Swine Flu

"OMG IT'S SWINE!" Ya we all hear about it. We're all scared for it. The infamous H1N1. But seriously, how much worse is it than the seasonal flu? Every year, about 36,000 people die from the seasonal flu. But only 426 people have died from a confirmed case of the swine flu. So why are we freaking out?

The symptoms of H1N1 are:

Fever above 100.4 °F

Cough

Sore throat

Headache

Chills

Muscle aches

Diarrhea

Vomiting

Those seem awfully familiar. That's becuase those are the exact symptoms of the regular seasonal flu. And the treatment for the swine flu? When I researched this, it stated that most people will get over the swine flu with no treatment at all. The only time anyone would have to worry is if they have other complications that will affect their chances against fighting the flu. So I wonder, why are we making such a big deal out of the swine flu? Yes, it's a pandemic, but the more we freak out, the more society freaks out. Everyone is talking about the swine flu. Everybody knows about it. And we are more scared about getting H1N1 then we are the regular flu. And the regular flu makes us just as sick. Do you think we play up the swine flu a bit much?And if we do, do we have reason for it? Should we really be scared about the consequences of H1N1? And what about the vaccine? The government is releasing a vaccine this fall for the H1N1 virus. This vaccine is different from the seasonal flu vaccine but is expected to be given out around the same time. Is it risky to be taking both vaccines? Especially us, who are living in close dorm rooms, should we recieve the vaccine?

And one more issue that has caused lots of rumors. What will Merrimack do when the swine flu breaks out? Will those people be sent home? Will H1N1 hit us like a bomb? There are so many "what ifs" and so many questions. And most of them won't be answered until something actually happens. But we all worry. Everyone is concerned about getting sick. But there is not much we can do right now other than washing our hands and stay away from those who are sick. What do you think about this issue? What should Merrimack do?

Naked Truth

Plastic surgery, weight loss diets, eating disorders, cosmetics, exercise videos, exercise equipment, posh shopping. Those are just a few things that are becoming more prevalent amongst women in the United States. In the present time, women are being portrayed in the media as thin, beautiful, sexy, and essentially, perfect. Every woman wants that perfect body and the media plays a large role in revealing exactly what this perfection is supposed to be.
Think about the messages that MTV, video games, and advertisements are exemplifying. The media depicts women as sexual objects and in standpoint of powerlessness. On MTV, women are always climbing on or around men and the women are usually half-dressed, if that, while the men are usually fully clothed. Did you know that most videos on MTV are male-directed? The physical image that MTV creates is the ideal woman. This creates body image issues amongst young women. This is where the increase in weight loss regimens, eating disorders, and cosmetic surgery comes from.
Also, video games typically display women in tight clothing, lots of makeup, and as having unrealistic bodies. For example, Grand Theft Auto is a prime example. Prostitutes walk the streets with large breasts and revealing clothing. The player can abuse the prostitute and exchange money for sex. This game is objectifying women to the utmost extent and illustrating to its viewers that this is an accepted notion.
Advertisements are just the same as the rest of the negative portrayals in the media. Women are either portrayed as sexual figures (such as in bikinis, lingerie, etc) or as housewives (subservient to men); they are never portrayed as powerful. Essentially, these ads demonstrate what the ideal woman is supposed to be like. While the media is allowed their freedom, why do they think this message is acceptable? Is this increasing the (negative) problem we seem to already have with gender stereotypes?

Death Penalty in the US: Is it right?

The death penalty is a very controversial topic. Out of only 60 countries today that still approve of the death penalty, the United States is one. 35 states have the death penalty and only 15 states do not. There are five different ways the states and US government uses to kill someone: Lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, and firing squad. Lethal injection is the most popular method of the five and only two persons were hanged and fired upon.

The cost of the death penalty is outrageous. The cost to kill someone is actually more than keeping someone alive. In California it costs $114 more per year to kill them than to keep them in prison for life. This is a very high price to pay considering California hasn't used the death penalty last year or this year.

