Tuesday, October 17, 2006

white vs. black love

ok, so on cnn.com today the first story you see is A mother or motherland?. this article raises the question whether "intercultural adoptions" are good for children. i think intercultural adoptions are okay, but those making an issue out of ethnicity/race when adopting are exactly the problem with today's society. why does it matter what ethnicity a child is? does it make the parents any less effective or loving? i understand the need to preserve one's heritage (and i think that adoptive parents should make an effort to make this an important part of his/her life), but the difference between one human and another is skin deep. in the article one child says she would "jump at the chance to be adopted by anyone willing to give her a home."

now, the trend of celebrity adoptions are another issue...

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

massacre versus tragedy

i was watching world news tonight and there was a story on school shootings. the story refered to the columbine shootings as the "columbine masssacre." this took me back to my high school days when i went to a school about a half an hour away from columbine high school when those shootings happened. on the local news the shootings were referred to a "tragedy," however in national reports it was called a "massacre." it may just be my narrow perspective, but when violence happens in a certain area, the locals convey the incidents as "tragedies" rather than use harsher words such as "massacre." i wonder what's the difference? is there a difference or is just semantics?

Monday, October 02, 2006

you know what grinds my gears?

ok, so here's the deal. i'm on myspace. surprise surprise...everyone is. but what bothers me (grinds my gears) are those who put on their profile: "i'm only on here because i have nothing else to do" or "my friends made me sign up." i thought peer pressure ended at fifth grade, but whatever. they may not *want* to be on this site, but guess what? they are...so that that makes them as lame as they proclaim everyone else on there to be. holier-than-thou attitudes only work when you're not participating in the activity you're criticizing. instead of making other feel like losers by degrading them in the "about me" section, you are really just making yourself look silly.

i actually like networking sites. "but holly," you say, "there are predators on there..." umm...that's why there are privacy settings. you don't have to add everyone who wants to be your friend. you also don't have to seek out people to put on your friends list. i don't befriend people i haven't met in person. i also don't use myspace/facebook/friendster as popularity polls unlike many not-yet-legal kids who have thousands of friends. thousands of friends? wow, really? you are sooo cool especially having half naked wanna be strippers (with fantastic names such as 'DaNCiN LiKe a HO' and 'HOTTNESS 4 U') posting "thanks for the add" on your comment wall.

here is a funny take on networking sites from the daily show:




ps. can you guess what show i am referencing in my title?

Labels: