The Battleground

D.A.R.E. commercial

2008-04-06T13:33:00.001-07:00

Here's an expample of the type of material used to spread the word of project D.A.R.E.

Drug Abuse Resistance Education...Effective?

2008-04-06T12:43:00.000-07:00

Upon scanning the plethera of articles that the Purdue Library has to offer, I came across a paper labeled 'Project D.A.R.E. Outcome Effectiveness Revisted'. It discussed the D.A.R.E. program we all endured in our early years of education. More specifically, it stated that D.A.R.E. is an ineffective program, and has little to no influence on whether or not individuals will experiment with drugs. Judgeing from their studies, it is obvious that an alternate approach is vital to get through to our youth about drug use. Considering the immense drug use that floods our society, it is obvious that those who participated in the program recieved little to no benefit from it.

Additionally, since the program has been deemed ineffective, the immense budget spent on D.A.R.E. is going to waste. Although spending the budget stimulates the economy, the money could be used on a program that actually makes an effect. I suggest that project D.A.R.E. be given to students at a later age than the typical fifth grade, considering students at such a young age are typically not exposed to drugs and are not truely aware of what they are. Also, I believe that the program should scratch the 'Just Say No' philosophy, because it is clear that it is not in any way beneficial to teach students the idea of just saying no. Students should be taught about drugs in a way that doesn't merely attempt to scare them. They should be given facts rather than frightening stories of individuals who smoked weed once and eventually turned into crack cocaine addicts. Also, focus should be put more on drugs that have a higher addiction/dependence rate and that have a worse physical effect than drugs which are nearly harmless and have barely a slight physical dependence rate. An example of which is the intense focus on marijuana that D.A.R.E. entails. Although marijuana is placed in schedule one of the criminal drug act spectrum (classifed as one of the most dangerous drugs, along side heroin) it is the least harmful drug on the Lancet drug classification. However, D.A.R.E. takes most of it's time teaching about the dangers of marijuana, rather than focus on drugs such as heroin and methamphetamine, drugs of a much more harmful substance. It is flaws in the D.A.R.E. system like this that deem it ineffective and thus having no impact on the probability of an individual to experiment with drugs. Therefore, project D.A.R.E. is ineffective in it's pursuit to end drug use.

Hail Hitlary

2008-04-02T15:56:00.001-07:00

On the subject of Hitlary Clinton, let me be quite clear. The female gender cannot be held accountable for the actions of such a coward. Any woman that would allow herself to be humiliated in front of the entire planet by her husband and continue to stay in what she thought was a monogamous relationship is a joke, and she by no means be running our country. the moment that it was deemed that Bill Clinton did, in fact, have sexual relations with that woman, Hilary had one way to get out of the situation with dignity and respect. Instead of leaving her husband to continue to seek entertainment in the interns, she foolishly stayed with him and lost whatever respectful attributes she may have possessed. We cannot have such a woman in charge of the most powerful nation in the world. If denying Hilary presidency means that women have to wait another four years to obtain the White House, then so be it. Unless Chelsea decides to step up to the plate, I doubt there will be another Clinton in the Oval Office for quite some time.

Attack of the Tweens

2008-04-02T07:09:00.001-07:00

While strolling around Target one day, taking in the plethera of items available to me, I came upon a group of ten or eleven year old girls. They were dressed quite scantily in clothing I would not deem appropriate for a middle school student, wandering up and down the aisles singing songs about their humps, their lovely lady lumps. Needless to say I was quite stricken by this. Not that I was shocked, no, today's society has become used to the idea of our youth attempting to seem older. I was, however, slightly disgusted. I don't see how a ten year old singing about their lady lumps makes any sense; not just because they don't have any, but because I would never want my ten year old daughter to be one of these 'tweens' (not still a child, not yet a teenager, but somewhere in beTWEEN). I understand that our society is changing to be more open about sexuality or what not, but I'm not comfortable with ten year olds strolling around Target with their bodies barely covered. I also find it quite disturbing that they find it appropriate to act as such. I would never let my ten year old daughter leave the house looking like these children did. It was something similar to Abercrombie Kids gone skanky, if possible.

