And Summer Is Gone

People change all the time, and sometimes they change for the worse, thus ruining friendships. Susie Kretschmer's short story "And Summer Is Gone" depicts the loss of a friendship between two people, Amy and David. Amy falls into the hole of desiring to be a part of the popular crowd at school. She is an egocentric and insecure person, while David is meticulous and sensitive.

As time passes by, Amy changes into a completely different individual whom David does not recognize. She becomes self-absorbed and "always [wants] to talk about the people in [their] grade" (2), the ones that David barely associates with. Amy "doesn't want to see [David's art] anymore" (2) even though she knows the significance art has on her friend. Another side of Amy is that she is a very insecure girl. She feels the need to impress others, even if it is at the risk of losing her best friend. She is the type of teenager who "gets invited to every party... who [carries] gossip" (2), and is always around the popular youngsters at school. She has "stopped eating" (2) for she feels overweight. She has refrained herself from enjoying the large portions of snacks she would have with David. Her insecurities have brought her to become the stereotypical popular girl who "[goes] to every party [and] every football game" (3). The compulsion she has to try to fit in is due to the lack of self-confidence. In exchange for her popularity, she looses her friend, who has always been there for her. Amy has become a stranger to David.

David is the artist of the pair and is very attentive to details. He remembers the days when they went to the creek. To this day, he still has the memories of Amy's "long, tanned legs half wet and shiny, half dry with the cracking clay stripes and dots of an Aztec king" (1). As Amy becomes unfamiliar to him, he notices that she has become a woman, that her body is now curvy and lithe" (2) rather than the carefree, scrawny girl. He discovers that Amy "[has] not spoken to [him] at school, or dared to associate with him in public" (2). At first, David thinks he is being immature and paranoid, but he is in fact right, and admits that "he [lives] in the worlds that [he draws]" (3)

Amy and David’s personalities can be described as the opposites of the spectrum. Amy’s egocentric and insecure attitude leads to the loss of a friend who cares and loves her. David’s meticulous and sensitive personality makes him the mature one of the two, but unfortunately, he is also the one who is hurt the most.

The Lottery

Traditions vary amongst different groups of people, and some of these traditions are as bizarre as they can be. Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery" revolves around a village's annual ritual of sacrificing one's life. Tessie Hutchinson is chosen as the unfortunate one this year, and is stoned to death by her fellow villagers. Although it appears the lottery will continue indefinitely, there is evidence that the tradition will not last.

The ritual of having the lottery has always been there, even before the birth of "Old Man Warner, the oldest man in town" (2). In everyone's eyes, "there's always been a lottery" (4) and the idea of the village without its annual tradition is strange. Old Man Warner, who is seventy-seven years old, participates in the Lottery for the "seventy-seventh time" (4). Children are brought up in relation to this event. When the Hutchinson family's name is drawn, even the youngest boy of the household has to "take a paper out of the box" (5). As the time of stoning arrives, the children are prepared to take part in what they are expected to do. Someone even "[gives] little Davy Hutchinson a few pebbles" (5) to throw at his mother. There is no doubt that this tradition is being passed from generation to generation, and the youngsters of the village are accustomed to this ritual.

Though the tradition has always been a part of this town, this odd custom may be at risk of disappearing. Many things revolving around this tradition are absent, both the idea of the practice, and the physical aspect of it. The villagers are not aware of its purpose anymore as "so much of the ritual has been forgotten [and] discarded" (2). The town now uses a black wooden box as "the original paraphernalia for the lottery [has] been lost long ago" (2). When the box is not in usage, it is kept in places with no importance, such as the post office or the grocery store. The practice of the lottery has become more of a burden rather than a tradition. Many of the families just want to "get this over with" (3) so they can return to working. The tradition has lost its significance, therefore "some places [nearby] have already quit lotteries" (4). Some villagers feel that the ritual "isn't fair [and] isn't right" (5). Old Man Warner, who has been through decades of this practice, senses that "people [aren’t] the way they used to be" (5). As time goes on, more and more of this ritual is going to be forgotten and ignored.

