What Are You Eating?

This read was my favorite so far solely because it made me the most heated so far. I completely agree, 100%, with the first article. What people eat and how much of it they eat is THEIR sole responsibilty. Why should someone else suffer because of what another person likes stuffing their face in. These people need to learn what is good for them, in what quantities and when it's appropriate to "snack." I eat McDonalds all the time and I am nowhere near overweight, I'm acutally the complete opposite. I need to gain some weight. If I can eat unhealthy sometimes, and then balance it out with eating proper later and exercising, why can't other people? It's not that hard. If people are overweight, it IS their fault. No buts about it. I also don't like how the second article made a general statement about "teenagers" and how they drink soda more than anything else. I'm proud to say I don't drink nearly as much soda as I do water. If I have the choice, 9 times out of 10, I choose water. I love water more than any other drink available, especially vitamin water. I also happen to love milk. In case you didn't notice, this reading really grinded my gears.
I understand for the people that are genetically overweight. If the entire overweight population was people that are genetically overweight, THEN it'd be a bigger problem for us all to solve. But it's not. Most of these overweight people, are people that can change what they eat and their habits, and in the end, fix their problem.

We're All Celebrities?

This was an interesting read mainly because I think we can all relate to it. We all have a Facebook or a Myspace, and look what we're writing on right now... a blog site. I must say that I disagree with the author though. I don't think this makes us celebrities in anyway at all. If anything I get annoyed with people on Facebook or Myspace. Half the status updates and bulletins I see are pointless thoughts, ideas or sentences that I'm sorry I wasted my time reading. I could care less about a great majority of the things that pop up on my screen while surfing the networking sites.
I will say however that I agree a little bit more on the blog site concept. On these websites we just type away, revealing our thoughts about things we've seen or read. And then we have to go back and read our fellow classmates' blogs and comment on them. So we have to pay attention to each other and express our feelings together. That makes it a little bit more "celeb-like" I suppose.
Another thing I wanted to comment on is the privacy issue. I know on sites like Myspace, certain things that we don't really want to get out end up getting out. But this is our faults. Myspace doesn't require you to put anything on your profile that you don't want on there. You could have a blank one with no pictures and just music if you wanted. These sites only invade our privacy because we let them. We're the ones typing in the information.

Take a Picture?

This was a interesting read. I really can't believe that certain professionals are trying to lecture that "stopping" to take a picture is endangering them and those around them. Even in the interview with the 19 year old, he mentions that he never once "stopped" to take pictures. He was "running and taking pictures." He didn't block in or endanger anyone trying to get off the plane. And the author doesn't make any note of any accounts so far in which a person or people have gotten injured or anything because of someone stopping to take pictures. If professionals are really taking this that far then the last sentence says it all; "it may take someone dying" for people to consider stopping to take a picture as a dangerous thing.
I will say however that it is really annoying when people in front of you on the road start slowing down just to stare at a car accident on the side of the road. These people slow down traffic and increase the chance of another one happening. It might not completely relate to the topic at hand, but the read definately reminded me of this occuring. It happens all the time and it has a little to do with the subject. I don't see a problem however if the people aren't slowing anything down or endangering people. All they're trying to do is "snap" a little bit of history and maybe send it in to a major news media.

Single-Sex Education

I personally think single-sex education is a great idea. Everyone knows that playing "the mating-dating game" is a huge distraction and definately takes away from the time you could be using to study or do other school work. I know from personal experience that dating someone ultimately takes your focus away from school things that you're supposed to be focusing on, whether it be just texting them in class or skipping the class all together to grab lunch with them. It might just be me because I have horrible time management skills, but girls play a huge distraction when I'm trying to get work done. I believe that if I was to attend a single-sex education facility, such as the one we read about, I would be able to be more focused on the things I'd need to be focused on and wouldn't be so worried about impressing some cute girl in my Monday class.
But as for the arguement presented in the reading, if society is allowed to have female single-sex education, then it's only fair that men are allowed to have the same opportunity if they wish. You can't take away one and not the other. That would show sexism and totally take away from what people have been trying to accomplish forever, equality. And if we took away one of these institutions, then like dominos, all the others would soon follow.

Letter from Birmingham Jail

The first thing I thought while reading this, is that Martin Luther King Jr. was a very intelligent person. He formed his sentences and presented his ideas very well. He effectively presented his claim and supported it with life experiences, facts and witnesses. Another thing that kept popping up in my head is, he had a lot of personal stories and accounts from other people that he used for support. One piece of his support that stuck with me the most from the reading is how he mentioned that merchants would hang signs in their "markets" that contained racial material. The witnesses and facts he used for support were valid and verifiable.
As everyone knows, King went through a lot of hardship and fighting for equal and civil rights. The fact that he wrote the letter from jail is, alone, proof enough. He was used to dishing out the nonviolent pressure on authorities and court officials to gain equal and civil rights, but most, unfortunately, didn't want to hear it. They resorted to throwing people in jail as a quick fix.
Of course, as we all know, all of King's efforts were payed off, as African Americans ultimately gained equal and civil rights. Martin Luther King Jr. was probably the single most influencial person in this historical accomplishment.

"Mall Rats"

I rather enjoyed reading this essay by William Kowinski. It opened my eyes to a new way of looking at spending time at the mall. I always thought of the mall as just... the mall. I never thought of it as grade school without the classes. I also never thought of the mall as teaching me life lessons and preparing me for the future. I always thought I was just having fun with my friends and shopping. The mall was never my other mother, or my baby-sitter. I have, and still do, spend a good deal of time at the mall. But I have noticed that, as I get older, the shorter my visits last. I'm usually in and out now. And I actually go with a set thing that I'm interested in purchasing. I'm not going as much as a place to hang out with my friends on the weekends or when we're bored.
As for the reading, I think the author did a great job with this argument, providing facts that supported both sides of the coin. It was very balanced and left the readers open to their own opinions on the matter.

Defining Key Terms

This read was very formal, I think, in terms of opening my eyes to new ways of looking at things. I never thought of the concept of "terrorism" having no set definition and having so many different ways to approach it. I think the way the author put it was the best definition in the entire essay, "violence committed by those we disapprove of" (137).
I do think it is ironic, however, that we talk about terrorism being such a horrible thing when we are guilty of it ourselves. We as Americans love being over in other countries, showing them how they should be living, and in the process, doing our own fair share of "terrorism." I also believe it's ironic that the author wrote the essay before 9/11 and gave a statistic in the introduction that no international terrorist acts occurred in the United States. Little did he know that later, this disaster would open our eyes and give us all a new "definition" to the word "terrorism" that will last forever in our hearts and minds.