Thursday, April 17, 2014

Were You There?

Good Friday always comes as a very bitter sweet day for many Christians.  It's deeply depressing to remember the cruelty humanity treated Jesus with.  Yet, as we look at the situations after the fact and know what happens three days afterwards, it seems to nullify the pain slightly.

However, Good Friday always comes very bitter sweet each year for another reason to me.  My favorite hymn, "Were You There (When They Crucified My Lord)?" is often associated very closely with Good Friday.  So in the event of Good Friday, I think it is important to share why I hold this hymn is such high accord.

With that being said, I usually hate every version of "Were You There?" because I hold it to such a high standard.  When in doubt, please sing the song a cappella and extremely solemn.  Over the years, I have found my favorite version of "Were You There?" and I will explain why.


I admire how the song starts out completely solemn and a cappella, drawing your undivided attention to the lyrics of the song.

          Were you there when they crucified my Lord?
          Were you there when they crucified my Lord?
          Oh, sometimes it causes me to tremble, tremble, tremble.
          Were you there when they crucified my Lord?

The lyrics themselves are so simple, yet so powerful.  Calling us to remember the story of the crucifixion, these four simple lines can move people to tears if done properly.  The simplicity and repetition really drill home the idea of what really happened.  When you hear a line once, it passes, but hearing that one simple line over again really gets us thinking and remembering the torture humanity did. 

These lyrics aren't calling us to remember the children's version of the crucifixion we all remember.  They call us to remember the story of the Son of God who died a humiliating death so that we may live.  He was ridiculed, beaten, humiliated, mocked, tortured.  If this isn't the greatest story ever told, I don't know what is.  It's the greatest love story ever told. 
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." - John 3:16
God the Father loved the world so much he was willing to give us his only Son to suffer and die for our sins, and then Jesus so loved humanity that he let this all happen.  Through it all, he had so much love as to say, "forgive them Father, for they do not know what they are doing."

However, I also interpret the lyrics another way as well.  The lyrics that appear to be so simple on the outside seem more complex in a way.  When the lyrics ask "Were you there?" I cannot help but think that the words imply for us to see ourselves as if we were there, as if we were in the crowd of sinners mocking or standing idly by.  Through this question, the song asks us to see ourselves as the sinners who are there.  The crowd ridiculing, laughing, or standing by is meant to symbolize all of humanity.  Though they were the ones physically there, we are all there because Jesus is dying for all of us.  Therefore, we all were there.

It is also amazing how they are able to take such a solemn song for the first three verses and then in the last verse, resurrect the mood to a feeling of rejoice and celebration.  And it really represents the entirety of these three days.  All seemed over.  The Son of God had died.  His followers were frightened and despairing.  Then, on the third day, they rejoiced to find he had risen from the dead.

A final point I would like to make.  This song makes such an excellent point for Christians whose beliefs are attacked every day due to "science" (more like an assumption that is not anywhere close to be proven).  We were there.  We saw what happened.  There are 2.18 billion Christians in the world today.  There is no need to panic over your faith because some scientist, who is an atheist, made an assumption that God doesn't exist.  We were there.  We saw.  We believed.

I once heard someone say (and I'm not going to tell you the source because I don't want you to look at the quote as to who said it but as to what it means) on this issue "I don't care about anything else; Christ died for my sins, and nothing else matters."  I thought this statement really rings true.  It doesn't matter whether the big bang occurred, or evolution is real or not, or anything else people use to try to discredit Christianity and the Bible.  It makes no real difference whether you are a Catholic, or Protestant, or Presbyterian, or Evangelical, or any other denomination.  What matters is Christ died for our sins.  We were there.  We believe.  We are Christians.

Were you there?

Thursday, April 10, 2014

BuzzFeed's Construed Definition of "Privileged."

It takes a lot to make me this upset.  This is your upfront warning that this will be a long post because there is a lot to say here.

I was on BuzzFeed and saw a quiz for "How Privileged are You?" and thought this would be one of those quizzes they put up every once in a while that makes everyone feel happy to be them.  It was one of those one's where you check off all the statements that apply to you.  I thought the quiz would be a little something like this:

I live in America, the land of opportunity.
I have the freedom to believe whatever religion I want to believe.
I live in a country where we have clean drinking water.

