Bumper Sticker

This time I want you to explain to them (the general public) a principle you've learned in this course:  People in general are not all that aware of how a single slogan or symbol (an ideonode) can actuate [excite, bring to life, animate] an entire belief system (an ideoplex). Take a bumper sticker slogan, and explain the whole ideology that springs up when someone reads just that single phrase.  Here are some bumper stickers to get you thinking, but hopefully you'll find one yourself: "Burn Fat, Not Oil," "Protect Our Borders," "I make milk. What's your superpower?" "NRA: Stand And Fight." (Stay away from real inflammatory bumper stickers for this assignment:  You only have three paragraphs.)

This bumper sticker is very simple, consisting of just one word ("Adopt"), but the paw print makes it into a symbol that relates to a much larger set of ideas surrounding animal ethics. The paw print brings to mind animals, particularly domestic pets like dogs or cats. Coupled with "adopt," the sticker as a whole calls to mind local human shelters and their humanitarian projects to rescue and give homes to pets.

This extends beyond simply adopting pets from humane shelters, however. Buying dogs from pet stores is usually not ethical according to animal activists, as the Some argue that buying from a breeder is not only expensive but encourages this growth of domestic pet population. As such, adopting from a shelter is the more ethical choice, which this sticker reflects.

The use of the paw print also brings about some pathos, much like those sad ASPCA commercials. Much of the population cares deeply about furry, playful creatures and would like to help them out if they can. This bumper sticker could serve as a call to action or a reminder of an option when considering getting a pet.

Symbol

This will be a great prep exercise before you write your Speech #4 outline. Pick a symbol (Snapchat, Adidas, Selena Gomez, Grand Theft Auto, Uber, Brangelina, etc.)  that you think unconsciously taps into a whole ideoplex of values, and that you think is problematic. Again, since you're writing to publics who don't know our theoretical terminology, use common ordinary language. Do three things in your blog: (1) Describe the symbol you're interested in analyzing. (2) Describe the ideology it supports. (3) Say why you think that ideology is harmful and needs to be challenged.

The symbol I am interested in is analyzing is the Confederate Flag, which represents the Confederate States when they attempted to succeed from America over their right to own slaves, which began the Civil War. As such, there is an association of the flag with racism, white power, and "Southern Pride."

In my opinion, as of many of those with my social views and those from the Northern states, the symbol is problematically entrenched in racism. In the Southern states, however, the symbol is often normalized, even though about 75% of African Americans living in the South find it a symbol of racism. It has even been used by white supremacists groups, after all. This is an ideology that glorifies "protecting" America from those who aren't white and returning to a time where they did not have to confront their racist values. The notion of "The South Will Rise Again" indicates more of a threat to our current system of government and rights than it does instill an arbitrary pride for living in the south.

Meanwhile, insisting just the flag just is a symbol of the south ignores its problematic history. There have even been cases with teenagers who pose with the flag and have a completely warped view of the history behind it. I believe we need to challenge our perceptions of items we view with serious nostalgia because otherwise we will be unable to make progress as a society.

This I Believe

Describe the elements of an ideology that you believe in (i.e., the ideonodes of an ideoplex).  Since the public that reads your blog posts doesn't know the terminology we're learning in this course (ideonodes, etc.), just use ordinary language terms that describe its values and practices. Name at least five or six norms, maxims, icons, or practices you support, and say what kind of ideology they support. This could be the values of the Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts you belonged to as a kid, the value system of the sorority or fraternity you now belong to, or the social values you want to adhere to when you leave college and start your own family or join a commune. Title and begin the blog post with the (famous) phrase "This I believe." Make sure that you're not just talking about values, beliefs and opinions, but about the concrete symbols that represent those values, beliefs, and opinions. This is what your instructor will be looking for in assigning points.

One ideology that I suppose describes my major outlook into my career as a writer, teacher, and general person is that of honesty to adolescents and young adults about various issues--basically social liberalism but in terms of issues relevant to their age. For instance, I would acknowledge the existence of LGBT+ individuals, often represented (in some classrooms and offices I've seen) by a sticker of support, likely with the pride rainbow colors (a major symbol).