The question I have is whether or not these so called Tweens comprehend what they're singing along to, and if they understand the message they're sending with the clothing they sport. Have our youth truely been warped to this monstrous state of growing up before they hit their teenage years? Or are they merely naive, believing they have developed mentally beyond their years and have surpassed the state of previous ten and eleven year olds? I do not favor either option. I yearn for the days when middle schoolers were still obsessed with boy bands and PG 13 movies were still intense. Now, with lyrics of innapropriate songs embedded in minds of our youth and what's left of sensible clothing in their closets are only church clothes, we can only reminisce about times when things were not so. I fear for the state of things ten years from now; how much worse can it get?

Life in Plastic: Analysis

2008-03-31T07:41:00.000-07:00

The article previously summarized, 'Life in Plastic', focuses on the impression on our youth made by the mass of plastic that is Barbie. Although there are many different views on the effect that Barbie has made on our society, I hold an opinion that is not presented in the article. She may have an improbable figure, and some may take it too seriously, but when it comes down to it, Barbie is just a doll; a mere plaything to entertain children so their parents can have a slice of free time. She was not invented to warp children's minds into thinking they had to look like her. Barbie's sole purpose (besides bringing in big money for mattel) is to give our youth a somewhat realistic yet basic toy to play with. The idea that she has become this icon of perfection, that she has created the standard by which we are to live by, is ridiculous. Barbie is a doll, and that's all there is to it. She is a genius invention, a basic doll that you can dress up differently and sell as a different product. Those who put too much emphasis on her effect on the world are thinking too deeply into the issue. I believe she inspires creativity; Barbie can be whoever you want her to be. She inspires our youth to make something of themselves; they can be whoever they want to be.

Life In Plastic

2008-03-23T16:51:00.000-07:00

The heated topic of how the media is shaping the image of what we are 'supposed' to look like is discussed in Life In Plastic, an article featured in The Economist in 2002. It refers to the image of Barbie, and whether she promotes the improbable look of "buxom breasts, a wafer-thin waist and permanently arched feet waiting to slip into a pair of high heels." Both sides of the argument are put forth in the article. The position that somehow the body image she presents has turned overtime into an idea of perfection as a negative and a positive are presented.

The first party states that the blonde haired, blue eyed piece of plastic setting an ideal is a negative, that having our youth believe they should want to be like Barbie is wrong. They say that Barbie's iconic status has contirbuted to weight-anxiety in teenagers along with magazines and television, that she promotes slimness, beauty, and youth as feminine success.

However, there are those who believe that the image of Barbie's figure is paid attention to less by her owners than her profession, or which version of Barbie, if you will. They argue that Barbie does not warp the minds of our youth to think that they have to look like her. Rather, they present the idea that while Barbie may look like a 'blonde bimbo', she promotes much more. As an astronaut, an engineer, a lifegaurd, firefighter, and many other careers of a striking variety, Barbie gives the idea that you can be whatever you want to be. She gives hope to those who play with her, inspiring them to make something of themselves. They claim that Barbie is a child of 'liberated times', that she 'empowers girls after all'.

The article briefly covers Mattel's success, worth more than Armani and right behind the Wall Street Journal. Whatever the impression that Barbie gives our youth, no one can deny that Barbie has indeed made a lasting impression on history. Placed in the 1976 Bicentennial Time Capsule, Barbie represents part of our culture, whichever image you take from her. No matter which of her many forms and professions she is at the time, Barbie is an icon of our time.

