The article I read from Slate covered the importance of always being prepared for the minor discomforts of pain, allergies, and other ailments. The article contains many quips the main focus being that we are in the 21st century— why suffer from discomfort if it is avoidable. The article covers several over the counter products, and their uses, as well as, what should be used or avoided. He warns against abusing the products like acetaminophen for they may cause potential long-term health risks. The writer clearly has done research on what he uses, and even has a clear method for classification of the medication. I learned that Sudafed is supposedly time released into your system. This allows for long-lasting relief, but also explains the result of drowsiness after it used. Many of the products that we are using have adverse side effects, and for what seems advertising purposes and to gain profits the consumer is at risk. Although he makes a clear case, it comes off as slightly neurotic as he admittedly carries a “mini-pharmacy” on his person. The point is made that an individual suffers from discomfort, it can ruin the rest of their day and one should be knowledgeable of what they are using to relive it. Headaches during meetings, fatigue when starting work, or an upset stomach at a child’s T-ball game can seem treacherous. He continues to address the importance of pain-free living, and the use of over the counter medications opposed to stronger doses and prescription drugs.
This interview immediately triggers the idea of what an American actually means—not on a born in the United States or has gained citizenship matter. The fact that immediately the actress is referenced to by her ethnicity and not her nationality points to the idea that there is more it. While she was born in the country she was identified in a nominally appropriate way in the incorrect manner. This happens quite often in passing descriptions or meetings. This may seem overly politically correct, but one has to admit that this is worth noting. There may be a few people, who are truly able to not make generalizations or make conclusions of how to communicate with someone from their ethnicity. What is in question is if this is actually an acceptable tool to use when interacting or making assumptions about a person.
It may be a generalizing blanket statement, but due to appearance and background, many conclusions may be implied. To simplify this idea—if you are speaking to a coworker after work who is a Mexican woman and you are a Trump supporter, you probably do not want to engage in a conversation about politics. This may seem like a safe bet. However, you have no idea of her background to make a valid conclusion about her political ideals—perhaps she shares the same convictions, and has a copious amount of distaste for Hilary’s policies or character and genuinely likes Trump. Instantly you made a legitimate call to avoid confrontation—was this accurate? These assumptions have possibly avoided an argument. An individual can read this analogy and shake their head—however, is there an exact statistical figure that can be recalled to make this judgement call? We can remember hearing something in the news, from facebook or listening to some of the statements that the nominee made. Not an exact fact to make this generalization, which may not even be true in this circumstance. This is a simple analogy, but truthful. A more datable analogy would be the reasonability of drug testing for welfare or stop and frisk policies.
Another topic that was interesting was the idea that a country was founded around Longoria’s family’s town. When this occurred, was her town expected to assimilate to the majority culture and accept new ideals that are completely foreign? Would there be appropriation within the community’s culture to build connections or bonds? Generally speaking, following laws and ideals would be pertinent to maintain order and forward innovation. However, this area heavily populated with the same culture, so general ideals will not fit in the smaller society and possibly cause unrest. The perspective of some of both would encourage duality between the two cultures… but they generally don’t fit, or perhaps there isn’t enough integration to encourage this. This is constituted by the inventions of margaritas and Cinco Demayo. When the US is made of so many of these dissimilar pockets, how do we exact what a true American would be?
Although this doesn’t seem like a profound topic; this was a very interesting interview of Eva Longoria on one of Chelsea Hander’s shows. This brief interview opens around how the Longoria felt she fit in American and Mexican culture. The immediate comment was that the interviewer hadn’t initially realized that the actress was Mexican, and receives the answer that she is Texican and she was born in America. She briefly explains that in the US she is often labeled as Handler described, but when she visits Mexico she is considered an American.
The interview continues to circle the idea of her duality in both cultures, and interestingly enough she describes her view that where she was born her family is from. The community hasn’t always been a member of the US, and after events of Texas becoming state her family was considered American citizens. Obviously, there are many more nuances to her reasoning that are not touched on in the interview and would make an interesting topic to research regarding appropriation and assimilation. The country she was born in was instated around a community that was already founded.
Then the idea of language is tied to the end of the interview, both speak Spanish and English—to different degrees clearly. Although these languages are clearly different, there are stubble familiarities. These languages share similar and sometimes nearly identical words(2500 but you cannot speak English slowly or loudly enough to successfully have a legitimate communication)—there is also seemingly a complete difference between Spanish in Spain and in Mexico. Then, Longoria briefly touches on Margaritas and Cinco Daimyo being American creations. Although, loosely linked she explains how an interesting place to visit in Mexico are the pyramids, which could be considered Aztecs but were first created by the Techloctans(sp).
