This is another essay I did for my writing class last term dealing with advertisements and children.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Super Bowl Sunday: the biggest advertising day of the year in the United States, if not the entire world. Millions of people across the globe tune in to watch and most of them aren't tuning in for the football game. The Super Bowl was originally a contest between two iron-willed teams out to prove to the world that they are the best. Today, the Super Bowl is known more for its advertisements. Several people have told me “I don't care about the game, I want to see the new commercials!” This statement boggles my mind even though it makes sense in a creepy Bizzaro-world way. Advertisers are blessed with an event that over the years has gained a large amount of worldwide attention, especially after television became mainstream. The Super Bowl consistently has a large audience who is glued to the TV until the game is over. People who watch the Super Bowl aren't inclined to change the channel when a commercial comes on, since the game is only broadcast on one specific station. Advertisers know that the audience is captive and relatively stuck watching the same station for the duration of the game.
What about people who have no interest in football? Advertisers benefit from a larger audience, so it is in their best interest to figure out a way to get more people to watch. Every year, Super Bowl commercials become more like shows in and of themselves. Now there are two captive audiences: People interested in the football game and people that are watching only for the commercials. Both audiences watch both programs because no one wants to change the channel.
Advertising has invaded almost every part of our lives. The Super Bowl is just one example of how advertisers have slowly taken over. Many people would say that advertising is a bad thing and that less of it would benefit just about everybody. However, those same people will gladly sit and watch a sports contest that has over the years become nothing but a day-long, multi-product infomercial. They will spend hours upon hours on Facebook, even though the entire site is funded by advertisers. Advertising has become more subtle over the years while at the same time becoming more bold. I compare it to a silk-covered brick. It is soft to touch and pretty to look at but if it hits someone it still hurts. People will ignore the pain if the object causing the pain is appealing enough. Feminist author Jean Kilbourne addresses advertising and how it influences our perceptions of what is beautiful in her video presentation Killing us Softly. I believe this influence is starting to affect children at a young age. Art critic John Berger said that we see before we can speak. Children, who are being babysat by the television at younger and younger ages, see a large amount advertisements. Advertisements are often bright, colorful affairs that easily snatch a persons attention. Even babies will pay attention to something if it is bright and colorful enough. Some of the first memories children have are of advertisements. By the time they are old enough to start spending money, they already are brand loyalists. Furthermore, they have an image of themselves and of others based almost entirely off of what advertisers have been telling them for years. Even though they have been bombarded most of their lives with advertisements, young people do not realize the influence advertising has on them or the way they interact with others.
Children can be cruel, especially towards other children. Advertising is making children more cruel to themselves and others. The problem involves more than actual ads. Programs that target children advertise to them through cleverly placed products. The programs have even become brands themselves. Television programs such as “Dora the Explorer” while educational, are still marketed to children as products. Dora backpacks, dolls, and even bedsheets are available. Children, absorbed by the show, end up wanting anything and everything associated with the show no matter how cheap or useless it is. This branding phenomenon isn’t a recent development. I remember many toys from my childhood that were connected directly to television programs. I also remember being convinced that I needed every last Transformers action figure and accessory, otherwise I would simply die! Products associated with television programs don’t need further advertisement. Children walking through a store will recognize the “brand” that has been created by the television program and instantly enter “I want it” mode. Branding teaches children that wanting is acceptable and that those who don't want the same things must be abnormal. On top of the desire to posses more, children that are over-exposed to advertisements begin to absorb them into every aspect of who they are. They start to form references and jokes based on the ads they see. The very few children who are kept out of the media loop become targets of reticule and even violence. Author Jackson Katz in his video Tough Guize, proposes that men start forming thoughts about how other men should act based on what they see on television. Children judge other children based on an image shaped by advertisements. Young children shouldn't have to worry about being too fat or having bad hair but they do.
Children grow up in this “be what we tell you or suffer” world and are affected by more than just the judgment of others. They are also being constantly judged by advertisements. People stare at the TV to immerse themselves in a reality that is better than the one they exist in but at the same time the more people watch, the more miserable they become. They realize that they aren't perfect and never will be no matter how much useless stuff they buy. However, they are inclined to buy useless things because ads tell them that they will feel a bit better. They will fit in more wearing an expensive fragrance or they will be more socially adept after a few beers but they will never be 100% perfect. Images in advertisements display a reality that is edited, manipulated, and impossible to emulate.
Children grow up with this reality, and as they grow, they turn into the perfect consumers. Through repeated exposure to television, billboard and even radio advertisements, children are taught that in order to fit in, they must have certain possessions and look a particular way. They become convinced that if something has been branded, it must be superior, even if experience tells them that the generic option is the same or better than the “name-brand.” The knee-jerk reaction of many parents when they realize the massive impact of exposure to advertisements, is to completely isolate their children from media sources. While this protects children from becoming brand-tools or product-mongers temporarily, isolated children often are sucked further into consumer culture because of the sudden and massive exposure to media that happens when their exposure is no longer monitored. Media isolation can also cause problems during childhood because the isolated aren’t aware of pop-culture references, which can make them the target of ridicule and bullying. The flip-side to over-monitoring is under-monitoring. Parents who don’t care about or are not aware of the impact media exposure has on their children’s lives will not monitor what their children are exposed to. As scary as the notion is, part of the solution to the over-saturation of consumerism is to encourage children to think. Of course, this means more work for parents, which can be daunting for someone who is struggling with a career on top of being a parent. However, opening a dialogue with children about media exposure will help them make smarter choices as consumers. It will also help them have a better sense of reality when it comes to body image. Many parents believe in the power of conversations with children when it comes to subjects such as drugs or alcohol. I believe that the same conversations should be happening about media and media exposure. As more people become aware of the impact media has on their lives and on the lives of their children, people can work towards lessening the impact advertising has on their lives.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Easy Meat n Potato Glop
I just came up with an easy and tasty recipe. Measurements are far from exact.
What you will need:
Aprox 1 lb stew meat
1 packet Mrs. Grass onion soup mix (Or a packet of whatever onion soup mix you prefer. I can only attest to the tastiness of this particular brand though)
1 packet of random mashed potato flakes. (I used one of the "fully loaded" flavors this time. I plan on experimenting with different varieties)
Water
Milk
Butter (optional?)
Some sort of large pan
Preparation:
1. Brown the meat. Leave all the grease and juice (or don't if you are a health nut. Use more water in the next step)
2. Mix in onion soup powder. Add enough water so the meat is covered entirely.
3. Let onion soup simmer with the meat until the onion pieces are tender
4. Turn off heat and stir in the potatoes. Add enough milk so the potatoes are a creamy consistency. This is the part where butter is optional. I added quite a bit of butter here but more milk will likely work just as well.
5. ENJOY!
What you will need:
Aprox 1 lb stew meat
1 packet Mrs. Grass onion soup mix (Or a packet of whatever onion soup mix you prefer. I can only attest to the tastiness of this particular brand though)
1 packet of random mashed potato flakes. (I used one of the "fully loaded" flavors this time. I plan on experimenting with different varieties)
Water
Milk
Butter (optional?)
Some sort of large pan
Preparation:
1. Brown the meat. Leave all the grease and juice (or don't if you are a health nut. Use more water in the next step)
2. Mix in onion soup powder. Add enough water so the meat is covered entirely.
3. Let onion soup simmer with the meat until the onion pieces are tender
4. Turn off heat and stir in the potatoes. Add enough milk so the potatoes are a creamy consistency. This is the part where butter is optional. I added quite a bit of butter here but more milk will likely work just as well.
5. ENJOY!
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Sexuality On Sale
This is an essay from this term. Enjoy! Works Cited at the bottom of the page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets talk about sex. Actually, lets talk about sexuality.
