The Orange Contagion

It's frightening how fast our world has become filled with intolerance and ignorance. We may not have an oppressive Big Brother constantly peering over our shoulders and censoring our information, but we still wreck havoc just fine all by ourselves. 
     Today, over six hundred cities across the world are participating in the March for Science. They are marching to celebrate science and to call for scientific evidence-based governmental policies. Science was founded to prove facts, and it is not something that can be denied once proven again and again. As such, global warming is real, and vaccinations save lives. The evidence behind these facts are indisputable, yet somehow they have become "alternative facts" that some choose to ignore.
     This is merely one example of ignorance, but it's safe to say that in our present day world, ignorance breeds conflict (both political and physical), not bliss.
     The fact that the President of the United States is a strong stander against global warming and has questioned the validity of vaccinations shows just how far ignorance has diffused into our society, and it's horrifying. That's not to mention his strong views on anti-immigration and blatant racism against Muslims, who he wrongly accuses to all be terrorists.
     Unfortunately, such extremist views have been spreading rapidly from the U.S. to other countries in the five months that Donald Trump, the orange man, has been our president. I've given this phenomenon a fitting name - the Orange Contagion.
The increasing popularity of France's far right-wing party, le Front National, or the National Front, only confirms my fear of the contagion.
     Marine le Pen is the head of the party, France's very own Trump. Not unlike her American equivalent, le Pen is advocating to ban the hijab in public places, stating that they are too "conspicuous" to be allowed. As if that wasn't bad enough, she has also asserted that France was not responsible for the war-time round-up of Jews, even though the French police rounded up about 13,000 Jews, most of whom were later deported to Auschwitz.
     Unfortunately, it seems we have brought this upon ourselves. We, as the American people, advocated for Trump long and hard enough so that he became a viable candidate, then proceeded to become president. France is faced with a similar decision, with the first round of their elections taking place tomorrow.
     These two people are armed with the weapon of fear, especially the fear of terrorism. While this is not an unfounded concern, the focus on banning religious expression and immigration only diverts attention away from the true issues. Thus, we have been "drowned in a sea of irrelevance" (Postman).
 It seems our government has no need of concealing information, as Big Brother infamously did in 1984. After all, even when the facts are presented to us, we stubbornly stick our fingers in our ears and call it a day. -MC

God bless America...

...and vive la France

For more information on the French election, watch John Oliver's latest video:
https://youtu.be/hkZir1L7fSY

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/10/marine-le-pen-doesnt-deny-that-french-jews-were-handed-over-to-nazis-but-she-claims-france-is-not-to-blame/?utm_term=.67c275f4667f

A Field of Verbal IEDs

     Recently, in a Times article I read, the author discusses how her college-aged daughter has now been converted to the side of P.C. language. Words such as "microagressions" and "cisgender" have now become a part of her daughter's vocabulary. So, one wrong mix up of gender pronouns or incorrect nomenclature earns her a dagger-like stare or groans of pity from her daughter. As a result, her house has become a field of "verbal IEDs", where she must always watch where she steps (or, in this case, speaks).
     Our nation has become much like this author's house. In our case, however, the battle is between political parties, and their weapons are P.C. phrases.
     This is not to say that all P.C. language is bad; Its intentions to eliminate bias on the basis of race, religion, or gender are admirable. But, merely altering semantics is not enough to sew shut the ever-expanding chasm that has split the nation.
     Virtually no difference exists between "abuse vs. torture" and genital mutilation vs. genital cutting"; They are all abhorrent (Okrent 771). These phrases are synonymous, and the minute differences in connotation are only the result of politically fueled battle. They waste time and distract from the real issues. Ultimately, if we can't agree on semantics, we should at least agree to disagree. -MC

Their points are one and the same.

Survival Town

Setting: Survival Town, Nevada. Sixty miles north of Las Vegas
Date: May 5, 1955
     It was a clear, early morning. Looking out, it seemed like a perfect town; Tidy houses and electrical substations were visible and homes' pantries were well-stocked with typical canned and packaged foods, like any other American home. But there was no bustling of breakfast being prepared, no yawns of children rising for school, no purr of automobile engines. In fact, there was no sound at all. The residents had been petrified, although not from fear. They were mannequins.
     Survival Town was built by the United States government in order to evaluate explosions' effects on people and buildings. It was a part of the covert Operation Teapot, which aimed to establish an effective strategic method of dispensing deadly A-bombs.

A mannequin before...

...and after. He would've been burned alive

Mannequins were dressed like people and placed in varying areas of exposure - outside, inside, in a vehicle, and so on. If the clothes were burned by the blast, it meant that a human would have been burned alive. The bomb, named Apple-2, was dropped shortly thereafter.

