HOW WOULD YOU LIKE YOURS COOKED?

How would you like yours, rare, medium or well done? After reading Jonathan Swift’s prose work, “A Modest Proposal” (Swift pg. 185), I find this is a question that would require an answer, if Swift had not the intentions of writing a political satire. When I first read this story; I am sure my first impression was the same as many people, who first read it in 1729 and since then. I was totally repulsed at the thought eating another human being, no matter how juicy, tasty and was well prepared. But, that was not Swift’s intent; he wanted to get the attention of his fellow countrymen because he believes Ireland was facing a grave problem of poverty.

Swift’s total concern was for his country, Ireland and her people. He could see what most people chose to ignore. Everywhere people traveled it was “……crowded with beggars of the female-sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags and importuning every passenger for an alms” (185). Most of these women were unmarried and could not work because they spent their days begging for food in order to feed their children. This same lifestyle would be bestowed upon these children, a vicious cycle that needed to be broken. Swift knew the cycle had to be broken and he also knew he had to convince his countrymen of the same.

Swift set forth to shock the readers of his day. He ran through all numbers of people, like an accountant of today would figure a profit margin, to explain how many would be having children; how many children would be born and the cost to feed and clothe them through the years. Then he explains his proposal and the benefits for all, including the country of Ireland.

Swift explains his idea no matter how repulsing; he was focusing on and attempting to solve the problem while other chose to turn a blind eye. Yet he did try to encourage others to come forth with their ideas. “After all, I am not so violently bent upon my own opinion as to reject any offer proposed by wise men, which shall be found equally innocent, cheap, easy, and effectual” (191). Of Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” all he wanted was to get the blinders off and force his countrymen to face the problem of an unbroken cycle of poverty among the people of Ireland.

Elizabeth Medina

Medina, No to Budget Cuts in Higher Education.

Written March 29, 2010, Elizabeth Medina a BSN student passionately wrote this essay to address the seriousness in cutting back on funds for higher education. Medina addressed her  essay to college students, Georgia citizens and Georgia State Legislators. She emphasized on the gloomy economy and its many effects it was having on its citizens especially college students and their student loans. 
As noted by  Medina Higher education institutions are currently facing $265 million in reduction and the Chancellor was given a project to develop a plan to cut an additional, $300 million.(194) Senator Seth Harp showed concern and some skepticism about the 300 million and the outcome of its effect.

As stated by Medina not only student will be affected by budget cuts but the faculty, staff and surrounded communities and because of this  Georgia State Legislators should not cut back on higher education fund.(194) Medina showed grave concern for herself and her peers when she states that with tuition increase higher education will soon be unaffordable for average middle-class parents. She addressed the fact that college hopefuls have a hard enough time obtaining the SAT’s or ACT’s score for college entrance now they have to worry about  Budget cuts for their education.

Medina showed how students can be affected  by these cut. Courses can be eliminated from certain programs, causing some student to have to pay more or lose their degree. We see that some student also gave some suggestion  on how to save money so they wouldn’t have to deal with the Budget cut. Some suggestion mentioned by one student Ann Pate, talked about ending  grass cutting on campus, closing computer lab and utilizing empty building instead of building new ones (197)

Polls show that a variety of voters was backing the tax increase. It showed an estimate of about  $350 million would be gained which they say will provide more money for higher education. The American Cancer Society and other Heart and Lung association agreed that the tobacco tax increase is one avenue that could help generate an increase in revenue.(198)

This bill they are trying to pass , Budget cut in higher education is not beneficiary for students, parents, faculty,  staff and Georgia citizens. Everyone knows that the economy is bad, and with this bill college students like myself and peers will be  feeling the pinch.  Georgia State Legislator should pay more attention to the students who will be the leaders of tomorrow. They should be given a chance to graduate without wondering how to pay back their student loan, or if they can enter or finish college. There must be other avenues they can look into without touching  higher education .

