I really like your idea about a general class where students could explore different jobs. Similar to your idea, Notre Dame won't even allow freshmen to declare a major for this reason. Love your "Raq and Roll" song idea, as well as the lyrics and video for your capital punishment song.

BLOG #11 Part 1

My ideal university is as such:

You start off in college with or without a major selected. Most students know generally what interests them, or at least what they like or son't like when it comes to subject matter. Two different general paths can be selected from the beginning of my four year university. The first is for those who know what they want to do, in which they take classes pertaining to only their major and have an unlimited amount of electives they can take if they so choose. The general education does not repeat what class subjects students took in high school unless the student so chooses, but instead offers new ones that weren't offered in high school so that a student without a clue as to what they want to do can try out new things. Also a general class should be taken by these students in which they explore the different types of jobs from taking trips to companies or trying them out themselves. With these paths, the curriculum is pretty much established. Within certain majors there should be job classes so that students can see what different types of jobs there are and work actively in them briefly so that they can get taste of different jobs in their major. Then take classes that will help them learn the material for their concentration. Each student should take a certain amount of credits in their majors. Minors should work the same way, just with less credits needed to achieve it. Overall workload for each class should stay minimal so that you can get alot of work but only if every class issues an assignment.

Thats acedemics, as far as sports and vacations, they should all be the same. The only exception I can think of is that we should get all major and federal holidays off.

No classes before 9 am. none after 4 pm. Everything else I do like about college. I think that acedemic standpoint is the only thing i really have criticism for.

BLOG #10

The top tshirt is is one I wouldn't want to see worn. He is wearing different articles of clothing than he would have worn and I think of this shirt as more a parody than the other one. There is no halo and we see Jesus as just being another guy. I think the one of the second shirt is different because the text is different and the way Jesus is presented as divine again is different. I feel like he second shirt would be worn more by christians than the others. I am and christian and actually own the second shirt, but I don't consider it to be a parody at all, just that I consider my relationship with Jesus something to show off and not to hide, and also that i consider it to be a personal relationship.

Paul Mitchell mentions that he thinks these shirts are parodies of the christian faith and he is upset when he sees christians who wear them. However, I view it differently. He also says that Christians want " to show the world that yes, I'm different," but he does not view these shirts that way. I think of these shirts, at least the second of the two to be a way to show a relatinshio with Jesus or that " I'm different."

If the first design only contained the text and no image, I would view it differently becuase it is making the same statement as the other shirt, just without a visual that is somewhat offensive. The second shirt, I believe my opinion would be the same.

I think he way the first shirt is set up is more of a parody and sending a rhetorical message that is more moking of Jesus than the other. The first shirt shows Jesus dressed in more modern clothing, the text is above him and his gesture are all something someone today would be wearing and doing. The second shirt is showing Jesus above the text, and the text less sloppy, and Jesus with a halo and attire that he might have actually worn. This, for me, shows him as he was, rather than a version of a mockery of him today, as in the other shirt.

BLOG #8

Seein' Both Sides

1. "Can't Neglect This"
Rock
A song with lyrics that portray a specific case of coaching negligence and how it is the coaches fault that it happened and what it has done to the family of the victim.

2. "Roid Rage"
Metal
A song that explores the truth about how many feel about the use of steroids in professional and lower level sports programs.

3."iCrazy"
Rock
This song will deal the the subject of increase in technology and how many people are crazy for the new products, and new technologies in medicine are very controversial, such as the use of stem cells.

4. "Zap Me"
Acoustic
A song that deals with a convict who has been sentenced to die in an hour. It will subtly pose questions about the death penalty and whether we should have it in the U.S. at all?

Lyrics:
In one or two years I get used to the room
Started slow when I first made the move
Routine is strange on the row
Most of my neighbors are just out of control
And it's bad that I see
Closer now then I will ever be.
I've got plenty of plans that never will be fulfilled
Do they regret their decision to kill?
Placed behind bars, but only for a few
Any last prayers, while I kneel at the pew?
Don't be scared, there's no way out
I deserved this sentence
They'll get even as I get tense
I will fall asleep, lie down and those who see won't weep, they'll only know me in their deepest darkest dreams.

Video: would portray the victim as he walks from his cell to the room where he will be executed and then the video ends just before he is going to be killed.