     Though it is apparent today that these tests caused cancer and distress to those living near the sites, they were deemed necessary at the time to "fight the Communists". The fear of hostile takeover by the Russians only fueled the "rampant...McCarthyism" (Williams 929), which began when Senator Joseph McCarthy ran around the government accusing various officials of being "loyalty risks" to national security.

     This was in a time where the Atomic Energy Commission assured nearby residents that radiation levels were "only slightly more than normal radiation which you experience day in and day out wherever you may live". Dead sheep were a common sight, and the rabbits fled.
     So, consider this: The Cold War wound up not requiring nuclear weapons (or, for the most part, violence), so why do we insist upon keeping a multi-billion dollar stockpile today? What are we so afraid of? -MC

Sources:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/sep/21/building-the-atom-bomb-the-full-story-of-the-nevada-test-site
http://time.com/3675016/nevada-a-bomb-test/
http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/joseph-mccarthy

The Unmarked Hijab

Disclaimer: I've incorporated my own political views into this post. It is not my intention to offend anyone, and I apologize if I will.
     As I read Deborah Tannen's "There is No Unmarked Woman" the other day, alarm bells went off in my head. They were screaming "Donald Trump" like bloody murder. Truly, as Tannen went on to describe how she "considered the clothes of each woman" she saw and paid no mind to the style of each man, I immediately though about our great President's unequal treatment of the sexes (Tannen 552). He is the type to peg Tannen as a "male-bash[er]" when she states that men, unlike women, have the option of going about their day unmarked and are not viewed as objects of affection or targets of sexual impulses.
     Really, though, I think being "marked" versus "unmarked" is dependent largely on your own perspective. I'm not saying this applies in every case - after all, I don't think the misogynist President will ever cease to judge women by how "tight or revealing" their clothes are - but this is especially true for hijabi women, who are followers of Islam.
     In American society, hijabs are sometimes seen as a symbol of oppression; Why should these young women be forced to cover themselves up? They are occasionally marked as ignorant followers of religion without the ability of free thought. In fact, in extremists' views, the hijab poses a danger to America. It is a reminder to them that all terrorists are Muslim (which, of course, is false). Thus, hijabi women are marked even more deeply. 
     However, in many cases, hijabi women feel as though the hijab completes them. It frees them from the burden of our society's obsession with physical appearances. In that sense, it renders them unmarked. They are able to remain modest and to be viewed for their intellect rather than physicality. 
     These women have the right wear their hijabs proudly and to be unmarked in their own way, a point enforced during the Women's March in Washington D.C. on January 21, 2017.

Protesters at the Women's March

It is not the hijab that marks them, but rather society's ever-negative view. -MC

P.S. If you need a pick-me-up, just watch this video, titled in French "Hijabs for All: The March for Women". It depicts two Muslim women helping pin American flag hijabs to other supporters of rights. The moment at the 32 second mark is particularly heartwarming.

Push Up and Put Up With It

Let's talk about push-ups. Well, the so-called "girl push-ups", which involve allowing the knees to touch the floor, thus making them easier, rather than maintaining a straight plank position.
     It's not so much the exercise itself that bothers me - they're actually a decent way to build some upper body strength. It's the name that's irritating. Why must it be girl push-ups? (Now, I realize they are occasionally referred to as "modified push-ups", but "girl push-ups" seems to be much more common. It has a particular ring to it that sticks in your mind.) Just the name itself places an entire gender into a box of "weaker than men". This may generally be true from a purely physical standpoint, but  it's essentially stereotyping. We wouldn't go around declaring all Germans to be racist or all blonds to be dumb, so why is it perfectly acceptable to imply that one gender is far weaker than the other?

When you Google "modified push-ups", the images are almost exclusively of women

     The other day at the gym, I went over to the free weight area. This is where the bench presses, squat bars, and other heavier equipment are located, and it inevitably draws men with the allure of being ripped. It's unusual to see any other women in this corner of the gym besides myself, and that day was no exception. After stretching, I proceeded to do some push-ups. Not girl push-ups, but the full ones. Behind me was a couple, with the boyfriend helping his girlfriend begin bench pressing. As soon as I began my push-ups, I couldn't help but notice him gawking at me. Really? I thought. Have you never seen a girl do push-ups? And I supposed he hadn't. So I just kept going until he eventually got bored and looked away.
     Why was it so shocking that a female could do push-ups? What does that say about our society?
     This is not just a one-way path of gender bias, however. If a man can only do "girl push-ups" he's considered lesser than those who can do full push-ups. That's not fair either. A person's value, regardless of their gender, should not be "measured in physical courage" (Ehrlich 571).
     We human beings are comprised of so much more than flesh and bone, and we should be valued according to traits that reflect our complexity. -MC

Side note: The paper towel company Brawny recently released ads with the slogan "#strengthhasnogender". We are making steps towards overlooking physical strength!

