The Terrible N-Word

So, I suppose I should mention that this opinion is coming from a middle-class, suburban white kid, attending a small country school with little exposure to black culture. Nevertheless, I'll throw out my 2 cents.
With the recent outburst of Michael Richards, there has been a call by black community leaders and figures for a voluntary stopping of the usage of the infamous "n-word." They say it's just offensive, there's no reason for its use or existence. Using the word is "unacceptable." This annoys me. I am by no means discriminatory towards any race, creed, sexual orientation, etc., and that's something you'll just have to take my word on. But the idea of eradicating a word from existence by command is absurd. Listening to and NPR article on the evolution of language, it was mentioned that language changes form and rules on its own, and without some sort of authoritarian rule, no person or group can demand change in a language; it happens on its own. To me, however, referring to any word as "unacceptable" strikes a very negative chord. I'm reminded of a very enjoyable post by Keith Olbermann regarding Bush's remark on a certain train of thought (I recommend everyone give the article a good read.) I believe this way of thinking applies to words as well. Words are the only communicable representation of thought. Limiting language implies limited thought, as strongly implied in Orwell's 1984.
Now, true, this particular word could probably be effaced without much loss of freedom of thought. However, lines must be drawn, and in my opinion the line exists at the very beginning. No words can ever, EVER be forced out of existence, whether that word has a beautiful, positive meaning or a terrible negative connotation. Expression can never be cut down.
If one is looking merely to reduce the power of racism by destroying the power of this racist word, then calling for an all-out stopping of its use is doing the exact opposite! A good quote to remember: "Fear of a word only increases fear of the thing itself." No wise thinker said this one; it was in a Harry Potter book. Why do curse words retain their power of expression? It's due to their lack of use! It words like "fuck" or "shit" are used on a regular basis, do you think those words imply the same level of passion? No, they are simply used as normal words with normal implication; they do not express the same extreme emotion as they once did. The same idea works in reverse. If you know someone who never uses foul language, when they curse you are astonished, but you recognize his/her level or frustration, right? Of course you do. If people want to reduce the power of this "n-word" then by God just say it. Encourage everyone to say it. Push it to the level of frequency that it becomes an everyday word. In many places it is already, but the commonness of the word must traverse racial lines; white people can say it too. Everyone should be allowed to use this word, and often. What would happen then? If anyone tries to use it as an insult, a negative epithet, would anyone care? Would it get the slightest response of anger? No, it wouldn't. It's now the norm. To remove a word's meaning, you must remove its taboo.
So, really, why all the fuss? My comment on any argument founded on the use of this word: Get over it.

Inexcusable Inefficiency for Clutches of Cash

I write merely to mention my digust with the Standardized Testing Organizations' methods of reporting scores to intended schools. Aside from the ridiculous level of difficulty regarding the simple lack of communication from the ACT website preventing me from even reporting those scores, I particularly want to mention the cost and procedures.

While Collegeboard charge $9.50 per school, I assume this price well covers the cost of printing, sorting, handling, and mailing the various scores from various students to various schools. While I'm very confident this can be entirely done in complete automation by machines with minimal (if any) direct human involvement, the cost suggests that it is done mostly by hand with several levels of verification to prevent incident in such an important task. However, I'm fairly certain that the reporting of scores can be done quite easily and efficiently over the internet with minimal risk of forgery or mistake with secure networking. After all, what do you think's going to happen to those scores as soon as school gets them? They're going to be entered right into a database with all your other info, and that useless paper copy will be shredded and thrown out or put in a file never to see daylight again. Heck, with my inexperienced progamming skills, I could write something up to take requests and send out scores with few mistakes.

The outrageous $26.50 fee for "rushing" delivery is understandable. Anything that shoves its way up the priority list must be adequately supported (in this case, by payment). But this fee moves the shipping time from 3-5 weeks to 2 business days. That, my friends, is lame. If sending the scores in two days is at all do-able, then 3.5 weeks as a normal standard can be no more than a crude business practice to encourage people to pay the extra sum for a quicker delivery. I might also remark that were the system done entirely electronically via the internet (a series of tubes, yano, not big trucks), the process could occur immediately upon verification of the payment method. It could even be done on non-business days! GASP! Productivity on the weekends! Nooo... that'd be too efficient. And we know who pays for lack of efficiency: the customers.

I close with a quote from a delightful movie and not the slightest bit related to this post's topic:
"I know, I am merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is." --V. :)

To The Deserving Nice Guys

I was going through my old files and came up on this. It definitely deserves publishing.

