Snarkity Snark Snark

•January 28, 2010 • Leave a Comment

Blogs are different from traditional forms of writing. Nunberg describes the difficulty of journalist to write in the appropriate familiar style required for blogging. Also, some blogs have a “snarky” or bitchy feel to them like a highschool lunchroom. So, in honor of all things snark, I’m writing this blog.

Since this is the first blog that doesn’t have restrictions on topic, I’d like to write about my hatred for Mcdonalds! Fast food companies get away with murder here in the US. They are highly unsanitary and more importantly the food is lethal if eaten daily for an extended period of time. I don’t think fast food companies get enough regulation. Cigarette companies and alcohol vendors face many restrictions from the FDA, but Fast food which uses addictive proportions of sugars, fats, and sodium to hook you are allowed to get away with ridiculous conditions and standards.

And the effects of this unregulated monster are reshaping our country…

America is the fattest country in the world. Childhood obesity rates have risen along with the popularity of fast food in the last 40 years or so. Many people know that fast food isn’t the healthiest choice, but many don’t understand just how detrimental an all fast food diet can be on a person, especially their children. They sacrifice health for convenience, but sadly with obesity comes a slew of life shortening diseases and conditions. Like on the documentary 30 days, the effects of an all fast food diet turned a regular healthy man into an overweight one with minor health issues in a short amount of time.

Something needs to happen, government needs to regulate food content and conditions better before fast food does any more damage to our country’s health.

Thanks for reading the snark!


Naked Celbreties’ opinions are Practically Biblical.

•January 26, 2010 • Leave a Comment

This blog is a summary and analysis of a publication on PETA’s tactics. the link to that publication is here:

This article argues the effectiveness of PETA’s Hollywood type sensationalism on the average person. From throwing acid on fur to ripping it off of runway models even the go naked campaign leaves ” those of us who are already vegetarians or vegans, are left scratching our heads and wondering why PETA uses dumbed-down tactics in their advertising instead of flooding us with harsh realities.” PETA has had some success with companies but their primary ability is that of causing a fuss. They do have websites with REAL info on veganism but this gets overshadowed by naked celbreties and the like. The author’s opinion is ” I’d Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur”don’t go over as well here in the south where hunting, pig farming and deep-fried foods are everyday life. I have been a vegan for years but am often disappointed by PETA’s advertising methodology.”

The author of this article was a marine air traffic controller who later worked in Japan and currently is pursuing a degreee in medicine, so she is an educated person from the vegetarian community. I feel that this gives her the credibilty to accurately examine PETA’s tactics.

I think the author of this article is spot on. Peta should be trying to advance its cause, not stir media attention and controversy over naked celebreities. No one will abandon their meat eating ways for vegan-ism and support this movement because Pam Anderson is naked with carrots. People need to be educated; they need to know REAL information about animal cruelty in order for Peta to get its message across and gain support. However, Peta has its image steeped in things like the banned Super Bowl commercial from the previous blog. They are trying to reach the average person in a way that seems more suitable for a beer company than an animal rights group. The problem is that while they have learned they art of creating  a stir and gaining attention, it is often negative  or irrelevant in the public eye leaving them appearing as crazed activist instead of people with a worthy cause.

In the Name of Sexy Vegetables..

•January 25, 2010 • Leave a Comment

So, one hand we have PETA, (semi) radical animal rights activist group, and on the other we have women!

Peta must have been inspired by beer commercials when they made their Superbowl ad this year. It shows women holding, playing, and bathing with a variety of vegetables in a promotion for vegetarianism. The ad’s slogan is that vegetarians have better sex. Their commercial submission was denied, and PETA used this to gain publicity.

They ad uses women, sex, and the like. The commercial has a woman licking a pumpkin,  sexually, and it shows a woman with faces of  sexual climax holding broccoli. PETA has women portrayed as sexual deviants for vegetable products ( an awkward exploitation, but still exploitation nonetheless). The ad is borderline ridiculous.

Although I could see the argument that PETA was treated with a double standard, I think, more importantly, that this company is losing touch with the morals that drive them to be so adamant for their cause. They are an animal rights activist group, but in order to spread their message  they have women stripping and dancing with vegetables. Granted, women and stripping have nothing to do with selling beer either, but beer corporations aren’t trying to promote ethics.

If I were a critic for the ad, I would call PETA out. Not only was it in bad taste, but it obviously exploits women by portraying them as prostitutes essentially for all things vegan. While the ad’s demographic is men watching the Super Bowl, I still feel that PETA could have been more effective at creating a commercial for their cause.

(On a side note, think of how bad a couter commercial in the same style would be from the American Farmers Association or a Cattle Company)


Is there a finish line for the issue of race?

•January 19, 2010 • Leave a Comment

Let’s take two steps back and look at human progress. We have explored other worlds, pioneered philosophies and sciences, and continually invent and innovate. So, when it comes to social issues like race and gender and discrimination, why are we, in the 21st century, still so hopelessly inept?

The modern idea of “political correctness” is a double-edged sword. While it may call attention to someone being insensitive toward race, at the same time it highlights racial narratives. It perpetuates the issue by drawing attention to it.  As long as people identify with and define themselves by race, then these issues will exist.

A South Park episode had an interesting parody of the illegal immigration issue in America. The Goobacks, humans from the overpopulated and racially mixed future, come back in time to find work. Look it up it’s interesting.

Racial narratives are ideas that come from people who look at the world in terms of race. When the world uses race as a way of defining itself, then naturally the differences in the ideologies, values, goals and traditions of different cultures are exposed and judged by others.

For example in high school, my gifted math class had noticeably more people of Asian descent than years before when I had taken lower levels of math, while the school basketball team had no Asian and very few white members. These observations based on race, but not racist observations. Why do racial differences exist? It is because different cultures value different things and possess different talents.

Like with Vogue’s shape issue with Lebron James people got offended at the cover which shows the star athlete roaring and holding super model Gisele Bundchen. People were angered that the first African American male to appear on vogue was portrayed as a primal and brutish black athlete; many even likened the photographer arrangement to King Kong. People fail to realize that the raw element in the photograph is not a racist or primal gesture, rather it is a part of his personality. It is definitely not the first time he has made that face. Look at pictures from Sports Illustrated or such as this one:

But when we look at things like this, it makes us lose sight of the individuality of humans. It makes some want to lump people together in sweeping generalizations that can carry stigma and resentment from people of other cultures.