These disparate women show a warmth to one another and spoke openly while explaining things critically. It was a learning experience and opened doors to different ideas. I was impressed with the flow and the ease of conversation. This is important to note, both women touched on past experiences and opened doors to ideas that are often an uncomfortable topic.
The majority in the community is only attempting to protect their best interest, and there have been a notable amount of questionable actions performed by members that attend this particular mosque. However, this in the only Islamic Center within the county—the correlation would appear to be invalid because of this factor. What is interesting, is that many individuals had expressed worry for those who have committed atrocious acts. Why would they not have reported these attitudes, comments or plans? Some members of the county find this to be unforgivable, for these events could have possibly been stopped—and blame members of mosque’s community to be at blame. While researching this topic it can be understandable that there was a lack of intervention. The relationship between the sheriff and this religious group has been less than tasteful. There is a history of condescending treatment and unjust dictations against the minority group. If there had been requests for the sheriff to look into these matters, what would it cost this rapidly growing religious group? There is founded doubt that there would be fair treatment and the ongoing resentment would cause reprimands for the whole religious community.
The response to the occurrence of the Pulse shooting seemed typical. Fear and hate motivate one another to place blame on an individual that is still living to take the blame. What is interesting is the response—immediately due to the shooter’s descent and religious beliefs this tragedy is labeled as terrorism. This is true, the event caused the entire nation unease—especially for the niche of the LGBTQ community. Where are these members safe, if not at a meeting space where they can feel comfortable to express themselves how they desire without negative societal pressure or fear of persecution? However, there are church shootings committed by troubled young men where people are murdered without reason or cause… This is how it is explained at least at the shooting at an ‘all-Black church’ in Charleston. This wasn’t considered an act of terrorism by the masses—the difference was the tragedy was committed by a White male. Regardless, both of these actions can at least be considered hate crimes.
When analyzing this situation in St Lucie County, we could use the term radical. Members of the county considered the Pulse shooter to be a radical Muslim. This is understandable if you link this action not to personal hatred, but to religion. On the same level, there have been many radical individuals reporting and taking action against the Muslim community and using the Islamic Center as an outlet. News articles posted, include the Pulse shooter’s name in the headline to describe the building when explaining the arson. The arsonist was also a well-known affiliated member of a neighboring chapel. Fortunately, some of the community has donated funds for rebuilding and publically showing tolerance to counteract other members from terrorizing the Muslim members of the community.
The articles related to this event are from the local newspaper of my community, both involve a Mosque in a neighboring city only five minutes away. The articles explain that the Islamic Center has been a center of debate within the city due to a member of the mosque committing the Pulse shooting in Orlando a few months ago. After the tragedy members of the Mosque have been assaulted both physically and verbal and most recently a member of a nearby biker chapel has set fire to the place of worship. These escalating occurrences are being evaluated by the Sherriff to observe if these were, in fact, hate crimes and how this comments on the local community.
The articles explain that a member of the Mosque had worshiped at the location the night prior to the Pulse shooting. This causes members of the community to question his motives, whether this was directly instigated to his religion or a hate crime. The man was married with children, and had been noted as being unstable and has allegedly made claims of the plotting of other possible terror attacks. This was never reported to authorities. His family has made statements and had apologized for his actions to the best of their ability –and insist this unforgivable action was purely an excruciating action done by a confused and hateful young man.
Since the tragedy in Orlando, the Islamic Center has been under scrutiny within its community. Members of the community have been actively protesting the mosque’s presence, by gathering during services with signs and chants. There was also a documented report of an assault of a man wearing ceremonial garb. It had been reported by the place of worship that the building has often been circled by bikers yelling obscenities. Just a week ago, arson had been committed and the man who started the fire has been identified as a member of a neighboring biker chapel.
Throughout these events, the Sheriff had refused to offer security, due to lack of staff and resources. There has also been an investigation to discern if these acts are in fact hate crimes and present a danger to the Muslim community. There has not yet been an official statement about this. However, members of Ft. Pierce and neighboring cities have gathered to support the mosque speaking out against the actions that had been committed and offering support to the religious leader—who is also a local doctor. There has also been a candle light vigil to show unity and support for the Islamic community.
Since moving to Florida I have taken a notice to the expansive amount of confederate flags being flown and stickers on trucks—sometimes the trucks even have flags. I’m looking forward to researching this topic so I can articulate, even if just mentally to myself of how this is a foul mess and prevent me from going into apoplexy while driving.
Initially, I needed more information to what the confederate flag is. Where it came from. What was the initial reading? I learned that there were many flags, but the confederate flag was actually a battle flag for E. Lee. Also, I have had the chance to look at some interesting reasons of why this is appropriate. This also made me consider some of the monuments that are still in Florida that are being defended—I will need to look further into this.