You know, things that actually do make you feel privileged.  Instead, I got some left-wing agenda driven post that was meant to make me feel terrible for being a white, Christian male.

Take a look for yourself:  http://www.buzzfeed.com/regajha/how-privileged-are-you

I'm stupid.  I try to avoid anything on that site that will fire me up.  I should have known when I saw Mitt Romney's face for the quiz I shouldn't have taken it.  But I think this gives me the opportunity to say what needs to be said on these topics.

Privileged is defined as " belonging to a class that enjoys special privileges; favored."  I think this is important to keep in mind as we go through the list.

First up: I am white. (And all the race related issues dealing with it.)

My race, in no way, gives me special privileges.  If you were to argue this before the Civil Rights Movement, I could understand how being white made you privileged.  But tell me one thing I can do as a white citizen that someone else cannot do as a black citizen.  Without looking at anything like socio-economic factors or anything besides race, tell me one way my race gives me privileges that an African American, Hispanic, or any other nationality does not have.

The Constitution of the United States is set up so that the law is colorblind.  I don't understand how conservatives, such as myself, can explain how we don't care what your race is and still be labeled as racist.

For example, I do not believe in affirmative action whatsoever.  I believe the best procedure for universities (obviously only public universities because privates schools should be allowed to do as they please) would be to remove all ethnicities, genders, even names from the application before being considered.  When applying to a school, you are assigned a number.  That way, the administrator can judge your application and essay as impartially as possible.

This farce Sandra Day O'Connor spread that "25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today" I find completely disgraceful.  I didn't know the Constitution put time limits on programs you and four other Justices deemed necessary.
 Did you know that of highly selective private colleges, it has been found that being African American gives you a 310 SAT point boost as compared to whites on the 1600 scale?  The study also finds that controlling for all other factors at the University of Wisconsin Law School, "the odds ratio favoring African-Americans and Hispanics over whites was 576 to 1 and 504 to 1, respectively."  Want to tell me about that white privilege again?

Second up: I am heterosexual. (And all the gay issues that come with it.)

If you were going to argue about marriage being a right, I could see how you could consider being heterosexual a privilege.  But that is not what any of these do.  My favorite one of all of these is I have never had to "come out."  So, I'd like to take this moment right now to say something very important.  Mom and dad, I know you will read this.  Just wanted to let you know.  It's true; I'm straight.  Please.  Please.  Hold the applause.

No, I find these arguments absolutely absurd.  Most of them focus on names homosexuals are called.  It's as if liberals think that people are never going to be called names in their lives.  Yes, I've never been called those specific names that you listed, but everyone is going to be called something.  If I had a dollar every time I overheard another student and even professors state that folks who come from small towns either are racist or more likely to be racist, I would have a nice chunk of cash to pay off some of that college tuition.  But I don't complain or worry about it because I know it isn't true.

I think the same thing goes for homosexuals as well.  Most of them really don't care what you have to say about them behind the veil of the Internet or even to their face.  It probably doesn't bother them.  It is these liberals, who aren't even gay, complaining about how terrible it is.  We all can all handle our own feelings just fine.  We don't need nosy liberals getting involved in everybody else's business.

On a side note for I always feel comfortable with P.D.A. with my partner in pubic.  Not just gays, but heterosexuals even more so (that I've seen), you people do some nasty stuff with P.D.A.  I hope none of you checked this box.  And if you did, let me use a famous line from one of my childhood shows, of which the star is now gay: "Ya little nasties."

Third up: I am a man. (And all the feminist bullsh*t that goes along with it.)

It's no secret that I don't agree with the feminist movement whatsoever.  So, I thought with Equal Pay Day taking place on April 8th, it's about time to debunk I make more money than my professional counterparts of a different gender.  When the left throws out these statistics, people don't look at the facts.  These statistics are like comparing apples and oranges.  And who better to debunk these claims than Laura Ingraham, a woman herself.