5. " 'Raq and Roll"
Rock
A song about the Iraq War and how many of the soldiers do not think we should be there. Along with many people in the US who believe we should leave Iraq, however, will address why we can't and how we are fighting not only for our soldiers lives but for Iraqi's Lives too.


The cover will have a picture collage of the war in Iraq, Coaches on a field and players, an empty jail cell with the door wide open, a needle, a very muscular athlete, and a bottle of medicine spilled out over a table. In the lower right hand corner, will be the title in simple courier new font and no other words with be on the front.

Strong analysis throughout your posts. Good!

Blog #5

I have seen this video before, I have written a short paper on steroid use in the U.S. before, and I think that it is a personal choice to use steroids and to know the risks if you have to use them. This video is interesting because it shows actual people who have been using them for years and who do not have any negative side effects. The news always talks about steroids in general but we almost never hardly see actual people who used them irresponsibly. However, every once in awhile there are those faces that make the news for essentially overusing steroids. I think this program failed to address those people, or maybe if they had talked to those families and shown their opinions, they would have a stronger argument for showing both sides of this conflict.

Even though I think steroid use is a personal choice I think different rules apply to athletes. If someone is participating in a sport, they are expected to adhere to the rules of that sport. In my personal experience playing lacrosse, I can boil one goal down to a certain thing that happened. For example, if someone's stick is illegal, however many times they might be checked or pushed or knocked off their feet, the ball will not leave their "control" and they can make it to the goal score. I call these small infractions unfair advantages, because referees may or may not notice an illegal stick. With sports that require a lot of strength to excel, steroid use is going to be more common, but then, it becomes one of these unfair advantages. One player can shape a game, even a team game. What if that one player is using steroids? I believe all sports should have steroid testing for those reasons. The advantages are obvious in many sports and the level of play should be based of skill of athlete and teamwork, performance enhancing drugs shouldn't be allowed to be used by athletes, from little league to professional.

This is not a double standard. Being the best, to me, is doing your best. Giving all you have to reach a level you want to reach. The problem is when you can't reach it, as one might put it, by yourself. I don't think society demands that we use steroids by any means, but to be the best is always great. However, I think it's interesting when those that are considered to be the best are caught using steroids, for some reason our society turns on that. For me, the ethics of steroids have always been only this: in order for me to reach my goals, I have to work hard for them, hard work and perseverance are the only things that I will use to reach them. To be the best I could be at something and for a sense of accomplishment, which I would not have if I chose to use steroids. I am usually a very impatient person, but when it comes to my own sense of well-being, I don't think I could ever use steroids to get results I want.

Georgetown Article

I personally believe that a party should be a party. The rules and restrictions that Georgetown is implementing in newer policies is, in some ways, taking out one of the main goals of a party: to loosen up and relax. The fact that the university is posting a procedure in order to have a party might turn people off of even trying to have parties. The restrictions do make sense, but they are having more negative effects than positive in my opinion. Taking "social life off campus," there are many complaints from students, and the fact that the restrictions have not had the effect on the community that the school wished, are all major backfires to these new rules (Kinzie).

Rules and restrictions set forth by Georgetown University recently are only the first of many steps that need to be taken to change the way parties are carried out on college campuses across the country. Some of the new restrictions include "one-keg-per-party," limiting the number of people allowed at a party, and registering "Two over 21 hosts" (Kinzie). Some say that these new rules have "pushed social life off campus" (Kinzie), causing local police and residents to strive to do more to neutralize problems some of the students are causing.

In-Class Paraphrase

In a recent quote James Lester spoke about research papers and how students these days are citing or plagiarizing their sources excessively. He believes that only about 10 percent of a students' final paper should be quoted. One suggestion to change this is to take notes sparingly, or reword only main points from a source.

Portfolio #2 Thesis

There is a subtle but distinct difference between coaching negligence and just an accident because a coach cannot be in two places at once, cannot control the actions of his players when they out on the field, and cannot prevent all accidents from happening.

(don't really want to do this)

Blog #4

In the first article, the authors/ researchers argue that in the past few decades, there has been a change in the way Americans percieve the male body image. They researched this topic in different types of media, particularly in male action figures by comparing older figurines with more modern figurines and interviewing some manufacturers. The authors say that this change in the way we view male body image has partly been caused by these action figures, pointing out also, that they might be changing due to other elements of media.