Reading a BOOK is Better

John Taylor Gatto wrote “Why Schools Don’t Educate” to heighten the awareness of the effects television and schools have had on children. It was a speech he presented after he received an award. John Taylor was thoroughly involved in the educational development of students in which he cared about the students and their progress. To relate to his audience he seems to present this read in a personal tone in which he expresses concern.

John Taylor expresses his concerns by revealing things he has encountered because of the acceptable natures that Television and society has created.  He demonstrates this crisis when he mentions , “ the children I teach have almost no curiosity, and what little they do have is transitory, they display a lack of concentration” to further demonstrate he states they have “ they have a poor sense of the future, they lack compassion and or cruel” . The lack of concern for children and their future has become an epidemic throughout the school system.  Gatto is clearly wanting to emphasize it’s not simply watching television is the consumption of it. I remember as a child to help us stay focus it was a rule my mom implemented no television watching during the week. It’s important that other things are used as a form of entertainment.

His audience would be primarily educators they definitely uphold the most challenging position aside from the parent. However I agree with Gatto. More can be done to revitalize our children and to help them benefit from the education that is being offered. There are still teachers that care.

Ellen Goodman, "Girls will be Girls

Ellen Goodman, “Girls will be girls”

In Girls will be girls, written May 25th 2002, Ellen Goodman uses the term “really mean girls” to describe  girls who like to go about spreading hurtful lies, nasty gossips and conversation which in turn could ruin or hurt someone’s reputation.
Goodman a Pulitzer Prize winner, an author, an essayist and television commentator is known for her past work experiences in countless newspapers through-out the USA included Newsweek, Detroit Free Press and Boston Globe. Goodman tries to persuade and show her readers that bullying isn’t only the forte of boys, but that there are also RMG’s -really mean girls who are bullies.

Goodman begins her piece with a dry, humorous, sarcastic remark from the popular TV series Ally McBeal. “In with Zeitgeist, and out with Zeitgeist, without even gaining an ounce.” She quotes and refers to the last episode from the series because there was an example of female bullying.
She praises Ally McBeal’s character in this episode depicted as a selfless mother to her onscreen daughter who gave up her job, her friends and her apartment to save her daughter Maddie from classmates who tormented her. They were called the RMG‘s, really mean girls (Goodman). Goodman says the episode is centred around “really mean girls” which she says had become one of the latest media mania - popular and much talked about.
The tone of Goodman’s work was one of concern for the general public as she feared a possible backlash from the episode. According to Goodman people had shown anxiety over followers who could imitate the RMG’s, becoming Alpha females, queen bees, girl bullies on “relational aggression”.(Goodman)

During Goodman’s collaboration with  author Patricia O’Brien on I know just what you mean, she pointed out that all females know about girls bullying and what grade it begins. She shows some analogies between boys and girls and says that cliques are to girls as bullies are to boys.
She argues that females are not coy innocent victims who lose their voices at adolescence instead their voices turn to whispers campaigns. In other words, while boys use their fists girls’ weapons are their mouths. (Goodman) It shows the way of bullying for boys is different for girls but the end result is same- bullying.
Goodman had an angry tone when writing about Rachel Simmons, author of Odd Girl Out and the statement she made to Oprah that being shunned was “meaner” than getting hit. She referred to the Columbine killings and asked, “wasn‘t Columbine worse than a cruel instant message?”(Simmons).
Goodman also quotes Marie Wilson- president of the Ms. Foundation who theorized that the way boys are masculinized and the way girls are feminized turns some of them into bullies(Goodman).

Goodman’s piece ended with Carol Gilligan, a psychologist who worked with girls and observed boys. In her new book, The Birth Of Pleasure, she wrote that while boys begin their initiation from age five, girls also experience a similar initiation into womanhood during adolescence. Gilligan disagreed that the mean girls media mania was inevitable. She believed that the ‘inevitable’ lies with the parents upbringing in their children and allowing the boys to be boys and girls to be girls.