There are also other factors, like men are more likely than women to negotiate their bonuses, that would account for the 5% remaining discrepancy.  If I was a woman, I would find it extremely offensive that the government was telling me that I cannot resolve the problem, if there even is one, without trying on my own.  The government telling women that they are victims and cannot handle  these situations only feeds into the stereotype that women cannot handle themselves and need to be taken care of. 

But why take my word on this when we can get the opinion of another woman!  Famous YouTube vlogger Jenna Marbles has some choice words for all you feminists out there.  (Disclaimer: explicit language.  Like Italian family reunion explicit.)

  

Despite all this liberal crap that clutters both the beginning and most of the end, there is a bright spot in the middle of what should make you feel privileged.  Some of my favorite are:

My family and I have never lived below the poverty line.
I have never gone to bed hungry.
I have never been homeless.
My parents pay some of my bills.
I have never felt poor.
I graduated high school.
I went to an elite college.
My parents are both alive.
My parents are still married.
I do not have any physical disabilities.
I have never had an eating disorder.
I have never considered suicide.
I have never attempted suicide.
I have never had an addiction.

These are the things we should feel privileged for.  I am privileged for growing up in a middle-class background, in an area with little crime, surrounded by family and friends.  Through hard work, I have had the incredible opportunity to pursue my dreams at one of the most elite universities not only in the nation, but in the world.  I was born healthy into a loving family in the best nation on Earth.  I have never had major health concerns to deal with and am living a wonderful life. 

For that, I am privileged, and no person behind the veil of the Internet is going to shame me into feeling terrible because I am a straight, white, male Christian.  I am, and so is everyone else, more than the labels you are trying to use to define me.  You, and your liberal ideologues, will not shame me for my background.  I am proud of who I am, even if I might be in the majority of your categories.

My true privilege doesn't come from the color of my skin, my sex, my sexual orientation, or my religion.  Anyone who can possibly think this only wishes to dwell on and complain about the past.  My true privilege comes from that with which I have been truly blessed, and nothing you can do or say can change any of it.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Scott Sense: Oh, the Things You See at the Gym.

The gym never ceases to amaze me.  Anytime I see something out of the ordinary, I tell myself, "now, I've seen it all," only to be amazed once again.  From people passing out to people who have clearly never been to the gym before, I swear I've seen it all, so I figured it was time to share because laughter can be the best medicine.  (And with Obamacare, it might be the only medicine you can afford.)

And for those of you wondering what this has to do with politics, I consume most of my politics at the gym because it is really the only place I watch the news.  Every Tuesday at 10, you can find me biking as I watch Hannity.  The same goes for The Five at 5 on Fridays.

The People who Have Clearly Never Been to a Gym.  Ever.

These are people who tend to come to the gym in groups because they have no idea what they are doing or how any of the machinery works.  You can often find them in a polo, pants, and dress shoes.  (Not kidding.)  It usually takes about five of them to figure out how to use a machine, and even then, they are usually wrong.

I saw an example of this the other day.  Two girls were trying to figure out how to use a leg press.  Despite the pictures on the machinery, they thought for some reason the seat was irrelevant and proceeded to try (unsuccessfully) to push with their arms.  I think they got a better workout trying to use their arms until a guy decided to tell them they were using the machine wrong.

The Show 'n' Go-ers.

These are your people, typically female, who show up at the gym, run on a treadmill for five minutes, then proceed to walk out of the gym.  You can tell if you are a show 'n' go-er if it takes you longer to get to the gym than the amount of time you actually spend at the gym.  You can usually identify these people at the gym if (1) they look like they have their makeup done for the day, (2) are there to bump into someone rather than workout, and (3) try to avoid breaking a sweat at all cost.

The Gym Rats.

These are the guys who live at the gym.  It doesn't matter what time you go, you will always see them there.  It is safe to say that they probably have their own housing contract to live in the gym.  You can usually identify these guys if (1) they have an incessant need to appear "buff," (2) have their own section of the gym where they all lift together, and (3) carry around water by the gallon.  Can't make this stuff up.

The Walking Advertisements.

I definitely fit this group.  You might be a walking advertisement if every shirt you wear to the gym is a free t-shirt given to you, advertising some even, team, or company.  These may include, but are not limited to, Wilmington Area High School apparel, a t-shirt advertising the URMC Mobile App, a John Cook Memorial t-shirt with sponsors on it, or anything else you usually don't wear out in public on the average day.