In the second article, the main argument is more the opposite of the first. The author mentions that she has been trying to defend Barbie from people who do not like the way she looks, showing that she completely disagrees that these dolls and action figures could possibly be influencing children's ideas of how they are "supposed to look." 

In the first article, an almost scientific tone is used. It isn't convicting but only presenting facts, as ina  report. At the beginning the authors list their hypothesis: "the physiques of male action toys... would proviode some index of evolving American ideals of male body image." They present facts throughout the article. Based on this I think the audience would be primarily anyone who might be doing research on the subject but also I think is article is particularly attactive to males, many of whom grew up with these action figures.

The tone in the second article is much more convicting and informal then the first. The author of the second seems like she is just venting from reading an article that argues the same thing as the first article. Her audience might be those that agree, that researchers interested in American body image are looking in the wrong place, and actions figures should only be looked at as actions figures, not real people to compare ourselves to.

From my personal experience, I work out and try to stay in shape. I workout because the sports I play require a lot of strength. After working out for going on 6 years, motivation is hard to come by and it is motivating to see someone who looks like how you want to look. But i wouldn't say that I work out to look like people think I should look, I feel as if I have accomplished something when I am done working out, and it gives me more energy. Lately for me it's been about being healthy. I also don't think that everyone feels like they have to look like these stars and action figures. I know quite a few people who don't work out, and don't have any problem whatsoever with the way they look. Maybe the toys did affect me, but I don't believe I have an idea about how someone should look. 

2.11.09

If I could uninvent one thing, what would it be?
I think nuclear weapons have obviously taken the world to a whole new level of destruction. War might be inevitable but the end all to war shouldn't be obliterating the other country/ side completely.

BLOG #3

Mental illnesses should not be taken lightly. Of all mental illnesses, both anorexia and bulimia have the highest fatality rates. Based on statistics like this one from Mim Udovitch, websites that are pro-ana and pro-mia (supportive of anorexia and bulimia), should be shut down. The websites that are on the internet these days that are supportive of those who have these mental illnesses are leading their viewers in the wrong direction. The goal of the sites are to support those who have one of these eating disorders, but the difference between these sites and constructive sites is that they are simply offering a place for someone to fit in, not offereng any help or support to change. Eating disorders are dangerous and shouldn't be accepted, but should be more like other mental illnesses in the fact that everyone should be searching for ways to treat and hopefully abolish it all together.

Recently there has been a lot of controversy surrounding pro-ana and pro-mia websites. Many people have slandered these sites and find them completly unacceptable. However, if someone was to ask someone affected by bulimia or anorexia, I am sure they would not say the same thing. The sites, however controversial they might be, are not promoting these eating disorders, even the site House of Thin states clearly that if new users are looking to become anorexic or bulimic, they have come to the wrong place. These are mental illnesses and though many who do not have them argue that the sites should be shut down, the site provide a place for those who are anorexic or bulimic to feel welcome. They offer a place where people don't have to be ashamed or hide who they really are. These sites should be allowed to operate for their help in acceptance and moral support if someone wants to try and change.

Pro-ana and pro-mia websites can be viewed in a few different lights. Many call them harmful while those affected by these illnesses call them helpful. Despite differing opinions, these website should be allowed to exist mainly for the fact that they provide support and acceptance. For those who do not agree with these sites intentions, they are definitely harder to see, but upon closer examination, should be seen as a helpful place. These are mental illnesses we are talking about, and they should be handled carefully, and anything that can be done to help prevent and abolish them should be done so that these websites are not even necessary, and those looking to lose weight or keep figure should look elsewhere to a more healthy means.

Fallacy: Either / Or Reasoning

Either you've seen Citizen Kane, Fight Club and Saving Private Ryan or you aren't a true filmmaker.

BLOG #2

My initial reaction to the ad after reading the text and seeing the beaten up shoes was to ask myself the question, what could these people possibly be advertising and why are they so against jogging. The beaten up shoes and the products they sell on the website just started to gear me towards the right answer. It is just odd to see people who are so into running that they are against jogging. So I asked myself what the difference between jogging and running are and its all just kind of silly that they would advertise running by denouncing jogging. I suppose the title stood out to me the most, that little bit about finding dead bodies as an incentive to run instead of jog.