Another aspect of this includes awareness of diversity and multiculturalism, often represented with a globe and/or different people holding hands. For me, this would mostly include reading, recommending, and writing stories about all different kinds of perspectives, including different races and ethnicities, sexualities, and physical and mental abilities. Furthermore, there's also an emphasis on feminism (represented often with the Rosie the Riveter image). In my case, this would mean writing and recommending stories that challenges gender roles and empowers female characters. All of these aspects would also mean that I treat all of my students equally.

Charity is another example, which is often represented by images of hands. I would probably donate to children's and book-related organizations that help out kids in need.

Lastly, I also try to spread awareness of mental health, which affects more individuals than many people realize. Mental Health Awareness is represented by a green ribbon and it has various maxims like "Stop the Stigma." I want to let my students know that I am there for them and help them find the resources they need, as well as explore some of the ways it has affected me in my own writing.

Analogy: Violence in media and real life

Make an argument assessing the strength of the analogy between violence in
 movies (or video games) and violence in real life. The analogy would be of the form 
A:B::A:C. (Violence in horror movies is closely related and perhaps
 contributes to violence in real life). Say if you think there's a strong 
connection or no connection. Support your argument with careful reasoning 
and/or an example. (Don't cite empirical evidence for this argument. Stick 
with your own logic and good reasons

I do not think the analogy suggesting the correlation between violence in movies (or another type of fiction) and violence in real life is credible. After all, fiction and real life are not analogous in the least. Fiction is carefully constructed to display a particular theme or message, whereas real-life is much more random (though, yes, I admit this depends upon one's religious beliefs). Furthermore, just because a film or novel is displaying violence does not mean it is presenting it as a good solution to one's problems or a positive recreational activity. Where intentional violence occurs in real life, however, the perpetrator intended harm. While he or she may have had reasons for it (racism, protest, etc), her or his main purpose is not artistic. It is harming real people, not fictional representations.

The depiction of violence in media often contributes to a larger theme that may even be a commentary on real-life violence, rather than an influencer of it. The Hunger Games, for instance, is built on the concept of children forced to kill other children. Despite the violent premise, however, the storyline emphasizes government corruption, disregard for life, and protests in opposition. As such, the purpose of the violence is to display its destructiveness--not portray the behavior as acceptable. Another example would be the murders with sexual undertones investigated in the British series Broadchurch allows for the show to explore the devastating impact of such violence--hardly condoning it.

Violence in real life is purported to cause harm. Violence in fiction, meanwhile, can be included for a variety of reasons, many of which include commenting on the devastating effects of violence in real life. This difference between fiction and reality makes the analogy weak.

Sign of the Times

I want you to interpret an indirect sign - a sign of the times.  The popular idiom "sign of the times" is a phrase that points to the fact that there are certain things that are accurate indicators of the cultural moment. (e.g., "Kim Kardashian is a sign of the decadence and superficiality of the times we live in.") Pick some symptom of present day culture that you've noticed, and describe what you think it indicates about general values, feelings, or concerns.  It could be, for instance, a statistical rise in suicides among a certain population, or a movie genre that has suddenly become very popular, or a change in social media technology, or a fashion. Describe the characteristics of the symptom with some specificity and vividness, and then speculate about what you think it indicates culturally.

One major defining and reflective cultural element right now is the Broadway rap musical Hamilton which, after running for over a year and losing most of its original cast, is still almost impossible to get tickets to. I admit I'm not as much of a die-hard fan of it as some of my friends (who have the soundtrack memorized); more so than its actual content, I appreciate its concept and cultural impact. It captures the current cultural mood of the need for minority representation in media, regardless of its subject matter.

Unlike traditional musicals, Hamilton's numbers consist mostly of rap, hip-hop, and R&B--musical styles created by and prominent in the black and Latino communities--and boasts a cast of entirely (well, except for King George) minority actors, even if they are playing the white, mostly slave-owning Founding Fathers. Hamilton and Jefferson's heated debates are captured in rap battles, for instance. Hamilton himself was an immigrant who ascended up society through his own hard work, emphasized through various parts of the musical, such as the song which dramatically reveals he wrote 51 of the Federalist Papers.While political rivals may no longer settle their differences with duels, plenty of topics--from immigration, sex scandals, and dirty political fights--are easily applicable to today's world.