When most people think of the word “sexuality,” their thoughts drift towards sexual orientation and gender identity. Many people think that a person’s sexuality is something that can’t be controlled: people are born with their sexuality intact and nothing can truly change it. On the other hand, many people believe that sexuality is entirely a choice and so a person can be rid of any and all sexual tendencies and new ones can take their place.y. Humans seem to be overly aware of sexuality. People spend a great deal of time trying to make themselves more sexually desirable. They also spend a great deal of time agonizing over sexuality when it concerns other people. Michel Foucault, a French modern philosopher, wrote in his book The History of Sexuality that sexuality has nothing to do with sex. The Sparknotes editors say this of Foucault:
"Sexuality, according to Foucault, is nothing more than a social construct. There is not something about our sex organs, or the act of sexual intercourse, or our instincts and impulses related to that act, that in itself relates to other aspects of our consciousness and social being. Rather, we have created connections that we now think of as objectively real and independent of us."
(Online)
If sexuality has nothing to do with sex, why do people obsess over it so much? Foucault goes on to say that sexuality has become something that has invaded every aspect of our lives. People are judged and have a moral character assigned to them based on how other people perceive them sexually. Not only do people have to work at becoming more sexually desirable, but also they must make sure that they are not perceived as being sexually unacceptable.
What is sexually acceptable and what is not has never been concretely defined. Things that society today deems completely unacceptable were acceptable and even sought after in times past. The argument that “it has always been this way” simply does not hold water. Sexuality, while a huge part of our core being, is not something that appeared out of thin air. It was created through a bombardment of images and the massive power struggle that shapes our collective consciousness. Susan Bordo, a writer who often tackles the subject of sex, says that men featured in advertising appeal mostly to other men. No singular guide book exists (at least none that I am aware of) that tells gay men what they must find attractive. Yet, Bordo can look at an advertisement and say with confidence “That ad is appealing to gay men.” How does Bordo know what a gay male would find sexually attractive? Her perception of what gay men find attractive is likely found on display in advertisements, both in print and on television. With very little research, one can find a plethora of information concerning the likes and dislikes of a “typical” homosexual male. One can also find plenty of companies willing to sell things to a typical homosexual male. Of course, they also want to sell things to a typical heterosexual female, a typical homosexual female, a typical heterosexual male and anything and everything in between.
Most people would like to think, no matter what “box” they have been put in sexually speaking, that they have total ownership over their sexuality. They know what they like and nothing is going to change it. Jean Kilbourne, in her presentation Killing us Softly, shares her view that advertising is contributing to poor body image in both women and men. She also speaks about how children are now growing up with an unrealistic view of themselves because they are constantly being reminded that they are not perfect little objects. I believe that the people in charge of media outlets are doing more than simply telling people “Please feel bad about yourself. We can fix whatever ails you for only $19.95!” Foucault theorises that sexuality is a constantly evolving social construct and that the construct is always being modified to benefit those in power. About the seventeenth century, he writes “One had tolerant familiarity with the illicit.” (Foucault) This way of thinking shifted, however. Behaviors and ideas that were perfectly acceptable suddenly became taboo. For example, homosexuality was not a subject of conversation even as late as the seventeenth century. As time progressed, it became less and less O.K. to be gay. Of course, people could still indulge in “unacceptable” sexual behavior, but it wasn’t free anymore. Not only had the definition of “sexual deviant” changed, but also people began to see profit potential in this new kind of deviant. Industries for treating and housing sexual deviants began to appear. Prostitution increased as more people required outlets for their deviancy, and as more people realized that there were some willing to pay large sums of money in order to deal with their deviant tendencies in a somewhat anonymous fashion.
Rarely does a person wake up and say, “I am a sexual deviant. I am not normal,” even though this is the message people see on a daily basis. People have been conditioned not to label unattractiveness as sexual deviancy. No, being unattractive sexually is not the same as being a child molester, but with the way the media puts emphasis on needing to be sexually attractive, it might as well be. When someone is sexually unattractive, they face many challenges. They may even be put last in line for a job, even though they meet or exceed the qualifications required. Many laws are in place that tell companies and individuals that they cannot act against someone based on race, religion, or handicap. Being unattractive is not considered a protected class, therefore people can discriminate without fear of retaliation. Axe, a brand of male beauty products, often warns men of the dangers of having “bad hair.” in their advertisements. The warnings are meant as somewhat of a joke, but a male with unacceptable hair can find himself discriminated against by both women and other men. Attractiveness is used as a measure of worth. If sexuality wasn’t constantly on display in television or print media, I doubt that people would be willing to spend large sums of money in order to become more sexually desirable. People also wouldn’t judge people based on what they are told is sexually attractive.
People in charge of the media benefit from telling people how think about sexuality. They have formed constructs telling people how to identify themselves sexually and what to do with this identification. Forces within the media even tell people how to operate within “unacceptable” sexual constructs. The television program "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," for example, is designed to help heterosexual males with subjects such as wardrobe selection and hair management. The programs premise is that homosexual males are better at selecting clothing and doing hair. This implies that heterosexual males are incapable of picking clothes or doing their own hair. Conversely, homosexuality, particularly in males, is frowned upon. Paradoxically there is quite a bit of money to be had in telling men how to be better homosexuals. Women are affected by the manipulation of sexuality as well. Most women are aware of the dangers of eating disorders yet at the same time there are hints found in various media outlets that suggest that sometimes women must develop an eating disorder in order to stay thin enough to be sexually attractive. Jokes about eating disorders are a constant on comedy programs such as "Family Guy." Some would argue that statements that would encourage women to develop eating disorders are not supposed to be taken seriously. I believe, however, that these jokes are are tiny bits of encouragement to some, especially those that feel desperately unattractive. Those in charge of media outlets benefit from making sure everyone is dissatisfied with their sexuality. The media tells people “You are xyz paradigm, but you can always be better at it! Pay us to find out how” and people do pay because they they are being watched.. People fear the eyes of strangers, especially when it comes to anything involving sex. The more sexual paranoia is perpetuated, the more people are willing to pay to make the nasty feelings go away. Don’t like being watched? Buy this product, get this surgery, take this pill and become normal enough to be ignored.
Even though they perpetuate a skewed perception of sexuality, television, magazines and movies appear to many as a savior. If the media are the ones telling people they have a problem, of course the media are going to have the solution. Maybe that new perfume will work or maybe just a little plastic surgery will do the trick. The media picture of the perfectly sexually attractive person is based completely out of image manipulation. Fashion models often admit that the images of them put on magazine covers and advertisements are not real. Imperfections have been smoothed over and pounds have been dropped artificially. Models are not perfect but people are told that they should find them attractive. No perfect person exists, even though there are many people who have some perfect parts. This is a good thing for the media because it means that people are constantly chasing perfection. People will never stop spending money on perfection because they can never achieve it. Those in charge of media outlets are careful not to reveal too much about how they are defining sexuality, even though it is obvious in just about everything the media has out there. There are shows that tell people how to be gay, straight and every thing in between. People start to think “Well they are experts after all; if I’m not all that they say I should be, there must be something wrong with me.” It becomes more than just not feeling attractive. People start to question what they find attractive about others based on what they see on television and in movies. Eventually, people begin to define their entire sexuality based on the opinions of others.