Hollywood ScrutinizationLIVE YOUR OWN LIFE

2008-02-25T07:56:00.000-08:00

It baffles me that our society is so obsessed with Hollywood and celebrities. It seems that the smallest events in their lives consume ours; the public is so focused on them that they sometimes forget that their lives are just as important. Honestly, who cares if some actress half way across the country named their baby 'Apple'? Not I. Why should I listen to Paris Hilton? What outstanding achievement has she accomplished that deems it reasonable for me to listen to her advice? She tells me to vote, I should probably go vote. I'm not saying that you shouldn't vote, voteing is extremely important (especially amongst our age group), but I'm not going to do it just because some rich blonde girl in California tells me to. Paris herself didn't even cast a vote after being one of the covergirls for P. Diddy's Vote or Die campaign. How's that for irony? Or idiocy, for that matter. Speaking of which, I fail to comprehend how Paris came up with the idea that she created the phrase 'that's hot'. I don't understand how she thinks she's original in saying this. I believe it was VH1's Best Week Ever that said "please, somebody coin 'that's cold' before she comes out with winterwear".

And Britney Spears; the posterchild for our generation, the product of today's media. It's no wonder she's going crazy and shaving her head, she hasn't had a moments peace since she was on the Mickey Mouse Club when she was six years old! Having cameras constantly shoved in your face for two decades when you go to the grocery store is enough to make anyone a little looney. Honestly, I feel terrible for Britney. Her six year old self had no idea what she was getting into.

The media's focus on celebrities is a negative on both ends. It causes distress amongst those who are constantly scrutinized by America as well as those who spend their free time stalking the actions of people half way across the country (whom they've never met and know only through television screens). There's all this talk about the image of celebrities and how it's having a negative impact on how we see ourselves, causing us to overanalyze our bodies and nitpick at the little things. No one is perfect. Celebrities obviously aren't (one word; airbrush). We know this, we are constantly told it, and yet we continue to base our perceptions of what we should look like from the media. If our society focused less on those publicized by the media and more on our own lives this idea of what we SHOULD look like would dwindle. I fail to understand why I should look like people who are making fools of themselves in front of the entire nation. Most of the civilized world, come to think of it.

Take Lindsay Lohan, for example. She's been in the spotlight since she was young; we all remember her in the remake of The Parent Trap. Since then she's been popping up continuously in various movies, as well as on the news quite often lately for her drug use and DWIs. She's grown to have a image completely different than who we saw her as when she first appeared on screen. If this is the image everyone seems to be going for, then I'm slightly confused; I wasn't aware that it was a good thing to look like a strung out cokehead. And yet, we continue to focus on them. If she's having her own problems, let her deal with them. Don't stalk her with videocameras and broadcast it for the world to see, how is that helping her get over her addiction? It's just putting more pressure on her. I'm not saying that she should be acting how she is, she's a role model whether she likes it or not and she needs to pull herself together. I'm merely saying the media should focus on more vital matters instead of the trivial trash that gets thrown on 9 o'clock news. If celebrities were left to live their own lives and not persistantly hounded by paparazzi they might be able to calm down and straighten themselves out, and we'd have more appropriate role models.

****
After writing this post I proceeded to watch some of Dave Chappelle's stand up on Comedy Central. If you haven't had the pleasure of watching Dave Chappelle, take my word for it; He's extremely hilarious and induces genuine laughter. I mention this because in the act Dave was performing he the actually mentioned the topic of this post. He talks about how foolish it is that we're all so focused on celebrities and that our concentration on them is ridiculous (once I find out which act it is I'll attach a video of it on this post).

I,Robot; Will Smith's One Negative

2008-02-22T19:59:00.001-08:00

Although it was not my intention to blog about movie reviews, I cannot refrain from stating my opinion on this subject. I recently watched the movie I,Robot. Never wavering as a Will Smith fan, I went into it with much anticipation; I expected nothing less than excellence from Will. However, I found myself sorely disappointed merely minutes into viewing.

The amount of advertisements placed throughout the show was unbelievable. There seemed to be no attempt to cover up the fact that they were trying to advertise the product; Smith spent more time in the first half of the movie talking about his Converses than developing the plot. The Audi symbol popped up more than five times, which was nowhere near the airtime the Converses got; flashes of the box, compliments on his shoes, footage of Smith's feet alone, etc. were constantly shown. The ads made the movie so unbearable I didn't know if it was worth it to continue watching.