I do run, at least, I do cardio workouts in order to get in shape for sports, and this was in no way controversial to me, just an interesting way to sell things for strictly running.

I think the allusions to TV shows and what the text talked about were just ways of drawing people who have ever watched a crime drama or even the news. It seemed kind of humorous to me that they would choose finding dead bodies as an incentive to run. The layout was definitely interesting because we see the beaten up shoes (I always look at the pictures first) and then the larger text just puzzled me as to what they might be advertising or promoting.

I think values that are promoted are obviously the act of running, but also very vague maybe even sarcastic call to action to help local police in any way possible, but i think that comes across as more humorous.Things that are discouraged are only the act of jogging, it is only mildly discouraged in this one add, but on the website, these people are serious about denouncing those who call them joggers.

In the Pearl Izumi ad, the separation of runners and joggers I think in some ways makes the ad unique and makes it stand out. Also in a way, the ad alienates the jogging population and in doing so, makes the runners seem elite, as if you would want to be a part of them. So its a product ad and a recruitment ad in a way.

The use of pathos in the ad plays with our emotions in that it makes us question what the ads logic is, but it more so uses almost humorous text to show that runners are more elite than joggers. The Reebok ad also plays with our emotions because it shows us a possible outcome to running and most people would groan at the sight of this runner vomiting. I think it is persuading the opposite, to jog instead of run by making you not want to experience the pain of running, possibly vomiting.

I would choose the Pearl Izumi ad to run in a magazine because it is easier to look at than the guy puking, although it is longer, the opening line sets up the reader to want to read the rest of the ad, wheras the Reebok ad makes you want to turn the page.

BLOG #1

When I read the title to this class blog post, I immediately knew what it was referring to. I played the first version of America's Army in 2002. My dad, who is in the Army, first showed me the game. He has never been one to push me into anything, and I just thought it was a really cool video game. Looking back at the website, I was just reminded how the game effectively portrays warfare and draws in a younger crowd. It is obvious it is a very creative recruitment tool, in fact I know one or two who are in the Army now because of this game. The first things I noticed as rhetoric were the shots of "Our Newest Real Hero" above an advertisement for the game that says "the Next Mission Could Be Yours." This basically poses that I, myself, could be a hero too. I can read about different squad roles, potentially even finding one I'd fit into (in my opinion). I suppose, however, that the biggest draw in is the fact that it is a free video game download, and compared to the usual fifty dollars we spend per video game, why not download it? I think most gamers are in their teens, give or take a few years, and that is the intended audience for this game. You can join the military when you are 18, so it makes perfect sense to introduce this possibility to those 13 and up, who might find the video game interesting enough to pursue for a career. I think video games can be very persuasive tools in recruitment, because gamers, many times live in a fantasy world that they wish could be come a reality. This gives them the opportunity to turn fun into a job and into reality.

I do agree with Navy veteran, that this will instill the ideology of warfare in gamers. Although the game is entertaining and is useful as a recruitment tool, the game itself might show that war itself is alright and reduce killing people down to just "doing a job." Warfare shouldn't be accepted and although these days it is almost unavoidable, I think teach younger teens this isn't a good idea. These potential recruits might also be future leaders in politics that have a deciding vote in declaring war or not. A potential improvement to the recruiting technique is changing the age from 13 to 17, that way older, more mature teens can take a tour in the world of a soldier. I think the media portrays the Iraq War just like "another thing" these days, and when soldiers are killed everyday, it's only the more numerous killings that we hear about. We grow used to it. We accept war, when we should be hearing reports about how gruesome war is for both sides and how the war is effecting us and many other countries, so that we realize how war can be avoided.

My dad was overseas for a year, and worked hard to help the war effort to maintain Iraqi freedom. War is very costly but sometimes necessary, but I think when I was 13 I wouldn't have understood as well as I do now all the things that have been going on over in Iraq.
My hope is that the video game won't promote violence as much as interest in the wars and foreign matters that are being handled militarily, and it has because I even asked the questions when I played this game, where is this fighting and why are we fighting this group. Hopefully the game will recruit those who understand how serious a decision like joining the Army is and that it is not just a game but an informative tool to show how a soldier's life can really be.