This rant was written for the Wharton Undergraduate Journal
This is a tribute to the nice guys. The nice guys that finish last, that never become more than friends, that endure hours of whining and bitching about what assholes guys are, while disproving the very point. This is dedicated to those guys who always provide a shoulder to lean on but restrain themselves to tentative hugs, those guys who hold open doors and give reassuring pats on the back and sit patiently outside the changing room at department stores. This is in honor of the guys that obligingly reiterate how cute/beautiful/smart/funny/sexy their female friends are at the appropriate moment, because they know most girls need that litany of support. This is in honor of the guys with open minds, with laid-back attitudes, with honest concern. This is in honor of the guys who respect a girl’s every facet, from her privacy to her theology to her clothing style.
This is for the guys who escort their drunk, bewildered female friends back from parties and never take advantage once they’re at her door, for the guys who accompany girls to bars as buffers against the rest of the creepy male population, for the guys who know a girl is fishing for compliments but give them out anyway, for the guys who always play by the rules in a game where the rules favor cheaters, for the guys who are accredited as boyfriend material but somehow don’t end up being boyfriends, for all the nice guys who are overlooked, underestimated, and unappreciated, for all the nice guys who are manipulated, misled, and unjustly abandoned, this is for you.
This is for that time she left 40 urgent messages on your cell phone, and when you called her back, she spent three hours painstakingly dissecting two sentences her boyfriend said to her over dinner. And even though you thought her boyfriend was a chump and a jerk, you assured her that it was all ok and she shouldn’t worry about it. This is for that time she interrupted the best killing spree you’d ever orchestrated in GTA3 to rant about a rumor that romantically linked her and the guy she thinks is the most repulsive person in the world. And even though you thought it was immature and you had nothing against the guy, you paused the game for two hours and helped her concoct a counter-rumor to spread around the floor. This is also for that time she didn’t have a date, so after numerous vows that there was nothing "serious" between the two of you, she dragged you to a party where you knew nobody, the beer was awful, and she flirted shamelessly with you, justifying each fit of reckless teasing by announcing to everyone: "oh, but we’re just friends!" And even though you were invited purely as a symbolic warm body for her ego, you went anyways. Because you’re nice like that.
The nice guys don’t often get credit where credit is due. And perhaps more disturbing, the nice guys don’t seem to get laid as often as they should. And I wish I could logically explain this trend, but I can’t. From what I have observed on campus and what I have learned from talking to friends at other schools and in the workplace, the only conclusion I can form is that many girls are just illogical, manipulative bitches. Many of them claim they just want to date a nice guy, but when presented with such a specimen, they say irrational, confusing things such as "oh, he’s too nice to date" or "he would be a good boyfriend but he’s not for me" or "he already puts up with so much from me, I couldn’t possibly ask him out!" or the most frustrating of all: "no, it would ruin our friendship." Yet, they continue to lament the lack of datable men in the world, and they expect their too-nice-to-date male friends to sympathize and apologize for the men that are jerks. Sorry, guys, girls like that are beyond my ability to fathom. I can’t figure out why the connection breaks down between what they say (I want a nice guy!) and what they do (I’m going to sleep with this complete ass now!). But one thing I can do, is say that the nice-guy-finishes-last phenomenon doesn’t last forever. There are definitely many girls who grow out of that train of thought and realize they should be dating the nice guys, not taking them for granted. The tricky part is finding those girls, and even trickier, finding the ones that are single.
So, until those girls are found, I propose a toast to all the nice guys. You know who you are, and I know you’re sick of hearing yourself described as ubiquitously nice. But the truth of the matter is, the world needs your patience in the department store, your holding open of doors, your party escorting services, your propensity to be a sucker for a pretty smile. For all the crazy, inane, absurd things you tolerate, for all the situations where you are the faceless, nameless hero, my accolades, my acknowledgement, and my gratitude go out to you. You do have credibility in this society, and your well deserved vindication is coming.



I salute and I drink to that.

God's Commission or Human Morals

I had to respond to a quote for PED. It's not pulitzer-worthy, but i still like it. And I like to share what I'm proud of.