The Asian Walkers.

Not being racist here, but there is a trend I've noticed that Asian females tend to walk on a treadmill for an hour as they talk on the phone.  I don't know if this is a trend at any other university gyms, but that would be interesting to find out.

The Multitaskers.

These are your people who hop on a bike, listen to music, highlight as they read for their class, while also trying to watch the news.  (True to life event.)  I have no idea how these people do it, but somehow they manage to get the best of four worlds.  If you can manage to do this, all power to you, but most of us prefer for our studies and exercise not to mix.

The Overexerters.

These are usually guys who have the body structure of a toothpick hoping to build muscle, and they think in order to do that is to put the weights higher than they can handle.  These will usually result in some of the funniest faces you will see in your entire life, cause you to burst out laughing in the gym.  (Luckily most people have headphones in, so they won't hear you.)

Last week, there was this guy, absolutely skin and bones, trying to use a machine I now know is called a pec-deck or a cable crossover.  Funniest face I've ever seen as he looked to be grueling with his lips trembling and eyes watering.  The saddest part was when I saw he was on the least amount of weight possible, 5 pounds.

The Overexposed.

When you see these people, you just want to ask them, "Would your mother have a heart attack if she saw you out in public like that?"  These are girls (and some guys) who like to wear shorts that are just a little too short.  These also can include people who wear clothes that are just too form fitting.

The best example of this would have to be the guy who wore nothing but a form fitting shirt and some compression shorts.  (Yes, no actual shorts.)  Believe me, everybody in the guy can see every inch of your body, and they don't wish to.  Please wear clothing that will at least leave something to someone's imagination if they so choose to go there.  Don't force every inch of your body onto people who have no intention of seeing you practically nude.  Quit raping my eyes.

The Swine.

There is no other way to describe this person except as a self-centered, gluttonous pig.  He will go machine to machine, leaving behind something of his to claim the machine as his own.  At one, it will be a towel, then a water bottle, then you swear you'll find his articles of clothing on something else.  He seems to think that he has property rights to the equipment he wants, and so long as something of his occupies the machine, those objects in the room belong to him, and solely him.

There are other people in the gym too.  Screw you.


The Workers.

Lastly, but certainly not least, the workers.  Some of them are really nice; some of them are jerks.  The jerks try to throw you out of the gym before closing time so they can get out of there early, but all you really wanted to do was finish watching Ann Coulter on Hannity up until 11 o'clock, like the gym rules allow, as he glares at you as continues to wipe down other machines.  Sorry, tuition is high enough as is; I'm going to use the facilities during their operational hours if I so please.




Then, there are those conversations you overhear at the gym that give you hope.  I overheard two guys talking as I was changing my shoes, and the conversation went a little like this:

Guy 1: "What's up?"
Guy 2: "Not much.  Just studying a lot for my classes."
Guy 1: "That's what you have to do, so you can provide for a better life."

And that's when you realize what an opportunity it is not only for you, but also those who have less than what you've come from, to go to the University of Rochester.

Thursday, April 3, 2014

Blackout. The Vulnerability of the US Power Grid.

Did you know any day now the United States of America could plunge into complete darkness?  No electricity.  No cell phones.  No running water.  America as we know it could be thrown back into the Dark Ages.

Even worse.  Did you know that nothing is currently being done in order to prevent this disaster?  Despite the United States having both the resources and the funds to permanently protect the US power grid, legislation both on the national level and the state level is being stalled by politicians caught up in their reelections.

To use one of the only good John Boehner quotes, "This isn't some damn game!"  This is a solution that has both bipartisan support by the citizens of the United States of America, but you damn politicians are so caught up in the politics of everything that you could destroy everything our ancestors have created.  Pathetic.

If the power were to go out and the United States of America be plunged into darkness, the death toll is estimated to reach as high as 9 out of 10 Americans possibly.  Let that sink in.  Only about 10% of our population could possibly survive.  Your odds aren't looking so good when 10% survive and 90% die.  Are you in that 10%?

The power grid of the United States is likened to that, by some, to a third world country's power grid, lacking the protection needed to secure the safety of our future.  Isn't it time we do something before it becomes too late?