The new ads depict women in the familiar red Brawny flannel

Bright and Shiny

     One of my earliest memories is walking with my mother along a brightly lit street, staring wide-eyed at my surroundings in awe; There were grand statues, gondola rides and men in funny striped shirts, not to mention picturesque blue skies. Music played softly in the background. I tugged on my mother's hand, eager to point out the merry shops and crowds of smiling people. I recall wondering if I was dreaming -- everything was perfect.
     Indeed, it was too perfect to be true. In fact, I later understood that I had not been mesmerized by Venice, Italy, but rather by the Grand Canal Shoppes of Las Vegas's Venetian Hotel. My five-year-old self had experience the "geographical implausibility" that was Las Vegas (Didion 102). Shortly after my revelation, I was merely confused by the sheer "self-contradictory business" Vegas was in. How could an industry thrive on the imitation of others? After all, there's a facsimile of nearly every notable landmark on the Vegas Strip: the Statue of Liberty, the Great Sphinx of Gaza (though with a layer of chrome paint to add to its appeal), the Roman Colosseum, the Arc de Triomphe, and even the Eiffel Tower. You name it, it's there in one form or another.

I don't think Egypt has light-shooting pyramids....

     Each of these landmarks was originally created as a symbol of freedom or as a celebratory feat of architecture. But, in their miniature forms in Vegas, they have become synonymous with gambling, eateries, and shopping. Essentially, they serve as a place where glutton is abundant, and entertainment is key. There is simply no connection with real life in Vegas.
     Many, myself included, have fallen prey to the luster Vegas boasts. We even convince ourselves that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. But really, if we lose our brain cells to such an artificially bright and shiny place, is the immediate gratification worth the price? -MC

"You Do Not Belong in this Class"

My mother first stepped foot on American soil on September 19, 1994.
     She was wearing her very best outfit -- a white lace dress, complete with white leather high-heels. At the Detroit Metropolitan Airport, she was first struck by the sound of rapid English being spoken all around her. It sounded like singing, a beautiful melody full of hopes and possibilities.
     In the following weeks, my mother noticed more of the unique aspects of America, especially when she started her graduate classes at Wayne State University. She was shocked by two aspects of university life: First, Americans dressed casually. Dresses and high heels, which my mother and her classmates wore around the university and at the workplace in China, were nonexistent in America. They were instead replaced with baggy colorful sweaters and camouflage pants. Second, the sheer diversity took my mother by surprise. Not only were different races present (versus China's nearly exclusively Chinese population), but also different shapes and sizes. Well, she noticed a lot of Americans were fat. Maybe that was because most things they ate were fried, compared to the steamed and boiled dishes of China.
     For the most part, (even though she gained a few pounds) my mother loved America. There was only a single incident where she felt like a small and insignificant in this nation.
     It was one of her first classes at Wayne, Sociology. Now, this was not a class she wanted to take, but it was a required course for her MBA. The professor was a stereotypical middle-aged American -- a short, obese, balding man in his late 50's. In the day in question, my mother's good friend, Mei, was ill and therefore absent. So, my mother decided to tell the professor about Mei after the class had ended. She didn't want to announce Mei's absence in front of some 150 others (mostly white males) in the middle of roll call. Keep in mind, this shyness was due to a combination of Chinese values, where humility and shyness are of the utmost importance, in addition, though to a lesser degree, to her lack of confidence in English.
     She approached the professor after class and told him about Mei's situation. He looked at her, my timid 26 year old mother, and said, "You should not be in this class". Just like that, without any exam, without any way to measure her ability, this man looked at my mother and determined from her spoken English and the way she looked that she did not belong.
     This blatant racism, my mother concluded, was due to a difference in values. She was raised to be modest, whereas in America, if you didn't speak your mind immediately, you were viewed as impotent and therefore unqualified.
     My mother stayed in the class because she had to, but also because she wanted to make a statement. You didn't have to be a white male to be successful. She earned her MBA a few years later and became a successful medical data analyst.
     In hindsight, my mother forgives that professor who made her first months of university in America so abhorrent. In fact, she even looks down upon him now, not in negativity, but rather in pity. She pities that fat old man because he could not open his mind and attempt to understand different cultures or to "improve [his] moral fiber". He forever remains in her memory, and serves to remind her just how far she has come. -MC