“We Americans have no commission from God to police the world.” -- Millard Filmore

It's odd. I originally planned to write this essay agreeing with the above quote, chastising the American government for its past self-proclaimed righteousness and unrequested interventions in the past; I thought that's what I'd be writing up until this past minute. For some reason the argument sprang into mind, almost defensively, that no, we have no obligation by God (this coming from an agnostic), but we do have the oft-forgotten obligation my human decency.
Today's world is froth with argument over what's the “correct” moral code. Stem cells: kill to let live? Fundamentalism: do evil means justify personally-preferred ends? I Can't Believe: is it or is it not butter?! Most people (oh, yes, including myself) have the curse of instinct ingrained in their mind, which manifests itself as absolute certainty in oneself. People have to believe they're right. If any attempt is made to live life always questioning one's intuition, progress will grind to a halt. Unfortunately, this necessary mindset of the courageous Confidence has a sick, malicious brother: Arrogance. It's this Arrogance that creates the conflicts rising from difference in opinion.
However, even with the radically contradicting views that exist today, there is a general need for moral conduct, which permeates all areas. The good news is, it's inherent. Even science backs up the intuitive caring for the general good of the group; just ask Scientific American Dec. 06. There are situations in which action is necessary, even the worst of actions, to right a wrong. These situations are rare: the Holocaust, bio-terrorism, destruction of organized religion (oh wait, that's not a uniformly shared opinion... ), but they do exist. The difficulty is recognizing them as early as possible, so that immediate action can be taken. If we knew about the Holocaust earlier, maybe we would have acted sooner.
Regrettably, recognition of such events comes as a sloth. Even now we face such an event that we will be judged by for generations to come and we do nothing. Four hundred thousand dead isn't enough, I suppose, to warrant action, only a spot on the “To Watch” list, which in itself is a cruel, pathetic joke.
I am by no means defending all of America's actions. Given the opportunity, I'd probably controvert the majority of what America's done; most of it was done out of ignorance, I might add. But I am saying that in certain circumstances, such a God would sign a statement of power to be given to the U.S. to do what is necessary (although we wouldn't ask, we'd act before and assume it's in-transit; preemptive action, yano?).
Sometimes one source policing the world, however unjustified, can prevent such atrocities from ever happening in the first place. Do the ends justify the means? Do they ever? It's not a matter of my opinion or yours, or even the United States', it's a matter of faith in humanity. And I mention it as I did in my previous essay, let's hope my naivety stays intact for a while.

Well Put, Sir. So What Now?

Just before the elections, my PED teacher handed out a short opinion on the increasing violence in Iraq to his Current Events class. Knowing I was interested, he gave me the same and followed it up with this email he had sent to someone asking his opinion. I thought it was very well phrased and so I like to make it available for others to read. I plan to get the aforementioned opinion and edit this to put in it here, also. The email goes as follows:

Interesting viewpoint. Good points, but also sounds like a bitter conservative upset that their viewpoints are not appreciated by a majority of people. Again, is it necessary to fight a war in Iraq to fight a war against terror? There are some very interesting points but an equal amount of questions about our choice of foes. Why didn't we keep our strength of force in Afghanistan? This country wants us there. Their country was hijacked by a true terrorist regime that was imported into their country. We liberated them and had a great opportunity for a base of operations to attack terrorist groups. Now we don't have the forces to protect Afghan people, nor ourselves. The Taliban is returning in force and we are unable to effectively convince the Afghan people to remain loyal to us. They feel we are full of empty promises.
We supported both Iran and Iraq during their 2-decade war against each other. We turned out heads when Iran cried foul because Saddam used chemical weapons on them. Several thousand were killed from his use of chemical weapons. We said there was no conclusive proof so we couldn't condemn him. Then we turnaround and make a preemptive strike against his country on allegations of weapons of mass destruction. We supported him when he was killing his own, but when he waged his war of rhetoric against our power brokers, we attacked. Also, who is making these military decisions. It doesn't appear they consulted too many historians on the Crusades. The lesson from the Crusades was that it is much easier to initially take Islamic land than to keep it under Christian control.
I guess the essential question still remains: Should we be fighting in Iraq?
The question is not whether the terrorists are good or bad. BAD. Or, should we be actively fighting terrorism. YES. Should we support our men and women in out military? YES. Can we still be patriots and question decisions that our elected representatives make? YES. Are people cowards just because they disagree with the War in Iraq? NO. What country were the terrorists from 9/11 from? SAUDI ARABIA. What country did the Taliban enter Afghanistan from? PAKISTAN. What country allows the most jihaddists through their border into Iraq? SYRIA. What two countries are providing the most financial aid to all of the Islamic terrorist groups? SAUDI ARABIA and IRAN. In what country was the American embassy bombed and many Marines killed and to this day Marines do not have a force in this country? LEBANON. What countries are supporting the armed, hostile takeover in Lebanon? PAKISTAN and IRAN. The leader of what country and has stated many times that Israel needs wiped off the face of the earth? IRAN. Again, the question is- Why are we fighting in Iraq?
What country was Timothy McVey from, who, in Oklahoma City, orchestrated the 2nd largest terrorist attack in America? And he claimed to be a true patriot.


