Kookie's Thoughts in the Meaning of Language

2. Write about whether you believe that efforts to eliminate sexism, racism, and violence in language are effective, or whether such efforts simply mask these issues.

Words carry along many emotions and feelings. In fact, words make up our language-the means of communication people use to talk to one another. As society is developing into a more modernistic culture, "political correctness has already made firm inroads into popular culture"(Kakutani 763). Many efforts can be made in trying to change our current society into a better place, but will any of these actions have any long-lasting effects? People tend to focus on "surfaces" such as simple "words and metaphors"(Kakutani 764) and draw their whole attentions to simplistic things, rather than dwelling on symbolic things present. So called politically correct usages have "uncanny parallels with the academic movement of destruction"(Kakutani 764).

Tying in with a previous discussion relating to Pinker, people say that they would want others to "be honest enough to walk to [others] and say the simple truth"(Pinker 746), but we all know that that's not necessarily easy to do. We say we want the truth, but when we actually hear it, we are strictly disappointed. Humans tend to mask the truth with excessive euphemism. Do we really want the truth if we know we're going to be hurt at the end? Not really. We would most definitely prefer euphemistic words-even if it isn't the straightforward truth. In this "infectious world"(748), we are all bound to get infected by each other with the strong language we have in common. Words can be of a great weapon and yet a great shield.

People can't really eliminate such strong topics of sexism, racism, and violence through language. Language is the very cause of why there are such harsh events occurring in the real world today. Trying to eliminate these things with the very cause of it is only a mask of trying to cover up what brought forth such horrendous topics.

Words carry varying tones along with them and the way with how they are transferred from person to person varies to a great degree. "Go for it!" can translate to "Take a stab at it!"(North York Women Teacher's Association 766). Although they both mean the same thing, modern culture and its following generations shape words into different structures and produce a whole new blend of language. Even the cartoon portrayed by Lester shows how society even shapes sports team mascots with blended topics. All these sources demonstrate how words make up language and that nowadays, words and their meanings are being changed to a big degree. Us trying to eliminate sexism and such are just vain efforts in "sheathing our words in politeness and innuendo", just like Pinker states.

Kookie Defines Greets

KOOKIE: "How are you?" "Nice to meet you." "Let's get in touch." Can these three generic examples of intro-to-convo be literally categorized under intention and meaning? Of course. But in reality, people can categorize these and take them into simple communication of politeness rather than intent meaning. Especially when people-not only students-are exposed to a new environment, no matter what every person's personality is like, a kind nature takes over people in such foreign surroundings. You are in a new place. You are in a new place with new people. New and foreign everything. How scary, right? In environments like these, it's only natural for people to start conversations with some sort of nice tone to appear better. So maybe it is natural for others to think twice about whether these statements are meaningful or not. But words have different meanings and effects depending on when and how they are used. In this sense, some people might reside in thinking that people don't actually mean what they say when they try to start a talk. When you don't know what to talk about first, you would use any of the three lines above to get a start. That's just a start. From that point on, depending on you and the opposite person, a relationship can develop or just halt from there. Everyone that I have encountered had different first-greeting responses when I first came to Troy. First impression also plays a great role, however, when someone said a simple "hello" or "nice to meet you" to me, I felt that much better to be in that situation. Even though they are small and simple words, after they tried to talk to me, I always wanted to be near the person, always talk to them, always hang out with them, always be his/her friend. Your presence is proved! In that sense, if someone uses that move, people shouldn't wonder if it's literal or not, but rather focus on how thankful they should be for being talked to and concerned about. Whether those simple yet strong words contain meaning or not is entirely up to the person speaking them. We shouldn't worry about it and just let our feelings and emotions from then on take over.