Isn’t sexuality supposed to be a personal thing? Over time, sexuality went from an individual construct to a construct built by the illusion of the status quo. Sexuality has become simply another commodity that companies buy and sell from society in little advertisement-sized chunks. Taking control of something that people find to be deeply personal is the perfect way to assure that the profits will continue. Those in charge of media outlets know that people are more driven to action when it is their idea. Simply telling people “We are going to tell you exactly how you should act if you identify with this sexual construct. By the way, your sexual construct is:” wouldn’t work. Most people would reply with a heartfelt “Screw you!” Rather than being direct, the media convinces people that they come up with sexuality on their own. Once people have come up with their sexual identity, through repeated exposure to what is perfect and what isn’t, the “Empire of Images” (Bordo) comes swooping in to save the day. Until people realize that they are being manipulated at the very core, companies will continue to profit from sexuality. Media companies profit from advertising. Advertising is paid for by companies who turn a profit. In order for companies to sell things, people have to be convinced that they need those things. This goes far beyond the beauty product and fashion industry. People who feel like they have something wrong will seek out medical treatment, psychiatric treatment and who knows what else. It could be argued that every industry on Earth could potentially profit from people who are convinced that they are flawed.
Works Cited
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, Volume 1.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. n.d.. Web. 24 Feb. 2011.
Bordo, Susan. "Beauty (re)-Discovers the Male Body."Ways of Reading: an Anthology for Writers. By David Bartholomae and Tony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. 131-76. Print.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality: An Introduction Volume 1. New York: Vintage, 1990. Print.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets talk about sex. Actually, lets talk about sexuality.
When most people think of the word “sexuality,” their thoughts drift towards sexual orientation and gender identity. Many people think that a person’s sexuality is something that can’t be controlled: people are born with their sexuality intact and nothing can truly change it. On the other hand, many people believe that sexuality is entirely a choice and so a person can be rid of any and all sexual tendencies and new ones can take their place.y. Humans seem to be overly aware of sexuality. People spend a great deal of time trying to make themselves more sexually desirable. They also spend a great deal of time agonizing over sexuality when it concerns other people. Michel Foucault, a French modern philosopher, wrote in his book The History of Sexuality that sexuality has nothing to do with sex. The Sparknotes editors say this of Foucault:
"Sexuality, according to Foucault, is nothing more than a social construct. There is not something about our sex organs, or the act of sexual intercourse, or our instincts and impulses related to that act, that in itself relates to other aspects of our consciousness and social being. Rather, we have created connections that we now think of as objectively real and independent of us."
(Online)
If sexuality has nothing to do with sex, why do people obsess over it so much? Foucault goes on to say that sexuality has become something that has invaded every aspect of our lives. People are judged and have a moral character assigned to them based on how other people perceive them sexually. Not only do people have to work at becoming more sexually desirable, but also they must make sure that they are not perceived as being sexually unacceptable.
What is sexually acceptable and what is not has never been concretely defined. Things that society today deems completely unacceptable were acceptable and even sought after in times past. The argument that “it has always been this way” simply does not hold water. Sexuality, while a huge part of our core being, is not something that appeared out of thin air. It was created through a bombardment of images and the massive power struggle that shapes our collective consciousness. Susan Bordo, a writer who often tackles the subject of sex, says that men featured in advertising appeal mostly to other men. No singular guide book exists (at least none that I am aware of) that tells gay men what they must find attractive. Yet, Bordo can look at an advertisement and say with confidence “That ad is appealing to gay men.” How does Bordo know what a gay male would find sexually attractive? Her perception of what gay men find attractive is likely found on display in advertisements, both in print and on television. With very little research, one can find a plethora of information concerning the likes and dislikes of a “typical” homosexual male. One can also find plenty of companies willing to sell things to a typical homosexual male. Of course, they also want to sell things to a typical heterosexual female, a typical homosexual female, a typical heterosexual male and anything and everything in between.
Most people would like to think, no matter what “box” they have been put in sexually speaking, that they have total ownership over their sexuality. They know what they like and nothing is going to change it. Jean Kilbourne, in her presentation Killing us Softly, shares her view that advertising is contributing to poor body image in both women and men. She also speaks about how children are now growing up with an unrealistic view of themselves because they are constantly being reminded that they are not perfect little objects. I believe that the people in charge of media outlets are doing more than simply telling people “Please feel bad about yourself. We can fix whatever ails you for only $19.95!” Foucault theorises that sexuality is a constantly evolving social construct and that the construct is always being modified to benefit those in power. About the seventeenth century, he writes “One had tolerant familiarity with the illicit.” (Foucault) This way of thinking shifted, however. Behaviors and ideas that were perfectly acceptable suddenly became taboo. For example, homosexuality was not a subject of conversation even as late as the seventeenth century. As time progressed, it became less and less O.K. to be gay. Of course, people could still indulge in “unacceptable” sexual behavior, but it wasn’t free anymore. Not only had the definition of “sexual deviant” changed, but also people began to see profit potential in this new kind of deviant. Industries for treating and housing sexual deviants began to appear. Prostitution increased as more people required outlets for their deviancy, and as more people realized that there were some willing to pay large sums of money in order to deal with their deviant tendencies in a somewhat anonymous fashion.
Rarely does a person wake up and say, “I am a sexual deviant. I am not normal,” even though this is the message people see on a daily basis. People have been conditioned not to label unattractiveness as sexual deviancy. No, being unattractive sexually is not the same as being a child molester, but with the way the media puts emphasis on needing to be sexually attractive, it might as well be. When someone is sexually unattractive, they face many challenges. They may even be put last in line for a job, even though they meet or exceed the qualifications required. Many laws are in place that tell companies and individuals that they cannot act against someone based on race, religion, or handicap. Being unattractive is not considered a protected class, therefore people can discriminate without fear of retaliation. Axe, a brand of male beauty products, often warns men of the dangers of having “bad hair.” in their advertisements. The warnings are meant as somewhat of a joke, but a male with unacceptable hair can find himself discriminated against by both women and other men. Attractiveness is used as a measure of worth. If sexuality wasn’t constantly on display in television or print media, I doubt that people would be willing to spend large sums of money in order to become more sexually desirable. People also wouldn’t judge people based on what they are told is sexually attractive.
People in charge of the media benefit from telling people how think about sexuality. They have formed constructs telling people how to identify themselves sexually and what to do with this identification. Forces within the media even tell people how to operate within “unacceptable” sexual constructs. The television program "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," for example, is designed to help heterosexual males with subjects such as wardrobe selection and hair management. The programs premise is that homosexual males are better at selecting clothing and doing hair. This implies that heterosexual males are incapable of picking clothes or doing their own hair. Conversely, homosexuality, particularly in males, is frowned upon. Paradoxically there is quite a bit of money to be had in telling men how to be better homosexuals. Women are affected by the manipulation of sexuality as well. Most women are aware of the dangers of eating disorders yet at the same time there are hints found in various media outlets that suggest that sometimes women must develop an eating disorder in order to stay thin enough to be sexually attractive. Jokes about eating disorders are a constant on comedy programs such as "Family Guy." Some would argue that statements that would encourage women to develop eating disorders are not supposed to be taken seriously. I believe, however, that these jokes are are tiny bits of encouragement to some, especially those that feel desperately unattractive. Those in charge of media outlets benefit from making sure everyone is dissatisfied with their sexuality. The media tells people “You are xyz paradigm, but you can always be better at it! Pay us to find out how” and people do pay because they they are being watched.. People fear the eyes of strangers, especially when it comes to anything involving sex. The more sexual paranoia is perpetuated, the more people are willing to pay to make the nasty feelings go away. Don’t like being watched? Buy this product, get this surgery, take this pill and become normal enough to be ignored.
Even though they perpetuate a skewed perception of sexuality, television, magazines and movies appear to many as a savior. If the media are the ones telling people they have a problem, of course the media are going to have the solution. Maybe that new perfume will work or maybe just a little plastic surgery will do the trick. The media picture of the perfectly sexually attractive person is based completely out of image manipulation. Fashion models often admit that the images of them put on magazine covers and advertisements are not real. Imperfections have been smoothed over and pounds have been dropped artificially. Models are not perfect but people are told that they should find them attractive. No perfect person exists, even though there are many people who have some perfect parts. This is a good thing for the media because it means that people are constantly chasing perfection. People will never stop spending money on perfection because they can never achieve it. Those in charge of media outlets are careful not to reveal too much about how they are defining sexuality, even though it is obvious in just about everything the media has out there. There are shows that tell people how to be gay, straight and every thing in between. People start to think “Well they are experts after all; if I’m not all that they say I should be, there must be something wrong with me.” It becomes more than just not feeling attractive. People start to question what they find attractive about others based on what they see on television and in movies. Eventually, people begin to define their entire sexuality based on the opinions of others.