There are many ways the US power grid could come under attack.  The first is by intense solar flare.  The last time the world experienced these intense solar flares was 1859.  They are estimated to occur approximately every 150 years.  Intense solar flares are knocking on our door.  In fact, last Saturday (March 29, 2014), the sun erupted with X-class solar flares at 1:49 p.m., torching the earth with electromagnetic radiation so strong they were able to blackout radio and mess with GPS systems for an amount of time.  Still, extreme ultraviolet radiation would produce solar flares intense enough to knock out the power grid.  If you do not think it is possible, think again.

Another way to destroy the US power system is with an electromagnetic pulse.  This would destroy all electronic devices and transformers. In fact, it is not just the US, but the world.  It is speculated that one EMP burst could cause the entire world to black out.  Think about that for a minute.  Your entire life savings would be gone, and you would be left with only the money in your pockets.

Still, another ways to destroy the US power system would involve a cyber attack.  It is thought the United States power grid has already been penetrated by cyber hackers, leaving behind software to compromise it.  In fact, an entire substation could be taken down with the command from a single cell phone if somebody knew how and had the technology to do so.

A nuclear device could also be used to take out the US power grid.  An EMP at a high altitude is estimated the most effective way to take out America's electrical grid.  Right now, North Korea has a satellite the size and weight of a nuclear weapon orbiting at an altitude that would be perfect for an EMP attack.  Additionally, this satellite approaches the United States of America from the South, an area of the country that lacks early warning and missile defense.  Even more so, the technology does not have to be either sophisticated or accurate.  (We're talking it could be a WWII nuclear bomb dropped anywhere over the United States in order to take out parts of the grid.)  The technology would be detonated at a certain altitude in the atmosphere, and depending on the height and its location, could knock out the whole US power grid at once.

The last way to bring down the US power grid would be through physical assault.  The power grid is only split up into three sections: the east, the west, and Texas.


An attack on a substation in Silicon Valley showed us how weak the protection for our grid really is.  In a military style raid, men with AK-47s surgically knocked out 17 transformers and 16 circuit breakers after cutting underground fiber optic cables.  The worst part of the whole story is that these men were able to outsmart security cameras and motions sensors, so nobody has been apprehended.  In addition to this, the investigation into this has claimed this event to be vandalism.  As if you and I would know how to systematically take down a substation in a military style raid.  Luckily the equipment was only damaged, not destroyed.

But worst of all was the report that came out after this attack.  If terrorists wanted to take out the US power system, they would only have to target 9 specific substations in the United States for all of the power to go out.  Now, you and I don't have that information, but where there is a will for a terrorist, they will find a way to get that information.

And if this attack were successful, the United States would be without power for 18 months.  Transformers have to be handmade, causing them to take about 18 months to be put together.  And although the United States does have the technology to produce transponders, only two countries in the world make them: Germany and South Korea.

If you're feeling a little scared, that's probably the usual feeling right now.  On the bright side though, all of these are preventable.  As pointed out, it would take only 10% of the Department of Energy's $30 billion budget to permanently protect the US power grid.  Think about that.  It's only $3 billion to protect the power grid permanently.  That is money well spent.  We threw away over half a billion dollars on Solyndra.  This is money that needs to be spent in order to protect the well-being of our country.

Luckily, awareness is also being brought to the topic.


But kudos to Judge Jeanie Pirro for being the first major newscaster I saw to present this story so clearly and boldly to the American people.  It is where I gathered a lot of my information, and there is so much more.  If you have time, I highly suggest watching her one hour special on the US power grid.

 

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

The Biggest April Fools' Day Joke: Obamacare Math.

Now, if there is one thing in this world that I know, it's numbers and mathematics.  I'm an Economics and Data Science major; I'm in my third calculus class (multidimensional calculus); math has always been my strong suit.  Numbers are my thing.

