I woke up at noon because my mom woke me up. I was still sleep-deprived and I had that feeling that my limbs were full of cement, and I wriggled around in the bed and thought about how much I hate merriment because I can never sleep during it.
But as I ran to the grocery store two times, driving around alone in my mom's car, I felt a city-girl romantic-comedy kind of giddiness. The sentiment of like the brunette girl from Sex and the City driving around singing with the radio cranked up because she just had a successful date with some great guy. Nothing like that had happened, so I can't really say why I was in such a good mood.
There were a lot of points where I forgot it was Thanksgiving. I feel bad that I didn't stop and have more grateful thoughts throughout the day. I do remember, just before dinner, as we got our food and prepared to sit down at the table, hoping my mom wasn't about to propose we say grace, because that seemed like something she might do. Because I would've made some snappy comment like, "I think we should be thanking you." She didn't end up saying anything about grace. So I just kind of felt like an ass.
It turned out to be the best food I've ever eaten at Thanksgiving: wheat bread you make by putting a packet of wheat-bread mix into a bread-maker, cranberry sauce, mashed potatoes, really good stuffing, this cinnamon pecan yam shit (I usually hate sweet potatoes but it was like the season of autumn in my mouth), steamed broccoli and cauliflower, a Tofurkey (which was store-bought but whatever). There was also turkey, which I didn't eat, but I assume it was good. It's not that any of this, except the yam shit and the Tofurkey, isn't eaten in like every American household at Thanksgiving. It's that she's a badass at making food, even when she's been sipping at a pool of red wine for hours. Now that I think of it, we probably didn't say grace because she was proud of her work.
She was the only biological family member there, actually. There was her, then some guy-friend she invited over because he just went through a divorce and didn't have anywhere to go, then Mitch and Lexie. Before dinner Mitch and I sat in the living room with the game on, him pointing at metal bands on a list and telling me which ones to download while my mom banged around in the kitchen with a wine-glass in her hand talking to that guy about how her ex-boyfriend's dog went with him to Florida this year. These interactions would not have happened if the day were not a holiday.
Friday, November 25, 2011
Friday, November 18, 2011
Argument
I unfortunately didn't have time for this one, so it'll end up being the one dropped from my grade. I realize that kind of screws me for the actual paper, but I'll take that for myself. This week's schedule was terrible for me.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Weed should be legal and abortion is morally reprehensible
I have recently been interested in the idea of making bullying illegal. I look to Lady Gaga as some kind of moral icon, but she has recently proposed the idea of making bullying illegal, and even spoke to the president about it, and I can't say I completely agree that making it illegal is the best course of action to ending it. This was after the suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer, a huge fan of hers.
Obviously, the issue has current relevance, as Jamey's Law is trying to be passed, beside the fact that teen suicides due to bullying have become a large topic in the media in the past year.
One reason I would be interested in arguing a side of this issue is that the public response to it is almost at stasis; I have found as much media supporting the idea as I have opposing. More importantly, I myself have not taken a side on it yet.
I saw an article a while ago that discussed why illegalizing bullying is a bad decision. And check this out. I also am generally aware of the cliche that bullies only bully because they're insecure, and the general knowledge that many bullies come from very dysfunctional households. In this Cracked article, the author, who has dealt with a history of bullying, is consistently aware that many bullies gain their physical dominance because they have to learn to physically defend themselves from their own fathers. What kind of message would it send to turn bullies who deal with such abuse into criminals? When I think about morals I always try to think about how "evil" is always more complicated then being purely bad. I think to illegalize bullying might be an insultingly simplistic way to deal with the issue.
And what about other root causes? Homophobia? Prejudice in general? Fixing these problems would certainly fix bullying. Laws already exist that ban most aspects of bullying, like assault and harassment. Bullying continues despite that for a reason.
But then part of me reminds me that fixing widespread problems is never easy, and to do so in the "bottom-up" way most people dream of would mean a complete reformation of society. I did at first wonder why Gaga would want to so simplistically victimize bullies through a law when she's all about love and understanding, but simply waiting for society to ride the tides of love won't stop the suffering of the bullied in the meantime. Laws are our "short-term" fix to such problems as murder and rape and bullying despite that they don't stop them, and they affirm that the ultimate power of the government is against them. I also view illegalizing bullying as a type of "tough love," telling society that, no matter what your pain, you cannot turn it into harm for others.
I was told by my friend who is very interested in politics that anti-bullying programs in schools are generally ineffective, so that would complicate the argument. How else should we deal with the problem if not to illegalize it? Also, many policies I view as regressive exist in some high-schools, such as the "policy of neutrality," which denotes that teachers must remain neutral in dealing with homophobic slurs because they may be part of religious conviction. Bullying is bullying regardless, and a national law would punish it when it reached a certain level of severity, regardless of whether it is of religious conviction. The law could be a way to counteract much of this bullshit.
So, that is what I understand as the two sides of the argument. I'll turn it over in my head and determine which one I figure to be ultimately true. In the end it'll be a slight but significant win and I'll be glad to portray each side as strongly as it should be.
Obviously, the issue has current relevance, as Jamey's Law is trying to be passed, beside the fact that teen suicides due to bullying have become a large topic in the media in the past year.
One reason I would be interested in arguing a side of this issue is that the public response to it is almost at stasis; I have found as much media supporting the idea as I have opposing. More importantly, I myself have not taken a side on it yet.
I saw an article a while ago that discussed why illegalizing bullying is a bad decision. And check this out. I also am generally aware of the cliche that bullies only bully because they're insecure, and the general knowledge that many bullies come from very dysfunctional households. In this Cracked article, the author, who has dealt with a history of bullying, is consistently aware that many bullies gain their physical dominance because they have to learn to physically defend themselves from their own fathers. What kind of message would it send to turn bullies who deal with such abuse into criminals? When I think about morals I always try to think about how "evil" is always more complicated then being purely bad. I think to illegalize bullying might be an insultingly simplistic way to deal with the issue.
And what about other root causes? Homophobia? Prejudice in general? Fixing these problems would certainly fix bullying. Laws already exist that ban most aspects of bullying, like assault and harassment. Bullying continues despite that for a reason.
But then part of me reminds me that fixing widespread problems is never easy, and to do so in the "bottom-up" way most people dream of would mean a complete reformation of society. I did at first wonder why Gaga would want to so simplistically victimize bullies through a law when she's all about love and understanding, but simply waiting for society to ride the tides of love won't stop the suffering of the bullied in the meantime. Laws are our "short-term" fix to such problems as murder and rape and bullying despite that they don't stop them, and they affirm that the ultimate power of the government is against them. I also view illegalizing bullying as a type of "tough love," telling society that, no matter what your pain, you cannot turn it into harm for others.
I was told by my friend who is very interested in politics that anti-bullying programs in schools are generally ineffective, so that would complicate the argument. How else should we deal with the problem if not to illegalize it? Also, many policies I view as regressive exist in some high-schools, such as the "policy of neutrality," which denotes that teachers must remain neutral in dealing with homophobic slurs because they may be part of religious conviction. Bullying is bullying regardless, and a national law would punish it when it reached a certain level of severity, regardless of whether it is of religious conviction. The law could be a way to counteract much of this bullshit.
So, that is what I understand as the two sides of the argument. I'll turn it over in my head and determine which one I figure to be ultimately true. In the end it'll be a slight but significant win and I'll be glad to portray each side as strongly as it should be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)