But the political process isn't the only place Hamilton relates to today's culture. In recent years, the subject of race in media has generated a lot of interest. #OscarsSoWhite pointed out the lack of black and other minority-focused films to generate critical buzz or exist at all. We Need Diverse Books campaigns for the need of books reflecting today's children in terms of race as well as sexuality, mental and physical ability, religion, and more. Meanwhile, racial anxieties are fueling many debates in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement and Donald Trump's many controversial comments. As such, Hamilton fits seamlessly into current sociocultural dialogue by displaying a world where minority culture is celebrated and minority actors have opportunities that less creative producers would deny them.

Finding Common Ground

Recall a disappointing moment in your life when you failed to convince someone to agree with you or do something with you or for you. Think back on how you approached them, and now think how you might have done it differently to get a different outcome.  See if you can think of an example in which establishing a common ground with them first would have yielded a different outcome. Tell this personal anecdote in your blog as a story ("Once when I was ...."), and then tell the alternate-reality version ("If instead of doing it that way I had taken a different approach...").  Your story will llustrate the principle of starting from a 'common-place' -- You don't have to use the technical language for your public audience, but illustrate the point.  

After moving into college, I had a plan to watch the movie version of the musical Rent (plus the deleted scenes), which I'd been wanting to sing along to with others all summer and which is quite important to me.. I'd been talking to some on my floor/building before we had moved in, as we had made a group chat, and we had discovered a mutual appreciation for musical theater and this show/movie in particular. So a new friend and I announced we would one Friday night, but then other friends who I had hoped to be there wanted to do something else, and it looked like we weren't going to have much of a turnout, so we called it off. I never made much of a case for inviting the others to come, however. I think all I said was something along the lines of "but it will be fun!"

I think I would have been more successful if I had made a case for moving it to another night and made a more compelling argument. I could offer to work around their plans like dinner or playing games by suggesting we watch the movie in between. I could also have made my intentions clearer to the girl who was also a fan by saying it wasn't so much about watching the movie but sharing our love for it and singing. This would have made it sound more appealing than tiresome, I think. To attract others, I could have also brought up how the show was playing at IU the next week, how it tackled issues still relevant to today (like LGBT representation), and how its diverse casting inspired the currently popular Hamilton. These common issues had the potential to attract new friends to a sing-along movie night.

Op Ed: Comprehensive Sex Education

Ok, here's your chance to write out a speech which makes a criticism you passionately believe, and make a strong case for it. I would like you to blog a three paragraph Op Ed against someone or something ("X is really bad/wrong/etc."), and offer the three strongest pieces of empirical evidence you can find in support of your claim.  Be sure to cite sources so that your readers can check your data. For this exercise I'm not going to require you to make your warrant explicit, just make sure you use strong empirical proofs or starting points that support your conclusion.  Your instructor will assess the strength of your argument on the quality of your premises (starting points) as empirical proofs.

America's Puritanical roots may no longer manifest in Scarlet Letter-like shaming, but it would be foolish to assume the conservative culture around sex is completely eradicated. One of the most irresponsible doings of many American school systems is a lack of comprehensive sex education for students.Abstinence-only programs often distort facts and do not inform students, whether straight or LGBT, enough about the importance of safe sex. As such, remaining willfully ignorant of the desires and behaviors of today's youth can misinform them, increasing the likelihood of health problems and risky behavior.

Abstinence-only or a lack of comprehensive sex education endangers teenagers by purposefully leaving out important information. According to a report released in 2004 by the U.S. House of Representative's Committee on Government Reform, 80% of common federally-funded programs that focused only on abstinence had distorted and misrepresented information. Purposefully shielding teenagers from the realities of the world can leave them without the tools they need to handle the situations they have not learned. Furthermore, it has not been shown that comprehensive sex education leads to more sexual activity among students, as is the common fear. In fact, research done by Douglas Kirby in 2007 showed that after comprehensive sex education, 40% delayed sexual initiation, reduced the number of partners, or increased the use of protection; 30% reduced the frequency of their sexual activity; and 60% reduced unprotected sex. As these findings indicate, teaching students about contraception does not necessarily make them more likely to have sex earlier and more often. Lastly, sex education programs often do not address LGBT sex. This poses a risk for LGBT-identifying students; for instance, about 1 in 5 of new HIV infections occur in gay and bisexual youth aged 13-24, according to the CDC. A lack of education about safe sex in non-heterosexual sexual relationships can lead to such health risks, especially since, as the CDC reports, only 41% of public American schools as of 2014 are required to instruct on HIV prevention.