Isn’t sexuality supposed to be a personal thing? Over time, sexuality went from an individual construct to a construct built by the illusion of the status quo. Sexuality has become simply another commodity that companies buy and sell from society in little advertisement-sized chunks. Taking control of something that people find to be deeply personal is the perfect way to assure that the profits will continue. Those in charge of media outlets know that people are more driven to action when it is their idea. Simply telling people “We are going to tell you exactly how you should act if you identify with this sexual construct. By the way, your sexual construct is:” wouldn’t work. Most people would reply with a heartfelt “Screw you!” Rather than being direct, the media convinces people that they come up with sexuality on their own. Once people have come up with their sexual identity, through repeated exposure to what is perfect and what isn’t, the “Empire of Images” (Bordo) comes swooping in to save the day. Until people realize that they are being manipulated at the very core, companies will continue to profit from sexuality. Media companies profit from advertising. Advertising is paid for by companies who turn a profit. In order for companies to sell things, people have to be convinced that they need those things. This goes far beyond the beauty product and fashion industry. People who feel like they have something wrong will seek out medical treatment, psychiatric treatment and who knows what else. It could be argued that every industry on Earth could potentially profit from people who are convinced that they are flawed.
Works Cited
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, Volume 1.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. n.d.. Web. 24 Feb. 2011.
Bordo, Susan. "Beauty (re)-Discovers the Male Body."Ways of Reading: an Anthology for Writers. By David Bartholomae and Tony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. 131-76. Print.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality: An Introduction Volume 1. New York: Vintage, 1990. Print.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Alone
I've been waiting for this moment
For so long it seems I'm never at peace
and yet you lie there unmoving
Unfeeling...
I touch you but you don't touch me
I'll float around like a shadow
silent, contemplative of my lonliness
Sometimes you wander by
and ask me silly questions
I laugh and I smile
I feel close to you again
Departure...
Back into the dark I fade
back into yourself you go
I am your rock, your fortress
but I am a timeshare
Pulled in pushed away
it all ends up the same
I'm in this moment and I'm alone
and only sometimes, am I at peace.
For so long it seems I'm never at peace
and yet you lie there unmoving
Unfeeling...
I touch you but you don't touch me
I'll float around like a shadow
silent, contemplative of my lonliness
Sometimes you wander by
and ask me silly questions
I laugh and I smile
I feel close to you again
Departure...
Back into the dark I fade
back into yourself you go
I am your rock, your fortress
but I am a timeshare
Pulled in pushed away
it all ends up the same
I'm in this moment and I'm alone
and only sometimes, am I at peace.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Final thoughts about my Writing class
This is one of my favorite quotes from the movie Fight Club:
"Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war, our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off." ~Tyler Durden
How many people are "pissed off" at this fact? Do people even realize that they are motivated by something that is invisible and in the hands of the owners of corporations? In a way, we live in a feudal society where those who have/run large corporations dictate everything to those who don't. The difference now is that it isn't very obvious.
I've felt manipulated by advertising and other media for a long time but until I took this course, I didn't really think about it too much. Reading the required essays made me think a lot more critically about the world at large. They also kick-started my brain. After I dropped out of college the first time, I became the perfect corporate tool. I worked for what I could never have chasing the impossible dream that TV said I wanted and needed. Going back to college made me realize that the dream is total BS. Why should I want what someone else wants? If I want something different, does that make me bad? HELL NO!
There is something better out there.
"Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war, our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off." ~Tyler Durden
How many people are "pissed off" at this fact? Do people even realize that they are motivated by something that is invisible and in the hands of the owners of corporations? In a way, we live in a feudal society where those who have/run large corporations dictate everything to those who don't. The difference now is that it isn't very obvious.
I've felt manipulated by advertising and other media for a long time but until I took this course, I didn't really think about it too much. Reading the required essays made me think a lot more critically about the world at large. They also kick-started my brain. After I dropped out of college the first time, I became the perfect corporate tool. I worked for what I could never have chasing the impossible dream that TV said I wanted and needed. Going back to college made me realize that the dream is total BS. Why should I want what someone else wants? If I want something different, does that make me bad? HELL NO!
There is something better out there.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Thoughts on Bitchiness
It seems like the second someone posts a thread (on a chat forum or other online posting site) where it seems acceptable to be snarky (and dare I say, bitchy) several people come out of the woodwork who couldn't be bothered to post anything encouraging or intelligent anywhere else. This phenomenon is found in every online community on the planet. I think it is because everyone has a bit of pent up rage and saying things you would never say to someones face is way easier behind a screen.
Also, bitch begets bitch. A snark thread is the most likely candidate for snark replies.
That being said, bitch comes in all sizes and colors. I think the bitch factor goes up with the overwhelming sense of entitlement some people seem to have.
No matter where the bitch flag came from, name calling doesn't do anything to help the situation nor does it work towards improving your life or the lives of others.
Bitching and complaining is easy. Kindness and encouragement should be just as easy but unfortunately kindness and encouragement aren't nearly as entertaining. No one started chanting "hug hug hug" in the school yard, at least not that I've seen. There aren't any complement or cuddling competitions either. For the longest time (maybe since the beginning of human consciousness), conflict has been a source of entertainment. Can humanity as a species work past that? I hope so.
Also, bitch begets bitch. A snark thread is the most likely candidate for snark replies.
That being said, bitch comes in all sizes and colors. I think the bitch factor goes up with the overwhelming sense of entitlement some people seem to have.
No matter where the bitch flag came from, name calling doesn't do anything to help the situation nor does it work towards improving your life or the lives of others.
Bitching and complaining is easy. Kindness and encouragement should be just as easy but unfortunately kindness and encouragement aren't nearly as entertaining. No one started chanting "hug hug hug" in the school yard, at least not that I've seen. There aren't any complement or cuddling competitions either. For the longest time (maybe since the beginning of human consciousness), conflict has been a source of entertainment. Can humanity as a species work past that? I hope so.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Total Limbo
I'm waiting for my financial aid refund to come through.
All of my nervous energy, all of my insomnia, all of my obsessive internet crawling can be blamed on this one simple fact. At the beginning of the month, it was easy to accept brokeatude because the day when I would no longer be broke was so far away. It was past Christmas and past the new year so I put it in the back of my brain and tired to make a few extra beans here and there. I did get a day of work and mom and dad did generously give this Christmas, which is probably what saved me from total insanity.
I want to do better this term in school. Having to drop a class really irritated me, especially since I know I could have made up the work I missed. New term, new opportunity though.
Another thing I want to get going is my mixing. I may not go far or be super famous at it or anything but the sheer fact that I can do it is therapeutic. I would love to play to a crowd, and I get the feeling that I'll get the chance to if I apply myself. I think though that I'll start feeling better as soon as I start messing with a set of decks. Through everything, spinning tracks has always made me really happy.
But I have to wait for money. Which is fine really but at the same time incredibly frustrating. This whole month has been a lesson in patience and trusting the ebb and flow of the universe. I'm starting to get it but I'm still kept up at night.
I'll get through, I always do somehow.
All of my nervous energy, all of my insomnia, all of my obsessive internet crawling can be blamed on this one simple fact. At the beginning of the month, it was easy to accept brokeatude because the day when I would no longer be broke was so far away. It was past Christmas and past the new year so I put it in the back of my brain and tired to make a few extra beans here and there. I did get a day of work and mom and dad did generously give this Christmas, which is probably what saved me from total insanity.