The youngest person ever to die was a young man of 20 years. Do you think that maybe he wanted to die? Maybe the US should take away the death penalty because a young man like that won't have to take the consequences for his actions. He doesn't want to spend years in prison. He is probably happy he is going to die because he won't have to survive the guilt within him. The death penalty might be helping those who are killed.

What do you think? Is it worth the cost? Should we kill murderers or lock them up for life?
There are currently 1174 people killed under the death penalty and more to come. Should we waste our money to kill a person when just locking them up is cheaper? Should the United States get rid of the death penalty? Read the facts and decide.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf

Where is happiness? Where can you find it?

In Congress, July 4, 1776, the unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America declared, among various things, that we are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I want you to focus your attention on the last four words; “The Pursuit of Happiness”. In those days colonial people believed that part of their happiness depended on breaking free from the British, and in fact it was. They definitely felt relieved and “happy” after getting their freedom. Now, the question is; what do Americans need to feel happiness nowadays? How does our pursuit of happiness differ from our funding fathers’? What does pursuit of happiness mean for us?

Response to Omelas

In The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, Ursula Le Guin shows us a utopian society that has one major flaw. There is a child suffering for the sake of the community by being thrown in a room and basically left to suffer for the rest of its life. The child is secluded and not given enough to eat, but the text never says why the child is kept in that room. All it says is “Perhaps it was born defective or perhaps it has become imbecile through fear, malnutrition, and neglect” (91). This raises the question, is a utopian society possible without pain and suffering?

Everyone in the city finds out about the child between the ages of 8 and 12, so they come to accept the child’s presence over the years. This makes the people of Omelas be thankful for everything they have even more because they have seen extreme suffering. You cannot truly appreciate life and the beauty of it without experiencing the extreme opposite. I do not think a utopian society is possible without suffering.

However, if there is even one child dealing with severe pain, then it is not a perfect society. How can they live with themselves knowing they are making an innocent child suffer just because they want to continue living in their perfect world? It is completely impossible for a society to exist without any pain or suffering in it. People often experience this on a daily basis, whether it is extreme or only minor, so a society free of pain is unattainable.

There are people in the city of Omelas who do walk away once they find out about the child. Are they being more heroic or less than the people who stay? I believe that walking away from a problem is the most cowardly way of dealing with it, but the people who do stay are not much better. No one in this story is a hero, but who is making the better decision?

America, are you really home of the free?

My father always has told me that I was a very lucky person to have grown up in the United States, the freest country in the world.

I can’t help but wonder, why then, as a nation, we don’t have the freedom to choose who we marry. The federal government of the United States does not recognize the marriages of same-sex couples and can’t because of the Defense of Marriage Act. Only four states currently allow the marriage of same sex couples and two others recognize out of state marriages, but don’t perform them.

A man I used to work with gave me his insight on the topic of gay marriage. His partner of many years was in a car accident which left him clinging to life. They told my friend that his partner had very few hours to live. When he asked to see him, he wasn’t allowed to because he wasn’t family, they weren’t married. His partner died that night, and my friend didn’t get to say goodbye.

The Declaration of Independence states:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

It is my interpretation that this was the intent of the signers of declaration of Independence. They believed that any person, whether they love a person of their own sex, or of the opposite, are equal in status to everyone else. If being with someone they love entitles them to happiness, shouldn’t we recognize that, just as we recognize happiness brought about by heterosexual couples? I believe that they wanted to make this country truly the freest country in the world where everyone gets equal rights.

An article published on September 19, 2009 includes some examples of homosexual couples being treated like second class citizens.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/19/us_lawyers_defend_letter_of_gay_marriage_ban/

“Government attorneys said in a brief filed yesterday in US District Court that the administration believes the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages, is discriminatory and wants it repealed.”

One of these couples were married in Massachusetts, but it wasn’t recognized and therefore they weren’t allowed benefits that same-sex federal employees enjoy. The couples filing the complaint believe they are treated like second class citizens, and that they don’t have equal rights like everyone else.

Many arguments against gay marriage include that “it’s not right” or “it goes against God’s will” or that “gays can’t form lasting relationships” and if they do they’re shallow. Is it right that my friend never got to say goodbye because of somebody else’s opinion on his love for somebody else? Do you think God would want someone to die alone because of some law preventing two people who love each other to marry? I believe He wouldn’t.

