or the future of Earth? We work so hard to make wills and divide our assets to take care of our future generations financially, but the Earth is what holds these materialistic things.To actually make an impact first we must actually care to make an impact. You cannot get results if you're not willing to make the effort. Because it is human nature to destroy we must take conscious effort to make change.

Soooo who isn't marked nowadays?

I wanted to expound on our in class discussion on being marked and why I think that both men and women cannot be unmarked with this new age media and self expression.

I think that before the mainstream use of social media, men fit easily into one category and had the ability to be invisible to judgement in society; but now with this overt concentration of aesthetics, men can't just don a suit and blend in. One tap on a screen can bring us past appearance and into the lives and decisions of others through their posts. We now even mark ourselves by choosing defining fashion that fits into one category or another. You can just tell what a guy does in his spare time by how he dresses, especially in highschool. An Aeropostal hoodie is usually paired with a nerd who doesn't shop for himself, and a Calvin Klein hoodie is associated with a sporty and popular guy. In the Tannen piece, the men were unnoticeable because of their similarities, but nowadays variety is the new self definition. Just because someone fits into their own self defined category doesn't mean that they fit into other categories, other places. I don't think any one person can go anywhere without getting compared to someone else, without being judged in some sense.

Tanned says that "Some days you just want to get dressed and go about your business. But if you're a woman, you can't because there is no unmarked woman." As I read this piece, I felt that what Tannen said doesn't apply to now. That there is no unmarked man. Now as the millennials ideals penetrate the population, tattoos peek out from under business suit cuffs and hair becomes styled in different ways. Self expression is normalized, yet your appearance ends up defining you (from highschool to the work world).

When we say that men are unmarked, we think about things such as the most recent theater production put on by our school, Guys and Dolls. The men had the ability to be uniform, to not stand out. The women on the other hand were either prudes or prostitutes, defined by their bright makeup or subtle looks. The gangsters all blended together as one macho man, they were unified in their label, they weren't marked beyond their occupation. But this shows us that this is of the past, that now everyone is marked. Everyone stands out in some sense, everyone has something that can be noticed or picked apart. Appearance doesn't make you fade into the background, this is left to personality. Women still face a substantial amount of sexism that, in my opinion, is worse compared to the sexism that men face (which still needs to be addressed) but both men and women are marked.

Is Church A Gendered Space?

I've always gotten along well with boys. I feel at ease talking with them normally, and when respect is mutual I feel comfortable. Often, I feel less pressure being around guys, and prefer being around them over girls. As a moody young teen at the age of thirteen, I had already been subjected to many gendered spaces. The homeschool community flourishes with gendered activities, spaces, and stereotypes. But, I first noticed this when my family started attending a Baptist church, and I regularly attended a youth service. Walking in the first time, I saw that boys sat on one side of the room, and girls on the other. I'm not in the least confident about my body, and wasn't then either, so I went to sit with the people I felt would least judge me... the guys. That got shut down fast. Rapidly, three or four mentors rushed to my side to "address" my wrongdoing. "Honey, you're on the wrong side." "That side's for boys, you're not a boy, sit on the right side." That was when I first comprehended that there were spaces for boys, and spaces for girls. Intermixing wasn't encouraged, Throughout the year I was there, the guys would crowd into one corner, and the girls likewise. The games we played as a whole were girls versus guys, and our lessons were separated by gender. My church experience was a gendered one. Wednesday night was "guys night", and girls had a night of their own. We were both encouraged to worship and follow the same God, but we were kept apart. 

Every church I have ever attended, a male pastor leads, refers to the males directly and overlooks the women. It was my first realization that religious spaces, spaces that should be open and free to everyone, are separated and gendered. This is a reason why I am a feminist. Men and women are said to be treated equally in these spaces, but the idea of equal opportunity is giving girls what girls are expected to grow up and attain... being a mother? Once during a marriage lesson at that Baptist church, a mentor asked who I wanted to marry, and I answered with "I'm going to marry my career," and she cried. I remember when my mom wouldn't buy me a green bible because it was the "boys bible", and that I needed to get the purple sparkly bible with a crown on it. 

The next church I went to, I volunteered in the kindergarten department, and during worship I again saw this separation of boys and girls. Half the play area had firefighter costumes and plastic power tools and the other half had baby dolls and cooking tools. Everything was kept separate. While the church classroom was the same room, there was an obvious divide. Church screams for children to stay in their own gendered category. 

Church is a gendered space, and the ones I have attended are not inclusive. It is one building housing two very distinct clubs. I believe that religious spaces are often gendered, that they stifle growth and encourage us to follow stereotypical patterns of behavior. This "you think pink" type of mentality forces children to judge the world without appreciating difference. By making these places strict and rule based, children see themselves as so different from the other gender. This disappoints me, as I have a close friend who feels he cannot express himself based off of the stereotype that men cannot show emotion or weakness. These ideas are perpetuated through religious places, parents, school, and the media. We need to attack these ideas and focus on understanding each other and not separating based on something that hardly means anything. My friend suffers from severe depression, and while I as a girl have a bit more leeway to express my depression, he doesn't. He is mocked and told that he needs to "man up".  