I want to do better this term in school. Having to drop a class really irritated me, especially since I know I could have made up the work I missed. New term, new opportunity though.
Another thing I want to get going is my mixing. I may not go far or be super famous at it or anything but the sheer fact that I can do it is therapeutic. I would love to play to a crowd, and I get the feeling that I'll get the chance to if I apply myself. I think though that I'll start feeling better as soon as I start messing with a set of decks. Through everything, spinning tracks has always made me really happy.
But I have to wait for money. Which is fine really but at the same time incredibly frustrating. This whole month has been a lesson in patience and trusting the ebb and flow of the universe. I'm starting to get it but I'm still kept up at night.
I'll get through, I always do somehow.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Get Out of My House
Another class essay, this one is about college room lotteries. Enjoy!
-------------------------------------------------------
At some point in time, I think almost everyone has lived with a roommate. I'm not talking about living with parents or even a relative. I speak to those who have been tossed into a living situation where they must co-exist with a total stranger. This situation is encountered mostly by college students who, because of lack of funding and high enrollment rates, often have to live with someone else to survive. Most students have little to no say as to who they end up living with. If they are lucky, the decision is made based on compatibility surveys or personal choice. However, students are often placed together based on an arbitrary room lottery system. This kind of arrangement can throw two people together who might not even be compatible as friends, much less as roommates. Room lotteries take two or more random people and force them to share a living space for at least one term (or semester) if not the entire year. Room lotteries do not take personality, living habits or cultural background into consideration. With a room lottery, it is always possible for two people with incompatible personalities to be matched together. People generally try to avoid others with whom they share no common ground. A room lottery will match these people together and then expect them to live together without difficulty. If students were allowed to participate more in the process of selecting a roommate, they could focus more mental energy on doing well in school.
Not everyone has a bad experience with a roommate assigned to them at random. Sometimes, students are assigned someone that they end up being compatible with. The roommates become friends and sometimes they remain living together for the entirety of their college career. Even if the roommates don't end up being bosom buddies, this type of living situation can help students develop tolerance for those that have differing opinions. It also can teach students how to appropriately deal with conflict and respond to stressful situations.
Room lotteries are a quick way to assign housing to a large number of students at once. They also eliminate the possibility of people choosing not to live with anyone but themselves. With student housing being at a premium, there often isn't enough room to accommodate people who wish to live alone. Group situations are also cheaper. With the costs being divided between multiple students per living space, even colleges that take care of housing as part of tuition can cut costs by filling dorm rooms with as many students as possible.
Everyone has their own personal habits, personality quirks, and tastes based on cultural background and the environment in which they were raised. The whole process of college is stressful, especially to students who are leaving home for the first time. Many of these students have not had the opportunity to live in an environment where they are free from parental influence. They are not used to having to motivate themselves to pick up dirty socks or kill the mold monster in the sink. On top of this, students are expected to make progress on an academic level. The whole idea of being self sufficient and self motivating is difficult when one has total control of their environment. More problems occur when there is another person, or several persons, are added to the situation. Each member of the arrangement desires some measure of control and disagreements are bound to happen, even in ideal conditions. Too often, roommates in a dorm situation are in disagreement before they meet each other. They may not share the same beliefs, or have beliefs that are in direct conflict. An extreme example would be a Christian being paired with a Satanist. When people disagree on a sensitive topic, it affects every interaction they have with each other. The disagreement will also be tenser because everyone has to remain in close proximity. A simple complaint about someone forgetting to vacuum can turn into a catastrophic argument that ends badly. The recent trial of Amanda Knox shows what can happen if roommate rage is allowed to fester for too long. In the trial, evidence was presented to suggest that Knox was angry with her roommate and that because of this anger she stabbed her roommate several times. Most roommate disagreements do not reach this level of violence. There are several college students, however, that have been through at least one situation where they feared someone would get violent if things didn't improve. Many students are hesitant to bring up these issues to Residence Assistants or other people in authority for a variety of reasons and so they deal with the situation by avoiding it. They find themselves staying with friends or in extreme cases, sleeping on a park bench.
Fundamental disagreements can also breed an environment full of mistrust. Safety concerns for college students are numerous. New students are cautioned heavily on making sure they lock their doors and that they don't walk around alone at night. They must constantly be aware of threats found in the world outside their dorm room. On top of all of these concerns, many students find themselves in a situation where they don't trust the person or persons they are living with. This mistrust can arise from people simply having a difference of opinion. Not trusting the person one lives with is extremely stressful. It also can lead to poor choices in reacting to situations as they arise. For example, student A has a difference of religious opinion with student B. Student A is convinced that student B is a heathen, based on their first meeting, which involved both students simply unpacking. Student A noticed that student B had a piece of literature that went against his beliefs. Later in the term, student A ends up missing some property. Even if there is a possibility that student A simply misplaced his property, his first reaction is to accuse student B. On the other hand, some people will exhibit poor judgment and steal from their housemate. There is no typical reason why someone chooses to steal another person’s property. It could be vengeance for real or imagined slights, jealousy, or even because the person just has a compulsion to steal. Whatever the reason, the possibility of losing things makes it difficult to focus on getting an education.
When I lived in a dormitory situation, I found it very difficult leaving valuable personal property alone with my roommate. The roommate did not initially do anything to betray my trust, but because I was dealing with an unknown entity, whose beliefs differed greatly from mine, I found it impossible to let my guard down. At the same time, my own issues and hang ups prevented me from discussing the issues I had with her. As a result, the conflict between us escalated to the point where there were threats of violence. Complaints to the Residence Assistant fell on deaf ears and the school did not offer any other sources of mediation. At the time, I was not familiar with how to deal with the situation at all. I am sure I am not the first and only college student who has problems dealing with conflict. I can say with certainly that I would have benefited with more information on how to deal with conflict. If the school insisted upon matching people up randomly, some instruction, even if it was through print or sent electronically, could help students better prepare for conflict. More and more, colleges are instituting programs and classes that deal with conflicts between roommates. College is a time of transition and suddenly having to live with someone else adds even more stress. I believe that students would benefit from more resources on campuses for mediating conflicts. With mediation, students also would learn how to deal with conflict in an appropriate way and hopefully feel that they could do something before the disagreement got out of control.
Dealing with drama involving roommates is often cited as a reason for poor academic performance. Unfortunately, most schools don't accept this as an excuse even though conflict is created through room lotteries that are often mandatory for students wishing to live on campus. If colleges do not want to eliminate the room lottery system, they must acknowledge and give allowances for the problems that room lotteries potentially cause. Even though more proactive steps are being taken to deal with conflict between roommates on college campuses, something has to be done about the way students are placed with each other. Living with another person is a large commitment that shouldn't be taken lightly. Dating couples who are contemplating marriage prepare for the commitment of living together by often seeing counselors or seeking religious counsel. It is a little bit different with college students because the living situation is expected to be temporary. A married couple is presumably staying together for the rest of their lives. They combine their possessions and resources in anticipation for a permanent arrangement. College students are not expected to combine bank accounts or buy property together. College students are also not expected to spend a great deal of time with their roommates, certainly not the kind of time people typically spend with a romantic partner. Still, care should be taken when placing students together because they do have to live with each other. It is impossible to completely avoid someone sharing a common living space. Filling out compatibility surveys is a good start but I think students should at least have the opportunity to meet with each other in person, if possible, before they are expected to live in the same space. If meeting in person isn't possible due to distance or time constraints, the people involved should meet via telephone or through an internet conference. Having a roommate isn't an easy thing to deal with in even the best of circumstances. Colleges should be mindful of the diversity of students and try to match people based on similar interests and beliefs so that students can focus more on getting an education and less on being angry at or fearful of the person they live with.