I’m not saying Gay marriage doesn’t go against the norm. It’s been an unapproved practice for all of time by societies throughout the world. But what I am saying is maybe its time to change that, and why don’t we start with the “freest country in the world.”

Freedom of Speech Really Isn't So Free

We all know about the Bill of Rights. It’s a basic list of rights that cannot be taken away from the American citizen. The bill covers the rights that all human beings should have; or does it? The first article of the Bill of Rights is summarized as the right to freedom of speech. The article states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

So if I go out on a limb, I know that the above statement is saying that people in general have the freedom to practice what religion they want to practice, the freedom to say what they want, and the freedom to assemble and protest if they decide that something is not right, Right? In my opinion…these rights are not as basic as we think.

I’ve noticed throughout my lifetime that people certainly have these rights- but only to a certain extent. Have you ever heard the phrase, “Never talk about politics, money, or religion”? Why not? What made basic rights in our everyday lives something that is now taboo to talk about? So now, I can’t talk about the economy, I can’t talk about the Obama administration and I can’t talk about what is currently going on in any sect of religion. I realize that the expression is figurative; but only to a certain degree.

Take South Carolina representative Joe Wilson for example. An outburst in congress the other night during President Obama’s speech could cost him his political career. Obviously I see where yelling, “You lie!” to President Obama is probably not the best thing to do- but according to the Bill of Rights, doesn’t Representative Joe Wilson have the right to say what he’s thinking?
Or take public schooling. Those of you who went to public school know how much of a “no-no” talking about religion was. There would always be that parent calling up and saying, “Stop trying to convert my child to a religion that is not his or hers”. There would always be that teacher who tip-toed around the subject. And if the Bill of Rights gives us the freedom of religion, shouldn’t it also give us the freedom to talk about it as well?

I’m not saying that the Bill of Rights is dated or unnecessary. It is my personal belief that the Bill of Rights is the most important document in the United States to give people equality. However, if a person is to read between the lines, the articles are guidelines- guidelines in which people don’t always reap the benefits of. Sometimes what a person believes isn’t always the most popular route; but as John Mayer would say, “Even if your hands are shaking and your faith is broken...say what you need to say.”

Healthcare & Heckling

One of the hottest topics in the news today is healthcare reform. President Obama addressed Congress and the nation to try and clarify his healthcare reform bill. During his address he was heckled by a member of Congress. This heckling has lead to off topic discussion, in which the issues he was trying to address were lost. It was a distraction that may actually hurt the Republican agenda because now “Monday morning quarterbacks” are focusing more on civility than the overall subject. Blurting out during a Presidential speech is immature and irresponsible. There are much better ways to disagree with the President of the United States.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxHKSHvMRWE

It appears that the media has been focusing on the incident rather than the topic at hand which is healthcare reform. This could be viewed as a type of media bias, as mentioned in last week’s blog, which is trying to take the spotlight off the real issue of healthcare reform and focus on the “bad behavior” of the Republicans.

We all understand that there are serious questions surrounding healthcare reform, questions that need clarifying. For example, the cost of healthcare and how it will be funded. Will the quality of healthcare be affected? Will we still have the option of choice? Will the brightest minds still endeavor to become doctors? What will be gained, what will be lost? These are the real issues of the healthcare reform bill that must be addressed and should not be overshadowed by partisan behavior and opinion.

What do you think?

What’s your opinion on the Steven’s Service Learning Center volunteer work?

Do you think it’s a burden or is it helpful? My opinion of this topic is I agree with the community service that we have to do as an honor student. In high school, anyone on National Honor Society had to do at least twenty hours of community service a year. It not only makes you feel good as a citizen, but it’s helpful to the community. One thing, I do wish that was different was the fact that you do it every week for two hours. I wish you could do it once a month for eight hours. As a college student, I have already seen how much work we have to do and it would be so easier to just do it once a month. It would also be less stressful to worry about getting transportation every week. But, on a brighter note, where to volunteer?

Do you want to volunteer with the elderly, kids or the homeless?