While doing my research I was immediately hemorrhaged with flippant opinion based pieces, some coherent and others belligerent. Although this seemed counterproductive, I think it is immensely important that I get a feel on both sides and attempt to be as objective as possible. As much as I would like to troll, it is important that I find an understanding of where both sides are coming from. Some of the points are moot, and this statement is related to irrational statements made by both sides. I’ve included some links below.
I’ve decided to bring in some media into this research, some of which contain interviews. What was most disturbing was, the viewpoint of some of those being interviewed. Many of the people were oblivious—some even discounting the horrors of slavery others explaining that their families who owned an individual were truly different. I am going to have to find further interviews and sources, my sources are becoming one-sided, southern and white washed. I need to find more diverse bloggers and opinions.
I have found some academic journals in relation to the topic relating to political correctness, from ten years ago. Which is interesting to me, because this term has just recently seemed to spawn out of nowhere to negatively refer to people are attempting to not be … disgustingly rude or bigoted individuals. The conversations introduce black churches and movements attempting to ban the presentation of the confederate flag in government/public places. I really would like to touch this topic to blacklivesmatter and how certain individuals don’t think it’s necessary and founded idea.
Webster, Gerald R., and Jonathan Leib I. “Religion, Murder, and the Confederate Battle Flag in South Carolina.” Southeastern Geographer 56.1 (2016): 29. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.
Carpenter, L. (2001). Old Times There Are Best Forgotten: The Future of Confederate Symbolism in the South. Callaloo,24(1), 32-37. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3300447
I want to transition my research into a broader sense in relation to the incident of sports players not kneeling for the national anthem… Peaceful protest working for a still subjugated people. With the inclusion of recent police reports and fatality statistics. I think this could be a solid end of the paper.
I haven’t written publically since livejournal or xanga was a thing—it probably was never a ‘thing.’ But my friends and I would keep in contact using it, and in a perverse way to catch glimpses into each other’s lives and feelings. I lasted maybe a month, but still creeped on their updates. The context here was actually useful, but crazy ordinary. It may sound ridiculous but beginning writing without clear direction leaves me dumbfounded, but considering what is appropriate after the topic is decided seems stifling. Reid’s photography metaphor actually resonated with me, ten people could take a picture of the same thing, but there will be different focuses, angles, use of flash, zoom… all that. Informal writing is fairly new to me… or new again? I can’t say I was ever good at it, but I haven’t attempted it in my twenties—or even after 15. It’s actually disconcerting that I’ll be writing something that’s interesting maybe even meaningful to me. It’s intimidating. Weird to think I won’t be berating or brow beating the reader with four references and word vomit in my own words insisting my reiterated research answers everything. Because that works. Always. More than often enough I don’t even believe it, but I have to make a stance to get credit.
I’m almost immediately bothered by the rhetorical questions. Who is your audience, what do they expect, how will they react. In relation to blogging… this seems strangely professional for blogging. I feel that most individuals that aren’t sociopaths that informal or casual writers already take this into consideration. I feel like these stiff questions are made for academic writing, in relation to who is directly giving me this prompt, how will they grade this… this just seems like catering and seems like a waste of pages… but that’s what a writer at Huffington Post is doing. I’m having an immense amount of difficulty relating this to writing in this format. I still haven’t browsed any of the posts on here and I plan to—hopefully more will be related to stance topics. It would be pretty awesome to get a grip on other’s understandings on topics and ideas I’ve been lacking or blind to due to my privilege or ignorance. I loathe using the term critical reading or critical thinking… (I hope I don’t begin saying awesome like every other secondary school teacher because it’s a safe adjective) but it applies to here—in the sense that the reader needs to interact with the reading or essay… so to speak.
I have been motivated to write, I used to want to be an author. Bet, I would like to publish a book. However… exigency… that is a strong word. I have trouble sharing personal ideas, beliefs, morals and ideals with people I hardly know. Which is ironic, because by the time I was a teenager I was pretty white and middle class. I’ve written papers for class. The last legitimate paper I wrote was for a course on Chaucer—would you believe there is a Chaucer writing society?! The professor was sure to share he had a few published works on the site we were to use. It sucked. I hate Chaucer’s writing style, humor, content and wonder how this is considered timeless literature. The Canterbury Tales was as innovative and entertaining as There’s Something About Mary. It’s dated. It was funny at that exact moment… and then never again. Never, it isn’t relevant. Some of it was entertaining but… really this is a basis of a doctorate? Commentary or not … let’s focus on something more recent with more diverse authors that are still alive and can verbal express their concerns on current events. I’m not using this displaced analogy to meet the word count and I’m not trying to sound like that person who uses terms like swill or common… because… condescending !!!person… maybe I’m that passionate about it. Honestly though, I really haven’t ever been motivated to write. It’s either been academic or to humor a friend. Real talk, I prefer editing other people’s work.
