Compare and Contrast: I'm Happy with an Arranged Marriage

Comparing and contrasting is the way we separate two ideas. We use it to differentiate them, and weigh their pros and cons to see which side they would rather take. It can be either one, neither one, or both. This especially helps if we are stuck between two things and we don’t know which one to go with.

In Gitangeli Sapra’s “I’m Happy with an Arranged Marriage,” Sapra weighs the pros and cons of an arranged marriage. She provides the reader with some information about arranged marriages, before they can form a judgment themselves. She states that “40% of ‘marriages made for love’ still end in divorce. By contrast, the rate of break-ups of arranged marriages in the Asian community is far lower.” Sapra is arguing that arranged marriages really aren’t that bad, despite the commonly attributed horrors that everybody seems to know. She says that “arranged unions are based on mutual interests and similar levels of education rather physical attraction.” While she argues that arranged marriages can actually be good things, she also addresses the fact that forced marriages still occur, making her argument more credible. However, she still abides by her statement that arranged marriages can be a good thing despite what Westerners may think.

Personally, I agree with Gitangeli Sapra in her argument. I don’t think that arranged marriages are really as bad as we credit them to be. Sure, it’s possible that two people that absolutely hate each other can wind up married. But, arranged marriages still come with a choice. If you meet that person and you decide you don’t like them, you don’t need to marry them, just move on to the next lucky person. Arranged marriages are usually more based on similarities, financial needs, and common interests. It’s like having a friend, except you’re married to them. Everything you might need, they will have. If you feel like having going skydiving and your partner also enjoys skydiving, there’s no question there about whether or not you should go skydiving, because it’s a common interest. In fact, arranged marriages kind of remind me of speed dating or match.com. Really, it’s just finding a person you’re compatible with and making it official, except in arranged marriages, there are a lot of people who love you trying to help you decide if you should marry this person. It’s really a great way to weed people out and make marriages last longer. 

Response to Stephanie Ericsson's The Ways We Lie

                In The Ways We Lie, Stephanie Ericsson categorizes some of the most common ways to lie. These include both the lies we tell other people and the ones we tell ourselves. The ones she includes are the white lie, facades, ignoring the plain facts, deflecting, omission, stereotypes and clichés, groupthink, out-and-out lies, dismissal and delusion. She asks the question of which lies are actually okay to tell. When is it okay to lie? Some of the lies we tell may seem harmless in the heat of the moment, but in the long term, will they be justified?

                I agree with the way Ericsson categorizes the lies we tell. She explains each lie very thoroughly and even includes a quote to back them up. If I could add in another lie, it would be plagiarism. Plagiarism is when a person takes someone else’s work out of context and calls it their own. This lie is very harmful to both the victim and the person claiming someone else’s work, because the victim loses their credibility to someone else, and the liar is depicted as, well, a liar. It really doesn’t get worse than that.

                Ericsson wrote this essay to tell all the ways we lie. Other than explaining each lie, she also talks about why we do it, and the thought process behind the decision that lying would be better than telling the truth. The purpose is to make the reader wonder about the world we live in. If so many people are lying, who’s to tell what a lie is and what is not anymore? What kind of world is it if all we do is lie? What if our world unto itself is a lie? Which lie should we believe next? These sorts of questions make the reader wonder when exactly it was that we have become so dependent on lying.

                Lying is a case by case situation. You need to consider the consequences of your lies. If your lie affects too many people, it can become extremely messy. If you’re the only one who suffers, it becomes okay to lie. If you’re the only one benefitting from it, it’s still okay. But it should never be the case that you benefit and others lose. That’s how I feel. 

Response to Robert Connors' How in the World Do You Get a Skunk Out of a Bottle?

Robert Connors’ How in the World Do You Get a Skunk Out of a Bottle? is about a university professor who saves a skunk from the terrible fate of having his head stuck in a glass jar for the rest of its life. He starts off slightly hesitant to whether he should save the skunk because of the possible consequences, but ultimately decides to forgo his rescue. He comes up with several ways to help the skunk, but they’re all too risky. The solution that he ends up using is just to hold the poor creature in one hand and the jar in the other, and twist and pull. After its release, it looks back, and the two of them share a moment of understanding.

The essay is titled as a question because Connors spends a majority of the narration coming up with a solution to the problem. He first goes through a process of convincing himself to approach the skunk, and when he finally decides to do it, he has to think about a good way to free the creature. At first, it seems unlikely for it to be released with the skunk getting scared and spraying him or it getting hurt. At the end, he does come up with a solution to the problem, and that’s why the title is in the form of a question.