For the elderly, we can volunteer at Marland Place. We would help the elderly with everyday activities. Their mission statement is “Everything we do at Atria is focused on helping our residents live life to the fullest. We strive to provide the highest quality services and accommodations; a choice of activities to nurture the body, mind and spirit; delicious, nourishing meals; and a true extended family of dedicated friends and caregivers.”



If you want to work with kids, you might consider volunteering at Bellesini Academy in Lawrence. Bellesini Academy is a boy’s Catholic Middle school in collaboration with Merrimack College. This school is for families that are in financial hardship. Here you would help teachers during the school day.



For the homeless, you can work at the Emmaus House in Haverhill. This house is a non-profit organization, open since 1985. They provide affordable housing to people in need.



I personally want to volunteer with children. To see their smiles when they learn to play baseball or get a math problem right, would make my day. Some people many think this is a burden, but I am very excited to see how I can make a difference. What do you think? Where do you want to volunteer?

How would you judge American society today?

In Eva Paus' Reflections of a New U.S. Citizen, I noticed three underlying points. These three points that Paus states in her short entry are, that we as a people have lost our power in the government, we have become very materialistic and that we have lost a sense of citizenship and respect for one another, on an international level.

I do believe that in some way, the people have lost power in the government. As a democratic government it is our right to speak out and to give our own suggestions. It seems, however, that not only are uninterested in voicing our own opinions but that a part of our society has even become uninterested in even selecting a representative to voice their ideas for them. Paus' states " ... and at a time when some regard dissent as the nemesis, rather than the essence, of democracy" 

Paus also hints that we have become very materialistic when she said, " We live in a country where most people know more about the Simpsons than the Constitution." Sadly, this is more true than we would think. Our country is obsessed with fame and money, and has become less interested in our government. For example, the tope three googled people in the world are as listed, 1. Brittany Spears, 2. President Obama and 3. Miley Cyrus. How pop artists such as Brittany Spears and Miley Cyrus are even considered to be on the save level as President Obama is unfathomable. 

Finally, Paus says that we need to "redefine, redirect and revitalize our ideas of citizenship, not just at home, but in an interdependent world." As a society we are very patriotic which is a good thing but, we have lost respect and knowledge for other nations. For example, when a United States General was asked if the army was bombing Sunni or Shiites, his answer was I don't know. For those who don't know, Sunni and Shiites are two diverse groups of Muslims and our army does not know which group they are even bombing. How can we bomb someone with out knowing who they really are? This helps support that we need to be educated on an international level and we also need to become more interested in helping other countries.

These are my thoughts based off of what Eva Paus has to say and there is some evidence to support these thoughts but, is this really what our country has become? Do you think that we are too materialistic, that the people have lost their voice in the government and that we have no education or respect for outside countries? 

“I didn’t mislead you; I just left out some details."

Media censorship, I believe that when most people think of media censorship, they think of masked profanity or edited content. However, this is not always the case. I came to garner interest over media censorship during the 2008 presidential election. Regardless of whom I supported, I came to find that the media censored issues in a very alarming way. It’s impossible to be completely objective, but the amount of sheer bias was blatant. The media’s primary job is to inform people accurately. This was not seen on either sides of the political spectrum. Conservative or liberal, both sides obviously let their personal opinions override the purpose of their job—to inform.
How did I come up with such a topic? The truth is, I was on youtube way too late last week. I came across a video of Bill O’ Reilly (a noted Fox News TV Host) and the political satirist, Jon Stewart. In the video, Bill O’ Reilly responded to Jon’s criticism of Fox news being bias. In his response, O’ Reilly states his opinion before revealing that Stewart had actually edited the content that was being criticized. Needless to say, the debate on the comments was brutal. I discovered two broad but distinctly different opinions. One side is stating that Jon was just catering to his “liberal” audience while the other side is insisting that Bill O’ Reilly completely missed the point of Jon’s sketch. Was Jon just being facetious about Fox’s bias? Or was Jon just catering to his audience and telling them what he wants them to hear? Or is the message something completely different?