Again, these were the words of my PED instructor, but I'm proud to display them here.
In light of the recent elections and the events that followed, I'm excited to see how things will play out in the near future. Democrats have swept control of the House and the Senate and promised much in the way of change. Change for the better or change for the worse is open to interpretation. They have stated plans to take action within the first 100 hours to raise the national minimum wage to $7.25 an hour, cut prescription drug costs, lower interest rates for college loans (something my father's very supportive of ;) ) and more. As for whether or not events will change too terribly much in Iraq is left to see. Any change that does happen should not and hopefully will not (and most likely cannot) happen to suddenly or dramatically. Aware of the seemingly racist character of the following statement, it is based in fact so I'll say it anyway: Rarely does any good come from sudden dramatic changes in the Middle-East. Any changing of tactics should be done after careful thought.

At home here in Ohio, the minimum wage has been raised to $6.85 and smoking has been banned by law in all public places, including restaurants, bars, and such. A much-needed school levy passed, and my congradulations go out to Lancaster for that.

But now this entry is becoming more of my ramblings and less of an objective observation. So I quit.

Aspirations to Ashes, Dreams to Dust

I went out on Tuesday. I drove a friend down to Chillicothe to watch the Regional Semis for Boys D-3 soccer. It's about an hour drive, so I didn't go just out of interest, I went cuz it my school was playing and about half the players on the team are good friends of mine.

It was a struggle from the get-go. I won't play out the game, as that's not my point, but it was a very good game. The other team was unexpectedly skilled and fast. We scored 14 min into the second half, and they countered ten minutes later. It was to sudden death and ended all too quickly.

The moment the ball crossed the line, time froze. The other side erupted in cheers and soon died down. Half an hour later, we were all still standing there. No one had moved. The other team and fans had all left, but not a soul had stirred on our side. Players began to slowly make their way back to the bench, but others remained behind: the seniors.

What's startling is that we were ranked number 1. We were supposed to take it all, the second state title for our school ever. We were District Champs for the third time in a row, and this was to be the culminating year after previous successes.

Mr. Swartz ambled over later and explained. Nine of those senoirs had been playing together since they were four years old. This was the to be the final triumph: the state championship, but it disappeared. I can sit here and type away all night, but I'll never be able to explain the tragedy that was felt after this event. I looked around and parents were crying. Fans and friends and even first-timers to watch the team were crying. The crowd gave a couple sporadic attempts to cheer up the team, with applaud and hollars, but it was pointless. Mark, one of my best friends for years, was squat down in the middle of the field, head in his hands for I don't know how long. A couple of brave souls tried to console him, but it took Coach to go out of bring him back to the bench. I hadn't seen so many of my friends so torn apart, tears on all their faces.

In one of the most beautiful moments I have ever seen in my short 18 years, as most of the players finally started coming back across the field to the crowd, the parents and families set out to meet them. Fands headed over and there was hugging and praising. Overall, though, there was a thick silence that lay over the entire field. Mr. Swartz said he thought it's be sad, but not so much like a funeral; but that's what it was. It was the death of a strong link between these men, who grew up playing together, working toward this one last chance at success.

I could not be an athlete. To be an athlete is to face the constant battle between victory and loss. I couldn't handle the prospect of glory being ripped from my grasp in an instant. I'm not as strong as these people.

To think the day before this game, they had all been wearing these three District Champ medals, dreaming of the few weeks ahead, where they'd prove themselves to the whole damn state in Crew Stadium, but it didn't happen.

I witnessed a death, a funeral, and a mourning within an hour. A mutual, overwhelmingly heavy sadness fell upon everyone there and I cannot even begin to explain how it felt. Being uncomfortable in such situations, I stayed out, on the side of the field watching the contagious grief and futile attempts to console. I wasn't as involved as many of those people in the program, so despite my pain, I couldn't begin to imagine what those people experienced.

I write this to recognize the strength in today's athletes, to memorialize this tragic event, and to express my pride in my team.


And for us, there is no next year.