-------------------------------------------------------
At some point in time, I think almost everyone has lived with a roommate. I'm not talking about living with parents or even a relative. I speak to those who have been tossed into a living situation where they must co-exist with a total stranger. This situation is encountered mostly by college students who, because of lack of funding and high enrollment rates, often have to live with someone else to survive. Most students have little to no say as to who they end up living with. If they are lucky, the decision is made based on compatibility surveys or personal choice. However, students are often placed together based on an arbitrary room lottery system. This kind of arrangement can throw two people together who might not even be compatible as friends, much less as roommates. Room lotteries take two or more random people and force them to share a living space for at least one term (or semester) if not the entire year. Room lotteries do not take personality, living habits or cultural background into consideration. With a room lottery, it is always possible for two people with incompatible personalities to be matched together. People generally try to avoid others with whom they share no common ground. A room lottery will match these people together and then expect them to live together without difficulty. If students were allowed to participate more in the process of selecting a roommate, they could focus more mental energy on doing well in school.
Not everyone has a bad experience with a roommate assigned to them at random. Sometimes, students are assigned someone that they end up being compatible with. The roommates become friends and sometimes they remain living together for the entirety of their college career. Even if the roommates don't end up being bosom buddies, this type of living situation can help students develop tolerance for those that have differing opinions. It also can teach students how to appropriately deal with conflict and respond to stressful situations.
Room lotteries are a quick way to assign housing to a large number of students at once. They also eliminate the possibility of people choosing not to live with anyone but themselves. With student housing being at a premium, there often isn't enough room to accommodate people who wish to live alone. Group situations are also cheaper. With the costs being divided between multiple students per living space, even colleges that take care of housing as part of tuition can cut costs by filling dorm rooms with as many students as possible.
Everyone has their own personal habits, personality quirks, and tastes based on cultural background and the environment in which they were raised. The whole process of college is stressful, especially to students who are leaving home for the first time. Many of these students have not had the opportunity to live in an environment where they are free from parental influence. They are not used to having to motivate themselves to pick up dirty socks or kill the mold monster in the sink. On top of this, students are expected to make progress on an academic level. The whole idea of being self sufficient and self motivating is difficult when one has total control of their environment. More problems occur when there is another person, or several persons, are added to the situation. Each member of the arrangement desires some measure of control and disagreements are bound to happen, even in ideal conditions. Too often, roommates in a dorm situation are in disagreement before they meet each other. They may not share the same beliefs, or have beliefs that are in direct conflict. An extreme example would be a Christian being paired with a Satanist. When people disagree on a sensitive topic, it affects every interaction they have with each other. The disagreement will also be tenser because everyone has to remain in close proximity. A simple complaint about someone forgetting to vacuum can turn into a catastrophic argument that ends badly. The recent trial of Amanda Knox shows what can happen if roommate rage is allowed to fester for too long. In the trial, evidence was presented to suggest that Knox was angry with her roommate and that because of this anger she stabbed her roommate several times. Most roommate disagreements do not reach this level of violence. There are several college students, however, that have been through at least one situation where they feared someone would get violent if things didn't improve. Many students are hesitant to bring up these issues to Residence Assistants or other people in authority for a variety of reasons and so they deal with the situation by avoiding it. They find themselves staying with friends or in extreme cases, sleeping on a park bench.
Fundamental disagreements can also breed an environment full of mistrust. Safety concerns for college students are numerous. New students are cautioned heavily on making sure they lock their doors and that they don't walk around alone at night. They must constantly be aware of threats found in the world outside their dorm room. On top of all of these concerns, many students find themselves in a situation where they don't trust the person or persons they are living with. This mistrust can arise from people simply having a difference of opinion. Not trusting the person one lives with is extremely stressful. It also can lead to poor choices in reacting to situations as they arise. For example, student A has a difference of religious opinion with student B. Student A is convinced that student B is a heathen, based on their first meeting, which involved both students simply unpacking. Student A noticed that student B had a piece of literature that went against his beliefs. Later in the term, student A ends up missing some property. Even if there is a possibility that student A simply misplaced his property, his first reaction is to accuse student B. On the other hand, some people will exhibit poor judgment and steal from their housemate. There is no typical reason why someone chooses to steal another person’s property. It could be vengeance for real or imagined slights, jealousy, or even because the person just has a compulsion to steal. Whatever the reason, the possibility of losing things makes it difficult to focus on getting an education.
When I lived in a dormitory situation, I found it very difficult leaving valuable personal property alone with my roommate. The roommate did not initially do anything to betray my trust, but because I was dealing with an unknown entity, whose beliefs differed greatly from mine, I found it impossible to let my guard down. At the same time, my own issues and hang ups prevented me from discussing the issues I had with her. As a result, the conflict between us escalated to the point where there were threats of violence. Complaints to the Residence Assistant fell on deaf ears and the school did not offer any other sources of mediation. At the time, I was not familiar with how to deal with the situation at all. I am sure I am not the first and only college student who has problems dealing with conflict. I can say with certainly that I would have benefited with more information on how to deal with conflict. If the school insisted upon matching people up randomly, some instruction, even if it was through print or sent electronically, could help students better prepare for conflict. More and more, colleges are instituting programs and classes that deal with conflicts between roommates. College is a time of transition and suddenly having to live with someone else adds even more stress. I believe that students would benefit from more resources on campuses for mediating conflicts. With mediation, students also would learn how to deal with conflict in an appropriate way and hopefully feel that they could do something before the disagreement got out of control.
Dealing with drama involving roommates is often cited as a reason for poor academic performance. Unfortunately, most schools don't accept this as an excuse even though conflict is created through room lotteries that are often mandatory for students wishing to live on campus. If colleges do not want to eliminate the room lottery system, they must acknowledge and give allowances for the problems that room lotteries potentially cause. Even though more proactive steps are being taken to deal with conflict between roommates on college campuses, something has to be done about the way students are placed with each other. Living with another person is a large commitment that shouldn't be taken lightly. Dating couples who are contemplating marriage prepare for the commitment of living together by often seeing counselors or seeking religious counsel. It is a little bit different with college students because the living situation is expected to be temporary. A married couple is presumably staying together for the rest of their lives. They combine their possessions and resources in anticipation for a permanent arrangement. College students are not expected to combine bank accounts or buy property together. College students are also not expected to spend a great deal of time with their roommates, certainly not the kind of time people typically spend with a romantic partner. Still, care should be taken when placing students together because they do have to live with each other. It is impossible to completely avoid someone sharing a common living space. Filling out compatibility surveys is a good start but I think students should at least have the opportunity to meet with each other in person, if possible, before they are expected to live in the same space. If meeting in person isn't possible due to distance or time constraints, the people involved should meet via telephone or through an internet conference. Having a roommate isn't an easy thing to deal with in even the best of circumstances. Colleges should be mindful of the diversity of students and try to match people based on similar interests and beliefs so that students can focus more on getting an education and less on being angry at or fearful of the person they live with.
An Essay about Depression.
This is an essay on depression I wrote for a class. I got a fairly good grade on it. Works Cited are at the bottom of the page. I hope someone benefits from this. :)
---------------------------------------------------
Depression is a disease that affects thousands of people in all walks of life and in all cultures. It is even considered a leading cause of medical harm in developing countries. Despite its prevalence, depression is a disease that many people misunderstand. As a sufferer of depression, I hear a lot of people tell me that it is “all in my head” or that I should “just get over it.” Another misconception of depression is that it will simply go away once someone has been prescribed medication. Depression is a topic that many people do not wish to talk about. It is easy to understand why people who do not live with depression choose to avoid it as a topic of conversation. In general, when people hear that a friend has depression, they avoid that friend. It could be because they feel that their depressed friend will make them depressed or that they don’t know what to say to help. Many times, the avoidance response isn’t even a conscious decision. Because of the social pressure to not burden friends and family with negativity, many sufferers of depression do not wish to learn anything about their illness. Even though the disease may negatively impact their lives, they are hesitant to find out more information because they feel that learning about the disease acknowledges the fact that they are indeed ill. Doctors depend on input from patients in order to recommend treatments and evaluate the progress of treatments already in place. If a patient isn’t honest with the doctor, the doctor can only make guesses as to how to treat their patient. On top of this, doctors are pressured by pharmaceutical companies to sell “quick fixes” to as many patients as possible. This pressure tends to create a less than desirable relationship between doctors and patients, making patients even more hesitant to speak up.