Honor Code: The Showcase

Honor codes certainly exhibit an outstanding appearance to the school and its administrative people. A "culture of academic integrity" slowly develops as Source C strongly claims. However, certain schools portray such enforced rules like "needing to report other students" or "writing a pledge of honor on every piece of work submitted"(Source B) on students and I think that this would rather drive some students off course. When people are exposed to very strict rules, they tend to rebel or resist the rules. Students are trapped in a place like one of a glass exhibition, only having to adjust to the school's rules and policies. Some students might even go as far to think that their schools only care about them for their academic status and how they represent their school name to others around the world. Everything's all about the ranks and status,right? Their hard struggles and attempts in schoolwork and other things can one day break their mental minds. Cheating is everywhere these days and students are aware that it's a bad thing to do. Honor codes enforce the rule: no cheating, plagiarizing, or stealing. Sure enough, honor codes must be in place within schools, but revising some might be the best alternative to choose for students to not stray away from the "right things to do" in an educational manner. Taking away completely or enforcing strict rules upon students are both the wrong way to deal with students who make up the majority of the school itself. Taking the middle ground position, I believe that students would best fit into a revised honor code system so that they can go through school life in a much more alleviated manner. Schools should try to be filled with different colors and shades of uniqueness rather than focusing on statistical numbers and scores that students earn to "support" their school.

Political Cartoon

     This political cartoon about the US Intel and ISIS draws a quick perspective in what Americans were thinking when news about ISIS threats first appeared. It's a natural instinct of people that when something so terrifying and serious like ISIS threats occur, they panic and lose control over their normal thoughts. Their grip and thoughts of what to do in situations like this just slowly crumble away. President Obama, under serious contemplation of the numerous ISIS events, was even thrown aback with how he should solve such a vast problem. As the cartoon suggests, whatever things the US Intel was trying to do seemed too small and insignificant to what they were going against.
     This cartoon shows a snippet of what humans look like when they are unprepared for what's ahead of their way. People have to be prepared and even more than confident to go against things in their way. The big dog only has to swing his huge paw to terminate the US Intel. What Americans and the government thinks at times can seem to be very minuscule and ineffective when their opponent is such a vast and strategic clan. This picture makes it seem as if the Americans have no such power compared to the huge dog representing ISIS. I think that this cartoon is trying to show how Americans try a lot during their "panic times" to think of strategic ideas to defend themselves, however, when actually facing their enemies, they can seem insignificant in the enemies' eyes. Just saying "a bit bigger than I thought" won't really help anyone in that sort of situation, would it?

Kookie Asks "Why?"

"I belong to a [typical family]"(1). "My mother, my grandmothers, and six aunts have all had [4.5 GPA, 36 on ACT, perfect college apps-to name a few]"(1). People might be amazed at what a family I have, but I wouldn't really call this family amazing. It just gives me more stress and pressure to dream and achieve impossible dreams like them. Is it even okay to call my family members "normal"? "This is [just] my family history"(1)...not my history. I want to be different from all these people in my current era where getting all these bizarre numbers accurately determine their future steps in life. "Well then what do you call 'normal' Kookie?", my parents ask. "Anything far different from those alienating numbers", I would calmly say.   

                                                         

***

"It is a well known story in the [current times]"(20) "The Day ["People Became Obsessed With Numbers]"(20). The government would be told "again and again"(20) that their outstanding students were receiving miraculous numbers and were at it once again. "On [March 13, 2016] through [whatever time period in the future]"(20), there has been the highest reported numbers of students receiving perfect scores not only on the ACT but the SAT as well. It seems as if people don't care about the ones who are below this superior qualities.

***

"In [my] culture, authority is respected, obedience is revered, and independent thinking is not"(30). Now, I finally question why independent thinking is not respected or revered. Isn't independent thinking a huge and essential part of what makes up a person for who he/she is?! "One by one"(32), everyone eventually did seem to be abandoning independent thinking and merging into one whole blob of the same goal. Their motto seeming to be: "Let's see who can get the highest score!" What kids seem to be only talking about these days is scores and numerical values. "I must question everything, even if it means losing my faith"(35) now.

---Just an attempt in mimicking/ adapting the tone and style of Williams writing

The Life of Kookie

Today is yet another regular day that passes by in a nick of time. People live their daily lives as if it is a given thing; however, life shouldn't be something that's considered a norm. Life can be over in a split second. Here, I can define two terms in the simplest of the simplest way. Life: a gift that's been given for a purpose. Death: a natural process that encompasses people; can defeat anything. Life is like a haiku. It has so many different paths-twists and turns-that lead to so many different directions. Like a haiku, life is a huge and important part of a person, however, it has complexities-or not even make any sense.