Yesterday, Obama decided to finally release Obamacare information (how ironic of a day).  Now, I find it funny that during this whole sign-up process whenever any media figure asked for any sort of statistic on the sign-up process, the Obama Administration continued to say, "Oh, we don't have that."  Then, the day after the official deadline, which received an unlawful extention by Obama himself, changing the law for the 37th time without Congress's permission, all the sudden they have the number!  As if it just fell from the sky.  The other fishy circumstance with the enrollment number was the administration claimed its goal was 7 million Americans.  Then, after no data throughout the entire process, the number is magically 7.1 million Americans.  How convenient.

But it's also important to keep in mind the definition of "enrolled" the Obama administration changed.  Originally, enrolled meant that somebody had logged onto the healthcare site (good luck with that), selected a plan, and had paid his or her first month's premium.  When we got into the process, all the sudden that definition changed to anybody who had signed onto the healthcare site and placed an item in his or her shopping cart.  Therefore, the people being counted as enrolled might not have paid anything.  Therefore, they might not be covered.

The RAND Corporation (somehow they have the data while the government doesn't) has broken this down and shows that about 23% of people who have selected plans have not paid their premium.  However, when you look closer, it gets even worse.  Of those who were previously uninsured, 47% have not paid their premium.

Obamacare was originally passed in order to help the uninsured.  That was the whole reason a sixth of the economy was thrown into this never-ending government chaos.  At the time the bill was enacted, the American people were promised 19 million newly ensured Americans by the end of 2014.  This is April, and that promise is not looking so good for Democrats.

The RAND Corporation also finds that of those who bought insurance on the individual market place, a measly 27% of those signing up for coverage were previously uninsured, reaching nowhere near the 19 million mark.

Additionally, despite pulling out all the stops to get young invincibles to sign up for insurance, only 24% of those signing up in the final three months are between the ages of 18 and 34.  The Obama administration had clearly stated they wanted a healthier sized pool than 24%, closer to 33%, in order to help offset the costs of the elderly and ill.

Furthermore, how can we trust these numbers when the Obama administration encouraged illegal immigrants to sign up for Obamacare?  The bill was originally sold to the American people that only Americans would be eligible.  Obama even stated himself during the State of the Union in 2009:

"There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."
Everybody remembers the outburst by Representative Joe Wilson: "You lied!"  Wilson was then reprimanded not only by members of Congress, but also the media.  In the end though, we see that he was correct, and Obama was the liar.  How can we trust a president and administration that has continually lied to the American people about our own healthcare?  Don't forget: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.  Period."

Lastly, we do not even know who has insurance and who does not.  We're told somewhere around 5 or 6 million American healthcare plans have been canceled due to Obamacare.  Then, Obama said he would grant a waiver for these people, unconstitutionally again.  But these people now say they haven't received anything from their insurance company notifying them that their insurance policy still is available or if the policy is being scrapped altogether because it will have to be pitched in a year or two anyway.  They are in health insurance limbo.

And of those who actually do have health insurance (or so they think), it's just as bad, if not worse.  These people signed up by the deadline to receive coverage by January 1st, paid their premiums, went to the doctor's office or the emergency room, and are now being slapped with giant bills.  Was it the government's fault?  Was it the insurance company's fault?  Was there an error in the system?  Do these people even have coverage?

Even if you think you have coverage under Obamacare, with the exorbitant out-of-pocket costs, you still might not be covered even if you are paying your premium because somebody obviously dropped the ball along the way.


After all of this, I don't see how the Obama administration can check the box next to meeting there goal when (1) the goal has been moved several times, and (2) other factors besides who has placed a plan in their shopping cart have been taken into account.  This law was rushed through Congress without being read (although who could understand a law that is over 20,000 pages long and continues to grow each and every day) in order to provide health insurance to the uninsured.  However, the law hasn't accomplished what it has set out to do.  The uninsured are not signing up, insurance costs are rising at increasingly alarming rates, out-of-pocket expenses jumped significantly, credible hospitals are refusing to accept Obamacare, and Americans continue to show their frustration over this law with its lackluster approval ratings.

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Women. Stop Pretending to be the Victim.

I am on my breaking point of groups trying to play the victim in society.  Once again, women want to hide behind their gender and complain about society.  My friend told me last night that she watched a documentary titled "The Bro Code - How Contemporary Culture Makes Sexist Men."  My instant replay was, "That sounds like some feminist bullsh*t."