In today's world, public education is expected to prepare students for their futures and for the real world. Yet, a lack of comprehensive sex education does anything but. With studies displaying that teaching about contraceptives does still lead to a decrease in sexual behaviors, the fear of the contrary is not legitimate. There is no reason why we should expose our children to misinformation at the expense of their sexual health.

Simple Argument: Investing in Ed Tech

I want you to blog out an original argument using the formula starting point + warrant = claim. Use the student debt example as a template, and follow the same procedure. Write a paragraph setting out the context of your argument, then in the next paragraph state the argument so that the three parts are clearly visible (to your instructor). Use some form of evidence from a reliable source as your starting point. Make sure that you cite your evidence carefully, so that your instructor would be able to find that source herself without having the URL link provided. Because your writing this blog for the public, don't refer to the technical terminology you've studied in this lesson: Just make an argument that effectively connects a controversial claim to a premise through a warranted justification. This is what I want you to get in the habit of doing whenever you make a public argument.

According to a Pew Research study published in 2016, about 52% of adult Americans are "relatively hesitant" when it comes to digital readiness, or using technology and rarely are aware of how to use technology for learning. This means that many adults are unaware of opportunities for finding information and advancement in school or career. Some of these "ed tech" programs include Khan Academy, Distance Learning, and digital badges (an online certification for mastery of a skill). They can be used to supplement traditional students or provide non-traditional education paths that adapt to different lifestyles, especially for working adults.

In general, most of the 52% are from lower income households. As such, they have less access to education to start with, and can benefit the most from online learning tools. However, they are unlikely to be aware of these options of they are not exposed to them through traditional public education as students and social outreach as adults. Technology and the Internet is changing rapidly, making it easy to fall behind in understanding it and missing out on opportunities.

Technology is so omnipresent in today's society that it's necessary for advancement in career and education. However, lower-income adults in particular often lack the skills to take advantage of these learning opportunities.We need to invest in digital literacy for our students so they will grow up to continue using technology for their own advancement, and we need to show adults how to do the same.

You Can't Unring That Bell

Use a blogpost title like "A Truly Embarrassing Moment," or "The Words I Wish I Could Take Back," or "You Can't Unring That Bell," and tell a story about a time when you didn't observe the time-tested wisdom, "Think before you speak."  In your blog, reflect a little on why it is that you can't, as they say, "unring the bell," and what it is about speaking into the air that makes that especially true.

 Perhaps this seems like a bit of a cop-out, but some of the biggest conflicts I've had with my family involved me running up to my room to calm down and proclaiming, "I don't want to talk!" I tend to do this without thinking too much about it (despite being a notorious over-thinker, I can blurt out plenty of things without thinking around people I know well), especially without thinking about its track record of hurting my parents, because it sounds like I don't want them around. In reality, I usually need some space to cool off...but sometimes my family gets trapped in silly arguments, and they're only made worse by further causing hurt, usually snowballing into some yelling.

It would have certainly saved a lot of time if I had simply admitted to or agreed with whatever I had done that was "wrong." This has been things like making unnecessary growling noises when my brother isn't listening to my parents, saying I don''t want to play chess, or complaining that my parents are arguing. In general, our temperament and conversation skills are so fantastic that we all end up saying things that we don't mean or more dramatically than is warranted, and a giant argument is sparked.

As much as we forgive each other and apologize, I've come to learn that "unringing the bell" isn't possible. They were still hurt by my words, and I cannot take back those moments of pain. They can only heal over time, the mistakes learned from (which is difficult, because it requires time thinking about speaking rather than reacting on instinct). When words are out, they cannot be taken back; there isn't an ability to edit or delete. I've certainly spent a lot of time compulsively explaining myself in many situations, but after a while it just seems like an excuse an the other party loses patience with me. If not thinking before you speak is a habit you fail to overcome, then others have difficulty believing your apologies and your relationship and trust falters.