More like the thought of death itself consumes people entirely. Sometimes it feels as if I'm "marvelous"(3) yet "pathetic"(3). Sometimes it feels as if everyone in this world is against me. Life gives people mixed-up feelings all the time. Life, is in a way, confusion in a different form. All the rhetoric used in Woolf's piece encompasses the central theme of how death always wins the battle. When humans struggle against the power of death-not wanting to die...clinging to their last hopes of staying on this world-they don't have a chance of winning, for death always wins. Honestly, life and death can't even be summed up in one blog post like this. 

Life is such a big part of a human being yet death comes over people in an instant

I personally think that the expression "hot for humility" explains how ridiculous people are in this world. People can be big-time "antagonists"(5), be "indifferent"(5), or even "impersonal"(5). Gandhi once said "live as if you would die tomorrow". This should be taken into consideration. It's not just another philosophical, fancy, nonsensical saying. Literally, death can come for you anytime. Hereafter, people need to know that suffering and death is an essential part of life as death nears and that life is truly a blessing given to people.

Sorry Mom -From Kookie

I'm Kookie. Just a 19 year old boy. I always want the most modern kinds of clothes. I want stylistic shoes. There's no end to what I want. When there's a celebrity wearing something that catches my eye, I want it. I need it. And of course, the first person I go to to ask for all these endless items is my one and only...mother. In the present state of mind I live in, I know that "literally and truly, one cannot get on well in the world without money"(Hazlitt 1-2). Dressing up in the most modern clothes makes up who I am. I constantly have the desire to wear what others are wearing and appear to be simply "cool". Looking back on myself for all these years and my crazy obsessions over my fashion-only being one branch of the numerous ways I begged my mom for money-I feel very ashamed at myself for "the fickleness of taste"(33) and I noticed that my mom had given me so much "extravagance in [my] youth"(35). Whenever I asked, my mom eventually bought it for me. I now know that the term "want" isn't necessarily needing but lacking. However, I didn't need any of these trendy items. I wasn't really needing or really lacking anything at all. In the end, all these things are worldly possessions. After death, nothing will literally stay with me to the end. So I truly want to express how even though I may have asked for so many modern items that I want to wear, I understand that ultimately, I don't "need" any of it. It's just my over-obsessive craze. In conclusion, thanks and sorry mom for dealing with my obsessions over such worldly items and helping me understand that the things that money can buy can't buy my happiness for eternity. Maybe it would during the time I live on earth, but afterwards, everything would become nothing.

It's Not Okay for Kookie to Be Consumed

Two lobsters were enjoying a regular fine day one evening. Sitting around doing nothing, hunger slowly crept into their stomachs. Opening their fridge they took out a "fresh"(669) human baby. Babies being "slightly cheaper"(669) than the full-course meal of a human adult, the lobsters had no choice but to pick the baby over the adult because of the overly expensiveness of it. They pondered and constantly thought about how they should cook up their meal. To "bake, broil, steam, grill, sautée, stir-fry, or microwave"(669). After a while they thought that "boiling, the most common and easy method"(669) should fix up their meal well. Not being able to think straight at this point-because of their increasing hunger-they hurriedly filled their kettle with about "2.5 quarts of water"(670) and "add[ed] two tbsp of salt per quart"(670). Once the water started to boil, they put in their "food" into the irresistibly hot water. The two lobsters were desperately waiting to eat their finalized meal but "hear[d] the cover [of the kettle] rattling and clanking as the baby trie[d] to push it off" and live to see daylight again.

Before going on any further into horrifying details, how does it feel to read this passage in the perspective of lobsters killing and eating humans? Humans dominate this world more than any other species and they think that eating anything they want isn't considered merciless to the food(even though at some point in time, some foods were living things, living normal lives like the humans). While people read this, they are probably horrified about how the merciless lobsters-if they were the rulers of the world-could eat humans so easily as if it's no biggie. It's obviously not considered as bad of a thing nowadays because many people eat meat such as beef, chicken, and pork normally. However, people should consider altering their idea that killing and eating any living thing to eat for their own satisfaction is always alright.