It's not necessarily the fact that gender stereotypes exist in society that makes me upset, but the fact that people in society have to continually walk around with this "woe-is-me,"  "I'm the victim,"  "It's all your fault you sexist white men" mentality that drives me to the point of insanity.  Therefore, I'd also like to delve into some of the claims made and offer my counterarguments.

First of all, the propaganda says society trains men to womanize, which through music and other outlets, it does.  I'm not going to deny that fact.  But let's look a little deeper.  Why, if these women are so upset at us sexist men, do they continue to spend money on media they claim objectify women?  Seems a little hypocritical to me.

For example, last summer Robin Thicke's Blurred Lines dominated the charts for what seemed like an amount of time that would never cease.  Everybody remembers the lyrics objectifying women as well as the controversial music video.  However, wherever I looked, it wasn't men who were obsessed with the song, but women.  When you look at how Robin Thicke polled among the top artists with respect to females and males, he placed 25-26 respectively.  So if women are really concerned about sexism in society, why is Robin Thicke polling higher for women than men when the only song that has made him popular so far is considered to be sexist?

While we're on the topic of music, I think it is important to examine some of these female icons these girls look up to.  Let's begin with the easiest and look at Beyoncé.  We all remember her, the pop icon trying to ban bossy and rid sexual stereotypes while creating extremely explicit sexual videos for her latest album that objectify her as a woman.  Exactly the opposite of what she is preaching.  And let's be very clear with all these women, they don't have to be provocative anymore to sell.  Beyoncé could put out a single of the ABC's, and it would be number one on iTunes the very next day.

I believe the advice my friend gave was to "Be the change you wish to see."  Maybe somebody should tell Beyoncé and the rest of these women this.

Another easy one is Lady Gaga, who raked in more money while she was injured in early 2013 than most people will make in a lifetime.  She's clearly got enough money not to be sexually evocative anymore and also preaches the acceptance of everyone for exactly who they are.  I think everybody remember the meat dress, in which she declared "I am not a piece of meat," meant to symbolize equality.

However, look at her latest album, and it's clear to see that there is some discrepancy.  The first song on the album, Aura, asks in the chorus "Do you want to see me naked love?"  The next song, Venus, asks "Don't you know my ass is famous?"  Her second single off the album was Do What U Want, referring to her body.  Another song is titled Sexxx Dreams.  And finally, who can forget her latest single G.U.Y., which stands for "girl under you."


Lastly, I'll go easy on Katy Perry because she has explicitly stated many times that she is not a feminist.  But she is the perfect example to contrast.  She came onto the scene with her I Kissed a Girl, but once she made it onto the scene, her best selling songs were not the explicit ones.

Explicit

E.T. 5xs Platinum
I Kissed a Girl 4xs Platinum
California Gurls 4xs Platinum
Dark Horse 4xs Platinum
Teenage Dream 3xs Platinum

Non-Explicit

Roar 6xs Platinum
Wide Awake 6xs Platinum
Firework 5xs Platinum
Hot n Cold 4xs Platinum

Just saying, it seems to be a trend that when all these songs got major radio airplay, the songs that really were just liked lyrically or had an empowering message sold better.  Which is why I will make a prediction that Katy Perry's next single, Birthday, will not sell as well as the non-explicit single.  Though it may have a great hook to it, there seems to be a pattern in music.


And I'm not saying women shouldn't be allowed to be a little sexual, but when you are going to attack men for acting like you are a sexual object when your own music defines you as one, it seems extremely hypocritical on the part of the artist and women also buying the music.  You can't just complain about society, and then also give money to the causes of which you say anger you.

Moving on from this point, the propaganda says the first step is to train men to womanize.  Correct me if I am wrong, but women also place stereotypes on men in society and look at them as sexual objects as well.  Whereas society tells women to be petite and delicate, it also places stereotypes for men to be tough and muscular.  If you want to be the ones to rewrite cultural stereotypes among the genders, good luck to you; you'll need it.  But don't act as if society is only out to get you.  You are only looking at society from your own viewpoint.