My father's graduation at the University of Michigan, circa 1995

My Mother and I

Reading "Arm Wrestling with My Father" really struck a chord within me.
     Manning's relationship with his father used to be based upon a "ritual of... competition" as a way to "have a conversation", but it gradually morphs until Manning is longer "pressured to compete with [him]". Manning's growth is an unavoidable part of life, and it alters his previously competitive relationship with his father. The loss of competitive nature paired with Manning's win in the arm wrestle is symbolic of his father passing his strength on his son, and this changes his father. Manning even senses a "softer... embrace" in his dad that carries a different meaning than it did before.
     It was the "softer... embrace" portion of the narrative that bothered me. Not because it wasn't a fitting end, but because that was what my relationship with my mother used to have. And, when Manning bares his soul in such a raw way, it reminds me just how much I miss the simplicity of a hug.
     Before I begin, let me just say that my mother always has and still does care for me greatly; She always makes sure a hot dinner is on the table, and she always selflessly puts my needs above her own. If I want to go shopping? Of course she'll take me, even if there's still work to be done at home. I remember I used to always give her a kiss on the cheek before I left for school. She would always call me at 3 o'clock to ask me how my day was.
     But in the past two years or so, our communication has gradually become more scarce. It was small at first, so small that I didn't realize what was happening until it was too late.
     It began when my mother got a new job as a data analyst. She was so excited to finally be trying something new, to learn how to code in the new age. And I was happy for her. But, she was so bogged down at work that a few weeks later, the post-school phone calls trickled off before stopping altogether. I didn't see her in the mornings anymore - she left for work before I was even awake.
     Nowadays, I don't see her until after I come home from swim, around 8 o'clock. While I eat dinner, she usually tells me about her horrible boss, who will not hesitate to throw people under the bus. Or she'll tell me about her coworker, who is recently divorced and who constantly cries. Either way, I'm now keenly aware of the inner workings of her company.
     It's become somewhat of a chore to listen to her. But I endure it.
     I keep my mouth shut because I'm older, and I understand her need to vent. I also understand that these are the precious few moments I get to see her in the day, and I must appreciate them.
     Perhaps this loss of communication, like Manning's loss of competitiveness, is inevitable as I grow older and more independent. 
     Even if that is the case, I still appreciate a warm embrace. Yesterday, when my mother got up to see me off to the HOSA competition, she gave me a hug, and it helped fueled me the rest of the day. -MC

Mad as a Hatter

In today's political turmoil, words like "racism" and "feminism" are often tossed around. These issues are constantly being evaluated, but what about equality for other minorities?
In her persuasive essay "Disability", Nancy Mairs argues that more representation for the physically disabled is necessary in media for the sake of both disabled and able-bodied people; An increased representation would lessen the "self-degredation" and "self-alienation" felt by disabled people while acclimating able-bodied people to the idea of disabilities, which most will wind up having towards the end of their lives.
However, she does not delve deeply into the effects of misrepresentation, which can be just as damaging as underrepresentation. This is particularly true in the case of mental illness. Even though representation of the mentally ill is present in media, their images are too often romanticized.
This is most apparent in television, which frequently connects mental illness with genius.
Take BBC's Sherlock Holmes, the sef-proclaimed sociopath. He is indisputably brilliant, but is plagued with addiction. Through the course of the series, his need for heroin nearly kills him a number of times. Even so, the show seems to imply that his addiction facilitates his powers of deduction: If he does not get his drugs, he cannot access his "mind palace" (Holmes' personal memory storage) and therefore cannot solve the crime.

Sorry Benedict, but addiction is no joke.

In reality, though, addiction is no laughing matter. In fact, over the past 13 years, the number of overdose deaths due to heroin has increased 6.2 fold while the number of overall overdose deaths has increased 2.2 fold. While this increase is not all due to media, it certainly does not help that addiction is misconstrued as the key to brilliance.
Holmes is not alone. Other characters much like him are rampant throughout television, including Gregory House, who is depressed and addicted to Vicodin, and Sheldon Cooper, who has obsessive compulsive disorder. These men both have potentially debilitating disorders. But, the media says it's a-okay for them not to seek help because they are geniuses.
However, most people don't have the intellect of Einstein. The media's correlation of mental illness and intelligence leaves those who do not fulfill these standards with the "painful...isolation" of their illnesses. They are in possession of a life that is not feasible to others. With one in five adults in the US experiencing mental illness, it's time for the media to change up its view. -MC

Sources:
https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates
http://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-By-the-Numbers