I have to agree with Carol Gilligan that the inevitable lies with the parents whose duties are to raise their children with values and integrity, thus making it clear that there is no integrity in being a bully. Whether Ally McBeal’s episode of, “really mean girl” caused more harm than good by triggering imitation acts of female bullying, is debatable. However, the episode brings awareness to the important issue of female bullying and the lesson that one should not condone it but instead, stand up speak out. After all, it could be any one of our families being bullied.

Speak up !!!!!

Deborah Tannen wrote “Indirectness Is Not Insecurity” (1994). Tannen defines the meaning of the old saying “it’s not what you say but how you say it”. In her essay Tannen argues that indirect communication in the work place can be just as effective as direct commands, which relaxes the working environment. Tannen recognizes that weather a boss, peer, or subordinate everyone responds differently. To demonstrate this she mentions two tapings of a conversation between a manger and their employees. I would definitely say her targeted audience would be those that hold a position of authority rather it be men or women.

                Tannen first example of this when she presents Mark a manager in a meeting attempted to give twenty five directives in which only four were softened by indirectness. The manager emphasized this to the employee when he states “because that’s who you mean that’s what you outta say”. Tannen then mentions that indirect request may at times be confused with just being a statement of need or a description of a situation. Then she presents us with the dialogue between another manager Kristin and the employee Charles. Kristin took the softer approach when speaking to Charles about his drafted report.  Tannen wanted to place emphasizes on the facts if Kristin would have been more direct in her approach weather than indirect Charles would have understand her view and what changes needed to be made to his report . She supports then when presenting line by line dialogue between Charles and Kristin.

For example Kristin in their conversation specifically suggest that Charles put in the conversion rate from local currency to dollars when she said “it might be useful – I’m not sure were going to show that.” Because Charles did not respond to her suggestion she took another approach to express herself more indirectly by asking whether the director would know the conversion rate if he presented the report differently.” (165) but he still didn’t adhere to the advice she then had to tell him what to do. Then she needed to add additional softener by adding reason or explanation for change.

The arrangement of this conversation was presented in this manner to simply prove, directness is not necessarily logical or effective. Neither was It convincing in terms of indirectness which most tend to believe manipulative or expression of insecurity. Indirectness can be just as powerful as a direct tone.

Smoking & Studing

A long exam, a speech in front of the class, a conference with your Professor, after any of these situations some students think to themselves, at least the ones that smoke, I really could use a cigarette. They walk outside the building and light one up, totally enjoying the calming sensation. In T. Leigh Maxwell’s essay “A Deadly Education” (168-175), she strongly supports a total smoke free campus at Clayton State University. I am just a part-time student and only on campus a couple of hours; I am finding it hard to agree or disagree with Maxwell, as far as a total ban on campus. I do agree with her concern over secondhand smoke and her expressed anger that non-smokers should give way to the smoker’s right to light up.

Maxwell does not believe having the students smoke outside the building, at least thirty feet away from any entrances, is good enough. Her concerns are with the students that walk through or near by the smoker(s) having to breathe the secondhand smoke. “Every day non-smoking students are expected to attend a poisonous and polluted campus to get their higher education” (170).  Maxwell does give supported medical evidence of how hazardous secondhand smoke can be for any person breathing the “…..putrid clouds of poisonous second hand smoke…..” (168). The health dangers are serious and most people are diagnosed in their later years. Besides lung cancer, some other diseases are breast cancer, sinus cancer, bladder cancer, etc…(170)  just from breathing secondhand smoke. Maxwell does present a strong case for a smoke free campus, until it is the politically correct thing to do it won’t be done.

Maxwell, T. Leigh. “A Deadly Education” Connections: Reading for First-Year Writing. Clayton State    University, 2011. 168-175.           