So, I noticed a common gendered space that commonly goes unnoticed, and also sadly untouched. If we could mix up children everywhere, we could see more collaboration and harmony. Many children go to church, and some only to church and not to school (or a gender separated school). Overcoming this could help inspire us to notice our similarities and not our differences. 

eat mor chikin

In 2000 9.7 billion animals were killed for food (credit). An average of 18,032 cows are killed each day for food, the U.S. Department of Agriculture found in 2013 (credit). The Meat Institute found that in 2014 poultry and meat sales totaled $186 billion in the U.S. These staggering results exist because Americans love their food. We see meat advertised, the theme of summer get together with friends, and pushed on children when first in Kindergarten "eat your meat honey, its good for you!" Meat is pushed just as is dairy because it has "a lot" of calcium and fluoride because it makes your teeth stronger. We don't really think much of what we consume usually, just chow down that tasty burger we see Kendall Jenner rave about, or can't get our act together enough to actually cook something healthy.

I was a hideously sympathetic preteen, as I took it upon myself to influence the the numbers of animals killed by becoming vegan... and I kept it up for two years. Now, I don't recommend this for the faint of heart, and YouTubers like Onision certainly mean it when they say it'll help you lose weight. I don't think I'll be able to eat another chickpea vegan patty again after their daily occurrence on my plate.

 Now, I choose to not eat any sort of sea animal even now, especially the lobster; partially because these "giant sea-insects" - as David Foster Wallace so eloquently puts it - look exactly what their name means, and partially cause I am an aspiring sea life collector with wild aspirations to own all the sea pancakes in the ocean. TBH also a lobsters antenna and beady eyes gives me more of a moral conflict than lying to my mom about cleaning my room does.

Americans just mindlessly chow down food mindlessly "as an à la carte entrée, lobster can be baked, broiled, steamed, grilled, sautéed, stir-fried, or microwaved. The most common method, though, is boiling. If you’re someone who enjoys having lobster at home, this is probably the way you do it, since boiling is so easy. " We have recipes, books, videos, and TV channels dedicated to teaching us how to consume meat. I don't think we are fully aware of how much we just eat. We make consuming these dead creatures and easier, cheaper and cheaper, faster and faster.  I mean, isn't eating dead creatures gross? Be aware, realize tofu is actually amazing (I mean seriously, like alternative food is lit, have you tried So Delicious ice cream? It is heavenly).

I don't think either extremes are great. I think we should be healthy, eat meat to make our bodies stronger and better equipped for handling the stresses of life. Also, I think we need to be self aware, and realize that animals need to be handled responsibly and that our consumerist behavior is going to mess up the environment even more than it already has. Humans naturally consume, but if we can fight back and stop eating the chicken from WalMart and try Whole Foods or something, I think we can influence how animals are treated.

so what is normal?

Affection and love go hand and hand. When you love someone, you hug them; when you are attracted to someone, you kiss them. Families often are expected to be affectionate, passionate, and caring towards one another. The picture perfect little family is one where its members share both physical and emotional affections. I think that we think the more people hug, the more people are close and the more they love each other. We signify touch with trust.

In Manning's relationship with his father, we see love expressed in an unusual and uncertain way. Manning's father isn't one to "[write] me cards and letters when I was away from home," but instead was one to show his love from a distance. His mother was more emotionally affectionate than his father was. His father wasn't lovey dovey, emotional or sappy. People put too much trust in the Focus on The Family family model. I know that when I was homeschooled, my parents put much effort into being that physically and emotionally affectionate family, but as public school approached we gave up as reality set in. We love each other, but we give each other our distance. Perhaps this is due to age, or perhaps it is because my mother decided our family isn't perfect and left us in peace.

It is often frowned upon when people hear that my parents haven't slept together in 10 years. They love each other, and care for each other, they just decide to express it their own way. I think that was the point of "Arm Wrestling with My Father" is that love can be expressed in a myriad of ways. We need to open our eyes to a new type of normal.

When I googled "The Perfect Family" the results were surprisingly uniform. Every picture had a father, a mother, and children... all embracing and smiling. I've asked my mother what she wants for me in my future, and she most frequently says "you know, I want you to be happy, have a nice family, good husband," I don't understand how we attribute happiness with a specific type of family. Chasing this impossible model will only lead to dissatisfaction.

Self Summary as Identity

Other peoples perception and judgement of us often ends up identifying us. Peoples expectations often helps guide us in times of self searching. We become victim to others perception as we use it to shape who we are. In Disability, Mairs is perceived as someone who is weak, insignificant, and her plight is romanticized. If someone doesn't know how to combat these perspectives, they will either become dissatisfied with themselves, or try to change themselves to meet others standards. When faced with a disability, often dissatisfaction is the only route one is lead into. This, after time, begins to imprint on our own identity, and takes immeasurable strength to overcome. Mairs shows her strength by choosing to neither change herself, or loose her confidence in the process. It is difficult to overcome the judgement we are subjected to and to Mairs is a good example of how she acknowledges societies perception but chooses to overlook it.

I then realized that this is a problem of summary and stereotypes, and we feel the need to put ourselves into boxes to feel a sense of identity. Taking the courage to break out of other's assigned boxes is hard. But, as Mairs puts it "Physical disbility looms pretty large in one's life. But it doesn't devour one wholly. I'm not, for instance, Ms. MS, a walking, talking embodiment of a chronic incurable degenerative disease." Mairs is saying that we are more than what people see of us, and that choosing to focus on what is beyond our label is more satisfying than focusing on a negative label.

We are so thirsty to find what labels define us that we ask people their first impressions, and take quizzes like this: Who Am I Self Assesment

This is stupid, as labels cannot explain who we are or account for complexities. Just and Mairs is a disabled woman, she is also someone who acts like every other woman. She is a woman who has her period, eats, and sleeps. We are all human (shade to them aliens out there) and we should treat each other as people who are different for their personalities, thoughts and actions, not because of their labels.