Something else I would also like to add to this point: don't try to tell me that only women are sexual objects.  I remember a year or so ago the movie Magic Mike came out, portraying the life of a male stripper.  I also remember a video that went viral of an interviewer asking women walking out of the theater what the plotline of the movie was even about, and very little of them could even come up with an answer that sounded even remotely like a plotline.  At least some women had the dignity just to admit that they weren't even paying attention to the plot, they were only there for the stripping.  Don't act like you don't do it.  You aren't this superiorly virtuous gender that some of you make yourselves out to be.

Lastly, one comment made on the topic was, "Women glorify chances where they can be chosen as the prize of the men."  We're going to go through a little grammar lesson for this point.  "Women" is the subject of the sentence.  "Glorify" is an action verb, which means the subject of the sentence is doing it.  Then, the question all elementary teachers ask once they get this far into the question: "What are the women glorifying?"  And the class responds:  "chances where they can be chosen as the prize of the men."  Notice how the women are doing the glorifying.  Therefore, don't blame men for what you are doing.  The women are doing the glorifying.  It's not men's fault.

This is like a child being told to shut the door by her parent.  Then, when the child sees the cat run by and gets distracted, she forgets to shut the door.  Then, when the parents see she hasn't shut the door, and they get a little perturbed, the child blames the cat.  No, the responsibility here is on the shoulders of the child to shut the door as told.  Don't go around scapegoating men because you are mad at yourselves.

And if you're saying, "well, you're a man, you don't count."  Then, I would suggest you watch some Dana Loesch.  She grew up a liberal, and once she learned about the issues, became a conservative.  Now, she speaks out about women acting like victims.


Friday, March 28, 2014

Lighten Up People.

Stephen Colbert has been in the news recently.  And before we go any further, I think it is necessary to establish my views on Stephen Colbert and Comedy Central.  I don't think Stephen Colbert, or really anybody over at Comedy Central, is funny.  I also think it's extremely sad people say watching The Colbert Report or The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is considered news.

With that being said, I will defend Stephen Colbert, but not Jon Stewart or Bill Maher, who isn't even funny enough to have a show on Comedy Central anymore, but HBO.  Because unlike Stewart or Maher, Colbert is exactly what he is: a comedian, a satirist.  Stewart and Maher want to be taken seriously, and then when they do something controversial, they hide behind the "well, I'm a comedian" shtick.

Now, back to the story.  Last night The Colbert Report's twitter account, not run by Stephen Colbert, tweeted "I am willing to show #Asian community I care by introducing the Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever."  (For once, I found it a little humorous.)

However, you also have to put the joke in context.  Last night, Stephen Colbert was talking about how the owner of the Washington Redskins was trying to make an outreach to Native Americans.  Additionally, a character Stephen Colbert plays on the show, Ching-Chong Ding-Dong, has been around for the past nine years.

The point I want to make is that society has become too oversensitive about jokes.  It's a joke.  Lighten up.  When it's the next day and #CancelColbert is still trending on Twitter, I see that as a real problem.

Instead of society actually facing the problem of racism, which is extremely slim to none, our society has taken the position that it is not socially acceptable to even talk about a person's race, in fear of offending them.  Instead of actually have open discussions that could alleviate problems, everybody just walks around on eggshells trying not to say something to offend someone.

Screw it.  Just screw it.

I like a white joke just as much as the next person.  I remember watching this clip in Psychology class and laughing hysterically.  (Disclaimer: Language.)


It's funny because it's true.  Most white people cannot dance.  The funniest jokes are the ones that are true.

But God forbid a white person make a joke about any other group in society.  The feminists, blacks, Asians, Muslims, homosexuals, and everyone else under the sun are allowed to say whatever they want without fear.  Then, when a white man makes a joke all the sudden he's a racist, sexist, homophobic being.  Learn to take a joke.

I remember on Twitter a few days ago "White people be like" was trending.  I looked through the tweets and had some good laughs because I thought they were funny.  However, if "Black people be like" was trending, I can't even imagine the uproar that would have ensued from everyone, including white liberals.

Why can't people learn to take a joke?  When people want to act offended and play the race, or gender, or sexual orientation, or religion card, all you do is try to limit freedom of speech and take some of the fun out of life.

Lighten up.  To me, this is all you sound like.