                                              

Nat Hentoff, "Should This Student Been Expelled"

In America, controversy has always surrounded the First Amendment which grants freedom of speech.
From the politicians, to lawmakers, to ordinary citizens, the arguments for and against what one should say and how one should say it continues to rage on, as some people try to change, abuse or misuse this amendment which was  handed down by America’s forefathers. And on the night of October 18^th 1990, a Brown’s University student and Varsity football player stirred further controversy which added to the growing debate on the First Amendment (1991). Doug Hann was intoxicated on his twenty-first birthday when he shouted outside his dormitory window, “Fuck you niggers!” The racially derogatory statements caused great offence to many students, and a freshman consequently opened his window and politely asked Hanns not to be so loud and offensive. According to the Brown Daily Herald, the polite request was met with further offensive insults, after Hanns noticed an Israeli flag in the student’s dorm. He shouted, “Fucking Jew!” causing further offense to another group of students.

Defence

In an article from the Village Voice titled Should this student have been expelled? Widely published author Nat Hentoff argued in Hann’s defence saying that he had a right to freedom of speech and shouldn’t be expelled. (1991). Despite Hentoff’s declaration that Hanns shouldn’t be punished, it is inarguable Hanns had no excuse for hurling racist, anti Semitic insults. He incited a breach of the peace and a heated verbal confrontation ensued between the friends of Hanns and the freshman. The consequences for Hann’s irresponsible racist and bigoted insults could have been devastating, possibly resulting in violence. Though it didn’t result in violence, it did cause a heated campus debate. Taking that into account, he should not have been expelled
.

.Gone too far

The Undergraduate Disciplinary Council and the president of Browns University Vartan Gregorian deliberated and agreed that Hanns had gone too far with his liberty of speech. Hanns was expelled and barred from the university for life. However, according to the New York Times Gregorian denies that they have expelled anyone for the exercise of free speech.(201)

Henoff, who is also known for his writings in the New Yorker and the Washington Post argued in the Village Voice article, that it was unfair and hypocritical of the Browns University president to use the “hate speech code” to expel  Hanns. Henoff quoted Gregorian’s words from a press release which stated that “the Browns Codes do not proscribe words, epithets, or slander, they proscribe behavior.”(203)

Henoff believed that the, “hate speech codes” which was use in Hann’s expulsion, violated the first amendment and Hann’s right to exercise freedom of speech. The “hate speech” code had been around for a while and no one had ever been expelled for violating any of these codes until Hanns. This caused quite a stir and attracted much attention to the case
.

.Support for Hann

The National Institute Against Prejudice claimed that it had never heard of a case like Hann’s. They said in other instances that they knew of, the accused students were sent for counseling and not expelled.

They appeared favorable to the presidents of those educational institutions adding that they wise enough to help the students not expel them.

Other apparent supporters of Hann’s included the ACLU, free thinkers on the student paper and unaffiliated objectors to expelling students for what they say opposed to what they do (202).

After much criticism for his action, President Gregorian wrote a letter to reputable newspaper -the New York Times, justifying his actions by introducing the university’s code of conduct.

The Way Forward 
Of course both Hentoff and President Gregorian could argue their points continuously resulting in no resolution to the question of whether Hann should have been expelled or not. Some legal scholars say that the United States should reconsider its position on hate speech. In a New York Times article titled “Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech” and dated June 12^th 2008, Jeremy Waldron, a legal philosopher is quoted from a New York Review of Books saying: “It is not clear to me that the Europeans are mistaken when they say that a liberal democracy must take affirmative responsibility for protecting the atmosphere of mutual respect against certain forms of vicious attack.” Waldron’s view is worth consideration because the reality is that hurling hateful and racist speech towards minorities is protected by the First Amendment, even when it causes much distress to people and incites loathing and violence. Perhaps the answer lies in reforming America’s laws on hate speech and possibly updating the First Amendment to make clearer distinctions between exercising one’s right to freedom of speech as opposed to using hate speech with the intention of causing offense to minorities and possibly inciting a breach of the peace.

 

References:
Nerula, Smita. Good Riddance. Browns Daily Herald, (February, 13)
The New York Times, (February 12) 
Henoff, Nat. Should This Student Have Been Expelled. Village Voice (1991)