I think the purpose of Connors’ essay is to entertain the readers. Very few people have ever encountered a problem like having to pull a skunk out of a bottle. The readers might find it quite interesting to see (from the point of view of the narrator) what it’s like to go through such a thing, so it makes them feel like they’ve had this kind of experience before too. Another purpose would be to persuade the readers from littering. Connors’ essay recalls the step by step thought process of freeing the skunk, and the reader gets a first-hand account of how difficult that is. He states that the skunk is suffering and suffocating, and he has to go through all sorts of possibly dangerous feats to rescue it. This is using pathos to play on the sympathy of the reader and persuade them not to litter anymore, because small animals can easily get trapped in its confines and die. 

Advertisement Influence: Olay

            In today’s manipulative, beauty-cautious world, money and appearances are everything. Businesses and corporations are always trying to appeal to the consumer, always trying to sell something. Seventeen is a popular magazine; teenager girls preach by it and the magazine knows it. Like most magazines, it features a number of advertisements, and in this issue, an Olay Complete advertisement is the first one seen. It’s two page spread is sure to be an eye-catching influence.

Pop singer Carrie Underwood is the face of this skincare corporation. Just featuring her boosts sales, because all teenager girls want to be like Carrie Underwood, and by subliminal advertising and false authority, they think they can be like her by using the product. The ad claims that “Olay Complete Daily UV blocks 92% of harmful UV rays.” Numbers like 92% also help sales because people are drawn to numbers, and numbers don’t lie. Since the number 92 is so close to 100, the product claims to be near guaranteed to work.

A Seventeen style professional named Ashley recalls a time when she received a scholarship to her dream school. She says that “[it] was one of the most exhilarating moments of [her] life.” The reader can’t help but feel happy for her and as a result, want this kind of thing to happen to themselves. It also says “check out my tips below for making your dreams a reality.” It taunts the reader into wanting to read and follow the tips. The ad makes it so that everyone can be just like Ashley and Carrie Underwood. Of course, Underwood has made her way to fame and fortune, but the ad incorporates their “tips”. Hard work pays off; using Olay doesn’t. This ad also gives the reader “a chance to win big” by offering tickets to see Carrie Underwood at the CMA Music Festival. These irrelevant prizes are like the Happy Meal toys from McDonald’s – a prize for doing something under influence. This ad is telling readers to buy their product so they can step into the shoes of someone they can only dream of being. These girls will change by using this Olay product, and their self-confidence will be boosted when they finally have something in common with Carrie Underwood. 

Response to Alissa Steiner's "Depression in College Students"

In “Depression in College Students”, Alissa Steiner talks about the battle of depression that college students often find themselves facing. Her thesis is “if counseling services on college campuses were better able to publicize and reach out to students, perhaps more students could get the help they need before it is too late.” She provides an annecdote about a student she once knew; Nima Shaterianl was a popular student who commited suicide. She also backs up her thesis with facts and statistics about depression and suicide. The science behind depression is explained in a way that allows the reader to undrestand how it works, as well as realize that seriousness behind the disease.  She also names triggering factors that lead to depression, such include school, work, extracurricular activities, family, etc. Steiner is also able to provide another real account of suicide, Elizabeth Shin, making the reality of the situation hit home. The readers are then able to relate to these accounts, because they too are college students, who could easily watch others, and well as themselves, go through the same things. A solution is offered, where Steiner informs the readera bout associations like CAPS that can help, and advices the readers what they can do for their own lives.

This essay really hit home, because I have a friend who battled depression for a long long time before she could finally win. She used to cut herself in her forearm; you can still see the scars when she wears short-sleeve t-shirts. It’s not something she hides, because she is so proud of herself for overcoming her depression. Unfortunately, not everybody is as strong as she is. It really is heartbreaking.

I thought that the essay was written very well, especially the way she formatted it into sections. There is one for recognizing depression, triggering factors, consequences, alternate solutions, and advice for the reader. It’s almost like a handbook or a guide, and it really defines each moment of depression and suicide, proving that even the earliest symptoms of depression are extremely important. I wouldn’t change anything about this essay.  

Response to Gerald Graff's "Hidden Intellectualism"

In “Hidden Intellectualism”, Gerald Graff talks about how educators are going about the wrong way in doing their job. They are so focused on academic intelligence that they completely ignore the values of being street smart. He believes that academic intelligence can be important, but students have things called interests as well, whether it is sports, fashion, dating or video games. If educators learn to incorporate these interests into academics, then students would actually be able to relate and turn it into something of educational value.