A large majority of people believe that there are no physical symptoms associated with depression. Even people who have been diagnosed with depression do not believe that there are physical symptoms. A survey in Atlanta concluded that “72% of people with major depression did not believe, prior to their diagnosis, that painful physical symptoms such as unexplained headache, backache, gastrointestinal disturbance and vague aches and pains, were common symptoms of depression.” (World) yet over 75% of the respondents to the same survey reported that they were bothered enough by these symptoms to go see a doctor. Patients have a tendency to not go to a doctor unless something causes a significant disruption to their daily life. When a physical symptom comes up, especially one that is debilitating enough to affect performance at work or in school, many people wish for the condition to simply go away. They treat the problem as a disease in and of itself, rather than figuring out if it is a symptom of a more complicated illness. They go to the doctor with their physical complaints, and too often, depression isn’t even discussed. Doctors, when presented with unexplained physical symptoms rarely think of depression. As a result, a patient may be subject to a wide variety of tests that yield no useful results. Patients could avoid tensions with their doctor and doctors could save patients the aggravation of fumbling around for an answer if depression were discussed as a possible diagnosis.
When people do see a doctor for depression, they are often prescribed medication. Psychiatric medication has increased in popularity significantly in recent years. With the introduction of drugs such as Prozac, more and more people have been turning to psychiatric medications in order to cope with depression. In 2002 it was estimated “that around 46 million prescriptions were written for psychiatric medications” (Davis-Berman and Pestello) even though the documented side effects of these medications are quite unpleasant. Side effects can be uncomfortable and even life threatening, and yet people are hesitant to ask their doctors about them. Many sufferers of depression think that once they are on medication, the process of treating the disease is over. Advertisements for anti-depressant medication tend to mislead consumers into thinking that taking one pill will cure them. Advertisements also have a tendency to gloss over the potential side effects of the medications they are trying to sell. Even though some depression sufferers do see immediate improvement with the first medication they try while suffering no side effects, this is the exception rather than the rule. There is no magic pill that works for everyone. Each medication has different effects on the brain and no two brains are exactly alike. Unfortunately, the hesitation by patients to discuss the side effects of the medications they are prescribed often lead to a worsening of depression symptoms. The mental and physical side effects of medications, especially those that involve sexual function, often make the patient suffer symptoms of depression that are worse than the original complaint.
Patients are also hesitant to speak with their doctors after a diagnosis because they feel that their doctor will not take their complaints seriously. Many patients feel that they are rushed through the diagnosis and feel that they are pushed into taking medication. Some doctors prescribe several medications at once; sometimes it seems with complete disregard as to how the medications will react with each other. Several patients with depression report having bad experiences with doctors. Patients who are dissatisfied with doctors soon seek out the advice of others, often through internet chat forums. In a study of postings found in chat forums designed for depression sufferers it was found that, “Posters sometimes challenged diagnoses and treatments that they or others had been given by their physicians. In this situation, they sometimes suggested alternative diagnoses and medications. Posters who had been ‘‘involved’’ in the mental health field for an extended period of time seemed to see themselves as ‘‘quasi-experts’’. They seemed to feel that in some ways their experiences made them more knowledgeable than doctors.” (Davis-Berman and Pestello). These same posters also felt that they were qualified to give advice about the type of medication taken and the correct dosage. If doctors are unsure about the effects of anti-depressant medication, it seems unlikely that the average person has enough knowledge of the subject to be qualified to give out medical advice. Most doctors agree that psychiatric medications can be dangerous if taken improperly or stopped suddenly. Doctors often caution patients against diagnosing each other because when it comes to medication, no two people are identical. What works for one patient has the potential to kill someone else.
Generally, when someone seeks the advice of a physician, they want to have their health concerns taken seriously. There is a prevailing attitude amongst sufferers of depression that doctors do not take what patients say to heart. Sometimes, sufferers of depression feel that doctors believe that they are “crazy” and will do anything to get the patient out of their office. This encourages people to adjust their medications themselves or quit them entirely. When symptoms get worse, the patient is hesitant to return to the doctor because of previous negative experiences.
Even though there are millions of people under some sort of treatment for depression, there are countless others who are suffering in silence. In 2005 the World Health Organization reported that three-hundred-forty million people worldwide suffer from depression, yet it is estimated that three-quarters of people with a depressive disorder never receive any treatment. This is partially because of the belief that depression is something that only affects the mind. Surveys of physicians and psychiatrists in several countries suggest that there are many doctors that do not believe some unexplained physical symptoms can be a sign of depression. Employers do not believe depression is a legitimate reason for poor job performance. Several people with depression, including myself, have reported negative actions taken against them after they inform their employer that they may be suffering from depression. Because it is difficult to prove the existence of depression in a tangible way, there are people who use the label of depression as an excuse for poor job performance and attendance. The prevailing attitude then becomes that anyone who complains of depression must be faking it. People who genuinely would be diagnosed with depression become concerned with the stigma associated with the label and try to tough things out on their own. Also, most health plans offered by employers do not cover diagnosis and treatment of mental health problems, even though there are some physical issues associated with the disease. Many anti-depressant medications are expensive and often, to find a treatment that works, it takes months of experimentation with quite a few different drugs. Toughing it out seems like a better option, especially since there is no way to guarantee that treatment will be effective. Toughing it out also keeps the disease a secret from co-workers or supervisors.
In order to combat depression worldwide, I believe several things need to be taken into consideration. First, the public in general needs to be educated about depression. It seems that the only things people know about depression is what they see on ads paid for by the pharmaceutical industry. It needs to be understood that depression is a legitimate illness both by doctors and the public so that people will be more willing to seek treatment. More and more doctors are admitting that the current methods of treating depression are not effective and that more patients would be willing to accept treatments if they worked better. Doctors are also starting to discuss new treatments and the need for further education about depression. These are positive steps in the fight against depression but there is more to be done. Employers need to become more aware of depression and its symptoms and offer a way for people to get treatment if they need it. People who have depression need to be more up front with their doctors so that they can have the best treatment possible. Depression sufferers also need to be honest with themselves as to what treatments are working and what treatments are not.
Depression can be a debilitating illness and the stigma of diagnosis can make the problem even worse. Rather than relying on information based on misconceptions of the disease, doctors, employers and patients need to work together and educate each other. Through effort, mutual understanding, and honesty about symptoms and side effects, depression is a disease that can be beaten.
------------------------------------------
Works Cited
Davis-Berman, Jenifer, and Frances G. Pestello. "Taking Anti-depressant Medication: A Qualitative Examination of Internet Postings." Journal of Mental Health 17.4 (2008): 349-60. Web. 26 Nov. 2010.
"People with Depression Unaware of Painful Physical Symptoms of Depression." World Disease Weekly (2005): 1112. 28 June 2005. Web. 26 Nov. 2010.