What do you think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvsEuQYwFSg

---Helena Berbano

GENDER CONFUSED

Alicia Unis

Why is it that we put males and females into stereotypes that are never broad or dynamic enough to fit a single individual? Have you ever met a man solely interested in sports or beer…and that’s it? What about a woman only concerned with household duties and soap operas? Truth is, we’re all a little bit gender confused.

Why is it that I hear people, men in particular, expressing the opinion that the loss of familial bonding and general wholesomeness is a result of women entering into the workplace? Is it a gender bias of mine to feel women have a right to work? Why do we chain them to the home and the upbringing of the children? Last time I checked, reproduction was a multiple person process, and to have parents is plural. Even though women have been daring to step outside their homes and into professional occupations for decades, they still on average receive a substantial percentage less than men in salaries for the same jobs.

Why are men and women perceived to be so unequal? You never hear people saying he’s good…for a guy, or he’s as good as a girl. So why is it that you’ll hear people saying girls that are good at sports are only good in regards to their gender and not as a general athlete, or that their good enough to play with the guys, as though on average they aren’t? Why is it that a spectacular female athlete must be man?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1207653/Womens-800m-gold-medal-favourite-Caster-Semenya-takes-gender-test-hours-World-Championship-race.html

In an online article, there was a dispute over the gender of a South African track competitor that won gold in the 800m World Athletics Championship. In this article (the link is above), the only explanation for these accusations was her talent. They cited no other reasons for their questioning of her gender, other than their surprise at her shattering the record by a whole second and her muscular physique. Apparently girls can’t work out now …and not a single other competitor was considered very muscular. This eighteen-year-old track star must now undergo a comprehensive gender assessment process and suffer this humiliation, solely because of her success. Not all women that love sports and are shockingly, actually good at them (you know, only for a girl), are unobjectionably a man. Is it so difficult to believe that a woman can be just as good as a man at sports?

Is it a radical concept, women being equal to men? Apparently.

However, you’ll never witness me saying men are to blame. I’m not quite that radical. They’re usually just on the receiving end of our enraged objections because they are considered to have the advantage of the situation. But do they?

If we are so attuned to female struggles and injustices, are we equally as blinded to that of the men?

Men feel the overwhelming pressure to be the provider of the household. In this society, the burden has never been placed on the woman. Men are expected to make the money, while women are expected to maintain the household and tend to the children. Even in modern times, you can encounter a woman attending college to get her M.R.S. (Mrs. Degree), to meet a husband rather than prepare herself for a job. For women, there isn’t that expectation, that pressure to provide the income.

Boys don’t get it too easy, ladies. Think about it in their perspective. Boys are teased by their peers, girls and boys alike, if they don’t express those masculine qualities our society has burdened them with unyieldingly. Not all women love cleaning and children; isn’t it just as likely not all men enjoy sports or fighting? Its unhealthy to encourage men to keep their emotions stifled under the surface, just because its considered “feminine” to express your feelings. Parents are tormented by the idea of their son choosing a Barbie over a G.I. Joe, not always because they’ve been conditioned into thinking that’s an inappropriate choice for a boy, but they also know what others will think or how they’ll react. Weaker, frail boys are usually the targets of teasing. That’s not how boys are supposed to be. But why are any of us supposed to be any way in particular?

We should just allow them to be.

What is all this gender stereotyping teaching little boys and girls? How much of our unfair expectations are forcing them into changing their yet unaltered opinions, hobbies and themselves. Instead of polarizing the sexes, we should promote androgyny, allowing for a well-rounded society of people not limited to the constraints of their gender.

My advice? Don’t be afraid to get confused.

Exhibit Darfur: September 28 through October 1

Exhibit Darfur graphically presents the crisis in Darfur Sudan through photos by six artists. It has been touring the country and will be hosted by Harvard University for the beginning of September and then come to our campus. It will be set up in the Sakowich Campus Center beginning September 28.

In conjunction with the display we will be:
*Showing the film The Devil Came on Horseback on Tuesday 9/29 from 7:00-9:00 PM in McQuade Library
*Hosting the workshop “Investing in Genocide: What You Can Do To Stop It” on Wednesday 9/30 from 7:00-9:00 PM in Cascia Hall

Please consider attending.