Whether or not the tradition of the lottery lives on depends on the people in this village. The children of the next generation are surrounded by the idea of stone throwing, but they do not understand the reason for this ritual.

The Painted Door

Being in a marriage means one is committed to the spouse, and when one is not engaged in it, the relationship may become a failure. Sinclair Ross' short story "The Painted Door" describes the life of a married couple living on a farm. Ann, feeling abandoned by her husband, John, falls for their friend, Steven, which eventually leads to the tragic ending. Although it may seem that Ann should be exclusively blamed as the cause of John's death, John is also partially responsible for his morbidity.

Ann, who many may think is the primary cause of John’s death, is an insecure woman. Ann often feels isolated and lonely; she seeks for attention from John. Her attitude indirectly results in the death of her partner. She feels as if she is “as important as [his] father” (1), and expects John to stay home with her. Ann equivocally tells John how she feels. Instead of communicating and solving the problem, she tells John to “pay no attention to [her]” (1). The lack of engrossment in this marriage causes the couple to grow apart. Ann constantly makes comparisons between her husband and Steven. She feels that any other man “would have put his wife first” (5). She notes how John is “responsible for her unhappiness” (4). She is very judgmental of her partner’s personality and appearance. Steven’s “handsome,..., young and clean-shaven” face (7) is a comparison she makes regularly to John’s unsettled appearance. Ann has always “been afraid to see them side by side” (7) because she has always known that Steven is the more attractive one. She blames John’s personality in order “to justify her rebellious thoughts” (4) of having an affair. If John is more sensitive instead of working for fifteen hours every day, her unhappiness would not exist. Ann purposely changes to another dress and rearranges her hair with “a little flush of colour in her face” (6). This partially leads to Ann’s betrayal with Steven. She knows “[John] always comes” (7), yet she still commits adultery. Ann knows she is at wrong; she has the “sense of guilt” (9) that she tries to accuse John of causing.

As the man of this marriage, John is insensitive to how Ann feels, and therefore indirectly causes the problems this marriage encounters. He is a man who is simple-minded and is “content with his farm and cattle” (1). His loyalty to Ann brings him home despite the blizzard. He treats this marriage as if it is an occupation. Instead of taking care of his physical appearance, John is more of a practical man who needs “to spend a little time on [himself]” (2). His personality bores his wife. He is introverted, and feels “it [is] easier to stay at home” (4). Even though John’s intention is to provide the best for Ann, it never occurs to him that what Ann ultimately wants is his companionship, “not pretty clothes” (3). John’s stubborn personality is also one of the causes of his death. He comes home even in “the wildest, coldest nights” (8). He knows the danger of his action, yet he still leaves the house after seeing his wife with another man.

Both parties in this marriage fail to understand the needs of each other. They choose not to discuss their problems; they choose not to solve them. Ann’s dependant personality causes her unhappiness, but John’s stubborn and ignorant personality leads to his death.

Bullying

The road to authenticity.

by Brené Brown, Ph.D., LMSW

The Cruelty Crisis: Bullying Isn't a School Problem, It's a National Pastime
Exclusion, humiliation, gossiping, name-calling, and cutthroat alliances - we can't get enough! We panic when these behaviors are directed at our own children and we express outrage when the consequences turn deadly, but over the past few years we, the adults, have turned cruelty into entertainment and sport.

According to the Nielsen ratings, reality television topped the "most watched TV" list in 2009 and analysts expect the trend to continue through 2010. From the Real Housewives of Orange County to the Jersey Shore, reality TV draws audiences by delivering performances that mirror the exact behaviors that we define as bullying. We tune in to watch hostile confrontations, belittling, collusion, backstabbing, and public ridicule. We're drawn in by the promise of mean-spiritedness and we're seduced by the idea that we get to watch people's most intimate and private moments made public. Sound painfully familiar?