However, I made it through to the end, and my overall conclusion is thus; I,Robot was a very good story idea, but it was delivered terribly. The advertisements alone ruined the movie for me, but it wasn't the only thing. The woman who played the main female role was a terrible casting choice. She attempted to portray the unbelievably cliche role of the pretty girl who's actually smart, proving her intelligence through seemingly advanced diction. Although she tried to surprise everyone and prove that she's more than a pretty face, she failed miserably. Her word choice was such that it was plainly obvious that she would never be using these sentences in real life; they sounded awkward when she spoke them. Most of her lines seemed as if the writer had simply taken a thesaurous and changed words in his script to sound more intelligent. However, he failed and his characters sounded like fools. Will's character even had a line pointing out her seeminginly intelligent word choices, that he couldn't understand what she was saying because her language was too advanced for him. I was very disappointed in Will for allowing the writers to make him look so unintelligent.

Also, the third 'rule' (one of three that were the basis of the plot) was worded so confusingly that I misinterperated it to mean the exact opposite of what it was supposed to mean. There were many aspects of the story that, if delivered differently, would have made I,Robot one of the top films of the year. However, that is not the case, and I am sorely disappointed to say that I have one notch against Will Smith.

I would also like to point out the ironic fact that I spent half of this post critisizing I,Robot for advertising, and I'm putting links to the products websites on the blog.

Chipotle vs Qdoba

2008-02-22T19:30:00.001-08:00

It has come to my attention that there has been a lot of focus on the mexican chain Qdoba. It is said to be better than Chipotle; I disagree. After several trials, my tastesbuds lie with Chipotle without question. The only leg up that Qdoba has is the ever popular queso cheese sauce, which even cheese haters such as myself can appreciate. However, I see this as their only advantage. Qdoba is nothing more than a knock off of Chipotle. I realize this is a bold statement, but I believe that Qdoba is to Chipotle as Burger King is to Mcdonalds; second place, never as good as the original.

Qdoba is all around significantly blander than Chipotle. Their steak has absolutely no flavor, leaving the customer very dissatisfied. Their chicken is sub par at most, and the other choices for meat aren't even appealing. Their corn needs salt, their guacamole is a catastrophe, and their portions are so small I am often tempted to buy two (even though I don't want to waste my money on something I'm not even fond of, but if there's not a Chipotle around I really have no choice). The one dish I will give them credit for is the chicken nachos with queso; quite delicious, but no where near a steak burrito bowl from Chipotle.
Qdoba's lame attempt to overtake the spotlight in quick mexican meals is fruitless. While Qdoba may be open for breakfast (24 hours, if I remember correctly), I would much rather stifle my cravings for a good burrito until Chipotle opens the next morning.

Purpose of the Battleground

2008-02-11T07:39:00.000-08:00

There are those who believe that keeping your thoughts to yourself is more than an acceptable policy; I do not agree. I have discovered throughout my years that I am a rather opinionated individual, and I do not like the idea of stifleing my thoughts. I find that I have quite lot to say on a large variety of subjects, and keeping a collection of what I think was very appealing to me. I do not mean the idea of a diary, but more along the lines of a place where I can state my opinion and await a rebuttle. Therefore, you are now reading what I plan to be somewhat of a battleground; I urge you to present your opinion on the subject matter of which I'm writing, whether it contradict or agree with what I say. For the most part, I'm looking for a debate.
I do not always intend on discussing subjects which cause an unreasonable heated rise out of readers, but rather issues which some may find slightly trivial. I find that with less important matters there is a larger base of people who can relate and give their opinion, instead of a topic which someone would be knowledgeable of only if they scrutinize the 5, 7, and 10 o'clock news on a regular basis. I intend to appeal to the average individual with a schedule and a life.