                The thesis is located at the end of the first paragraph. It states, “What doesn’t occur to us, though, is that schools and colleges might be at fault for missing the opportunity to tap into such street smarts and channel them into academic work.” Graff supports his claim by using himself as an example. He takes us back us back to his childhood, where he spent a lot of time trying to balance himself between being book-smart and impressing the “hoods”. On one hand, he used correct grammar and punctuation, but on the other, he had to prove he was a fighter. He was really into sports, and he found his comfort zone in reading sports books and magazines, a combination of the two things that originally had him torn. It goes to show you don’t need academic excellence to do “educational” things like debate, if it comes down to the subjects that he actually enjoys.

                Graff also explains that unlike academic subjects like Plato, interests and sports “satisfies the thirst for community.” When a debate about sports kicks off, it’s really anyone’s game. Anybody can have an opinion and the opportunity to throw in their two cents. It’s all about culture, and even people you’ve never met can join in. It is much unlike schoolwork, which is extremely limited to those that have actually achieved academic excellence and know what they’re talking about.

Students get excited about things like music, cars, sports and fashion. So why not let them explore these fields? A subject that bores a student will receive lackluster responses and efforts. If an educator is going to force a student to write a paper, they might as well allow students to write about what they’re interested in, and save everyone’s time and effort. The results will be a passionately written essay with tons of facts and arguments behind it, thus meeting academic standards.

Social Media Takeover

Steven Pinker and Peggy Orenstein both address the issues of social media through their respective articles, entitled “Mind Over Mass Media” and “I Tweet Therefore I am.” Steven Pinker believes that despite the common belief that social media and technological advance are ruining human intelligence, it is in fact quite the opposite. Technology has put us more in the reach of knowledge, as long as we control our temptations to use it for every little thing. Pinker uses examples and statistics to back up the fact that the common belief is false, that crime rates have gone down with advances in technology. He also uses logos to explain that social media is not detrimental to scientific progress, thus supporting the fact that social media does not make us stupider.

Peggy Orenstein believes that social media has taken a very positive turn into a person’s psychology by allowing them to be more open with the world. She explains how social media makes every article of information exposed to the world by people makes them self-conscience about how they appear. The things that they say in the heat of the moment via Twitter can define who they are to everyone else. It’s almost like a performance that they have to perfect. I enjoyed reading this essay; she uses an anecdote in the beginning to hook the reader in and make it relatable. She also provides evidence to back up her claim, citing fellow credible authors that have conducted surveys among social media users. I also like how at the end of her essay, she includes an enumeration of questions that are self-reflecting and very relatable. It makes the reader stop and think about how social media has affected their own lives, and possibly dig deeper. 

What We Eat Is Our Own Fault

David Zinczenko (Don’t Blame the Eater): When I was young, the only options I had for a daily, fulfilling meal were McDonald’s, Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken, or Pizza Hut. It caused me to gain 212 pounds.

Radley Balko (What You Eat is Your Business): Why would you do something like that? There are so many choices of food for you to eat. All of that junk has made you fat, and politicians are working to fight obesity by implementing “fat taxes”, and banning snacks and soda from school campuses and vending machines.

DZ: I was a latchkey kid; it was all I could afford. But then I turned my life around and joined the navy. Other kids don’t get this chance. If I could pinpoint one cause of these problems, it’s the fast food companies. They should put labels and warnings on foods they serve and sell, to let people know the potential risks of eating their products. There are so many blurred lines on their “fine print”, and that really needs to be fixed.

RB: I think that our government should work to improve the personal responsibility of your own health. They just take this chance to boost their public health insurers, and we’re busy paying for other people’s health issues. Instead of forcing restaurants to send every menu item to the lab, they should force people to think about their own health instead, and how the things they eat are affecting it negatively.

DZ: Money spent to treat diseases keep skyrocketing, but what other choices do teenagers have? There are so many fast food restaurants around, and they’re affordable and there is a lack of alternatives. The industry is marketing to children these products that will ruin their health, and they should protect themselves and their customers by providing them with the information they need.

RB: Congress needs to switch tactics and just reward people who make healthy choices and reprimand those who don’t.

Thesis: A person is responsible for everything they put in their own mouths, but the government isn’t entirely innocent here. Everybody should watch their own backs about what they eat, and should be controlling how much they eat and whether or not they’re making the right food choices. The government can do its part in helping influence that by reprimanding their unhealthy food choices and promoting good ones.