---------------------------------------------------
Depression is a disease that affects thousands of people in all walks of life and in all cultures. It is even considered a leading cause of medical harm in developing countries. Despite its prevalence, depression is a disease that many people misunderstand. As a sufferer of depression, I hear a lot of people tell me that it is “all in my head” or that I should “just get over it.” Another misconception of depression is that it will simply go away once someone has been prescribed medication. Depression is a topic that many people do not wish to talk about. It is easy to understand why people who do not live with depression choose to avoid it as a topic of conversation. In general, when people hear that a friend has depression, they avoid that friend. It could be because they feel that their depressed friend will make them depressed or that they don’t know what to say to help. Many times, the avoidance response isn’t even a conscious decision. Because of the social pressure to not burden friends and family with negativity, many sufferers of depression do not wish to learn anything about their illness. Even though the disease may negatively impact their lives, they are hesitant to find out more information because they feel that learning about the disease acknowledges the fact that they are indeed ill. Doctors depend on input from patients in order to recommend treatments and evaluate the progress of treatments already in place. If a patient isn’t honest with the doctor, the doctor can only make guesses as to how to treat their patient. On top of this, doctors are pressured by pharmaceutical companies to sell “quick fixes” to as many patients as possible. This pressure tends to create a less than desirable relationship between doctors and patients, making patients even more hesitant to speak up.
A large majority of people believe that there are no physical symptoms associated with depression. Even people who have been diagnosed with depression do not believe that there are physical symptoms. A survey in Atlanta concluded that “72% of people with major depression did not believe, prior to their diagnosis, that painful physical symptoms such as unexplained headache, backache, gastrointestinal disturbance and vague aches and pains, were common symptoms of depression.” (World) yet over 75% of the respondents to the same survey reported that they were bothered enough by these symptoms to go see a doctor. Patients have a tendency to not go to a doctor unless something causes a significant disruption to their daily life. When a physical symptom comes up, especially one that is debilitating enough to affect performance at work or in school, many people wish for the condition to simply go away. They treat the problem as a disease in and of itself, rather than figuring out if it is a symptom of a more complicated illness. They go to the doctor with their physical complaints, and too often, depression isn’t even discussed. Doctors, when presented with unexplained physical symptoms rarely think of depression. As a result, a patient may be subject to a wide variety of tests that yield no useful results. Patients could avoid tensions with their doctor and doctors could save patients the aggravation of fumbling around for an answer if depression were discussed as a possible diagnosis.
When people do see a doctor for depression, they are often prescribed medication. Psychiatric medication has increased in popularity significantly in recent years. With the introduction of drugs such as Prozac, more and more people have been turning to psychiatric medications in order to cope with depression. In 2002 it was estimated “that around 46 million prescriptions were written for psychiatric medications” (Davis-Berman and Pestello) even though the documented side effects of these medications are quite unpleasant. Side effects can be uncomfortable and even life threatening, and yet people are hesitant to ask their doctors about them. Many sufferers of depression think that once they are on medication, the process of treating the disease is over. Advertisements for anti-depressant medication tend to mislead consumers into thinking that taking one pill will cure them. Advertisements also have a tendency to gloss over the potential side effects of the medications they are trying to sell. Even though some depression sufferers do see immediate improvement with the first medication they try while suffering no side effects, this is the exception rather than the rule. There is no magic pill that works for everyone. Each medication has different effects on the brain and no two brains are exactly alike. Unfortunately, the hesitation by patients to discuss the side effects of the medications they are prescribed often lead to a worsening of depression symptoms. The mental and physical side effects of medications, especially those that involve sexual function, often make the patient suffer symptoms of depression that are worse than the original complaint.
Patients are also hesitant to speak with their doctors after a diagnosis because they feel that their doctor will not take their complaints seriously. Many patients feel that they are rushed through the diagnosis and feel that they are pushed into taking medication. Some doctors prescribe several medications at once; sometimes it seems with complete disregard as to how the medications will react with each other. Several patients with depression report having bad experiences with doctors. Patients who are dissatisfied with doctors soon seek out the advice of others, often through internet chat forums. In a study of postings found in chat forums designed for depression sufferers it was found that, “Posters sometimes challenged diagnoses and treatments that they or others had been given by their physicians. In this situation, they sometimes suggested alternative diagnoses and medications. Posters who had been ‘‘involved’’ in the mental health field for an extended period of time seemed to see themselves as ‘‘quasi-experts’’. They seemed to feel that in some ways their experiences made them more knowledgeable than doctors.” (Davis-Berman and Pestello). These same posters also felt that they were qualified to give advice about the type of medication taken and the correct dosage. If doctors are unsure about the effects of anti-depressant medication, it seems unlikely that the average person has enough knowledge of the subject to be qualified to give out medical advice. Most doctors agree that psychiatric medications can be dangerous if taken improperly or stopped suddenly. Doctors often caution patients against diagnosing each other because when it comes to medication, no two people are identical. What works for one patient has the potential to kill someone else.
Generally, when someone seeks the advice of a physician, they want to have their health concerns taken seriously. There is a prevailing attitude amongst sufferers of depression that doctors do not take what patients say to heart. Sometimes, sufferers of depression feel that doctors believe that they are “crazy” and will do anything to get the patient out of their office. This encourages people to adjust their medications themselves or quit them entirely. When symptoms get worse, the patient is hesitant to return to the doctor because of previous negative experiences.
Even though there are millions of people under some sort of treatment for depression, there are countless others who are suffering in silence. In 2005 the World Health Organization reported that three-hundred-forty million people worldwide suffer from depression, yet it is estimated that three-quarters of people with a depressive disorder never receive any treatment. This is partially because of the belief that depression is something that only affects the mind. Surveys of physicians and psychiatrists in several countries suggest that there are many doctors that do not believe some unexplained physical symptoms can be a sign of depression. Employers do not believe depression is a legitimate reason for poor job performance. Several people with depression, including myself, have reported negative actions taken against them after they inform their employer that they may be suffering from depression. Because it is difficult to prove the existence of depression in a tangible way, there are people who use the label of depression as an excuse for poor job performance and attendance. The prevailing attitude then becomes that anyone who complains of depression must be faking it. People who genuinely would be diagnosed with depression become concerned with the stigma associated with the label and try to tough things out on their own. Also, most health plans offered by employers do not cover diagnosis and treatment of mental health problems, even though there are some physical issues associated with the disease. Many anti-depressant medications are expensive and often, to find a treatment that works, it takes months of experimentation with quite a few different drugs. Toughing it out seems like a better option, especially since there is no way to guarantee that treatment will be effective. Toughing it out also keeps the disease a secret from co-workers or supervisors.
In order to combat depression worldwide, I believe several things need to be taken into consideration. First, the public in general needs to be educated about depression. It seems that the only things people know about depression is what they see on ads paid for by the pharmaceutical industry. It needs to be understood that depression is a legitimate illness both by doctors and the public so that people will be more willing to seek treatment. More and more doctors are admitting that the current methods of treating depression are not effective and that more patients would be willing to accept treatments if they worked better. Doctors are also starting to discuss new treatments and the need for further education about depression. These are positive steps in the fight against depression but there is more to be done. Employers need to become more aware of depression and its symptoms and offer a way for people to get treatment if they need it. People who have depression need to be more up front with their doctors so that they can have the best treatment possible. Depression sufferers also need to be honest with themselves as to what treatments are working and what treatments are not.
Depression can be a debilitating illness and the stigma of diagnosis can make the problem even worse. Rather than relying on information based on misconceptions of the disease, doctors, employers and patients need to work together and educate each other. Through effort, mutual understanding, and honesty about symptoms and side effects, depression is a disease that can be beaten.
------------------------------------------
Works Cited
Davis-Berman, Jenifer, and Frances G. Pestello. "Taking Anti-depressant Medication: A Qualitative Examination of Internet Postings." Journal of Mental Health 17.4 (2008): 349-60. Web. 26 Nov. 2010.
"People with Depression Unaware of Painful Physical Symptoms of Depression." World Disease Weekly (2005): 1112. 28 June 2005. Web. 26 Nov. 2010.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)