Kookie Wears Makeup Too

Why are women only classified to have tons and tons of varieties to express themselves? Even in Tannen's piece, she doesn't really focus on the role of how men portray themselves in society and says that "the men's styles were unmarked"(8). Women are known to have so many different ways to accessorize and make up who they are. Using makeup, wearing different types of shoes(comfortable/sexy), wearing revealing/concealing clothes, keeping their hair up or down, changing their hair color or not. The list goes on and on. Society expects women to dress or appeal to them by expressing who they are in different ways, however, men can express themselves in whatever way they want to as well. 

Let's consider the pop industry as an example. Men using makeup such as eyeliner, lip treatments, concealer, and blush is known to be more common in society than it was a long time ago. Makeup is obviously a product that people use to enhance their appearance. Just like why women use this product, guys are starting to use it as well. Stylistically, there are differences to how they use it, however, they both use it to sharpen their looks and express themselves in society to be more intriguing and interesting. Framing men by saying they are "gay" and such isn't correct to do just because they are using a simple product known to everyone. People should just take it as a way as men trying to express themselves in a different way. All the more, this ties into Tannen's opinion that men are marked just like women. It's not right to "say that men didn't wear makeup in the sense that [people] could say a woman didn't wear makeup"(15). Of course, it's different and sort of odd for men to wear makeup, but it's still a possibility open for them to use. It's just society's perception that formed into thinking that certain things men aren't allowed to do, but women are. Makeup is just one of the many things that men apply to their lives nowadays to try and show the public another side of themselves.

Kookie's "Haters"

Although this world is composed of many optimistic viewers, it's packed with haters and negative thinkers. The term hater is just a harsh way of saying someone who strongly hates someone or something. One of the reasons that relationships can be broken apart and disrupted is because of how people view the opposing person or what they do. Vowell says that "all [her father] cared about were guns"(Vowell 6). If people tried a little more for the relationship and even made an attempt to try and show interest in the other person's hobbies, the bond between the people would most definitely become stronger and tighter.

People bring out the different qualities of a person continuously although it's unnecessary. It has become an unconscious action and it can even be exaggerated to be a judgement against someone. It's funny how people characterize others negatively when they aren't even perfect themselves. Everyone has his/her own interest or hobby. This world would be a much more peaceful and loving community if and only if people built strong relationships with people and didn't create enemies. Inside, people are all alike if they choose to be. A person you thought who was totally different from you can turn out to be like your very own twin. It's all a matter of how people perceive others. Vowell declares that "[her] dad and [herself] are the same person"(Vowell 29). After a person goes through certain stages of maturity, people's mentality levels change and they understand that they just chose to perceive the certain person in a judgemental way. Regrettance certainly follows a person around for the rest of their lives when they realize this too late. People need to catch onto the fact that everyone has certain interests and judging them for it does them no good.

Kookie and His Norms

I truly wonder what the realistic definition of the term "normal" is. Nancy Mairs, being someone who can state facts in being a disabled person states that "physical disability looms pretty large in one's life"(Mairs 3). There are many people who were thankfully born to be free of disabilities in this world, however, there are many who are disabled. Nobody is born wanting to have disabilities as a part of their life. They don't have a choice either. It isn't fair for them and it's even more unfair for people without disabilities to judge them. Disabilities aren't the core of what makes up a person. People have to see the person for who they are and not judge for the disabilities. 

Mairs denies the fact that people should let their disabilities kill the person who they really are inside when she counterattacks and says "but it doesn't devour one wholly"(Mairs 4). She powerfully expresses her desire that disabled people shouldn't be discouraged of anything and keep the positive outlook on life they have. It doesn't make sense to discriminate against disabled people when they do the same daily activities as any other person would do. Whether it's using lotion, driving, talking on the phone, eating pizza, or any other typical acts, there is really no difference. Sometimes, it just seems as if people have nothing else to do better than judge people. Racial, sexual, and even discriminations against disabled people is present in society. I believe that it's all about perspective. If a person truly believes that their inner self is just as good as any other and keep their confidence, disability would just become a normal characteristic and it wouldn't hurt him/her psychologically. No matter what kind of a person is around, their inner self is what's really important and disabilities shouldn't be a problem once people acknowledge this. A human being is a human being like any other.