Gossiping, one of the most glamorized behaviors on TV and a popular weapon in the bully arsenal, is another behavior that falls into the "do as we say, not as we do" category. As adults, how many times have we stood around with a group of friends or colleagues and criticized or made fun of someone? It happens every day in carpool lines, in the back of churches, in front yards, and around the water cooler. We wonder why the awkward first grader is being excluded from birthday parties when our PTO clique is constantly whispering about his weird mother and would never consider inviting her to coffee.

When it comes to managing conflict and difference, we're not exactly modeling the behaviors that we want to see in our children. Whether it's politics, religion, or social issues, the more uncertain we feel, the more certain we act. Finger pointing, screaming, and in-your-face personal attacks have replaced respectful and necessary debate and discourse. We see this everywhere from political talk shows and school meetings, to the sidelines of kids' soccer games. I've heard people define bullying as "angry, aggressive acting out in children." I would argue that a lot of bullying is simply kids acting like aggressive parents acting out and behaving like angry children.

I've spent the past decade studying vulnerability, shame, authenticity, and belonging. I've interviewed research participants and collected thousands of stories about how we live, love, parent, work, and navigate our increasingly anxious world. Over the past ten years I've witnessed a profoundly dangerous pattern of behavior emerge in our culture:

As our fear, uncertainty, and feelings of vulnerability increase, cruelty becomes an acceptable way for us to discharge our pain and discomfort. Rather than doing the difficult work of embracing our own vulnerabilities and imperfections, we expose, attack, or ridicule what is vulnerable and imperfect about others.

In our culture, vulnerability is synonymous with weakness, and imperfect means inadequate. Rather than acknowledging that we are all vulnerable and imperfect, we buy into the painful idea that we are less than; that we aren't worthy of belonging. It is the struggle for worthiness and belonging that leads to bullying.

Belonging is the innate human need to be a part of something larger than us; we are hardwired for it. Cruelty is a predictable outcome in a culture that tells us that invulnerability and perfection are prerequisites for belonging. We are never more dangerous than when we are backed into a corner of never __________ enough (good/ rich/ thin /successful/ admired/ certain/ extraordinary/ safe/ in control/ powerful/ etc.).

In a world that is plagued by war, economic hardship, and pervasive self-doubt, we rage and humiliate to alleviate our own misery. It's simply easier to attack and berate others or watch it happen on TV, than it is to risk having honest conversations about our struggles with worthiness. Why lean into our own feelings of scarcity and shame, when we can watch strangers get booed off stage or voted off the island? It feels good to watch others suffer.

If we want to reclaim courage and compassion in our families, schools, organizations, and communities, we must open our hearts and minds to a new way of thinking about vulnerability and imperfection. Our imperfections are not flaws; they are what connect us to each other and to our humanity. Vulnerability may be at the core of fear and uncertainty, but it is also the birthplace of courage and compassion - exactly what we need to help us stop lashing out and start engaging with the world from a place of worthiness; a place where empathy and kindness matter.

Whether we are a sweaty-palmed 7th grader navigating a hostile cafeteria, or a laid-off worker trying to make a mortgage payment, or a young mother waiting for mammogram results, feeling vulnerable, imperfect and afraid is human. It is when we lose our capacity to hold space for these struggles that we become dangerous. We can legislate behavior all day long, but true compassion comes from a tender and vulnerable place where we understand how inextricably connected we are.

Courage and compassion are not ideals; they are daily practices. The TV shows that we allow in our homes, the way we discuss politics and social issues, the way we handle altercations at the grocery story - these are choices with real consequences. Bullying is a serious problem in schools, but we are all accountable for the cruelty crisis that is fueling these behaviors. The answer to the bullying problem starts with this question: Do we have the courage to be the adults that our children need us to be?

Mirror

Mirror is such an important tool these days. Honestly, how many people do not look at themselves in a mirror at least once a day? The idea of the non-existence of a mirror almost seems outrageous. A mirror magnifies one's flaws; a mirror lowers one's self-esteem. We look into a mirror to see if we are presentable to others, to see if we meet the society's standard. Who set up these standards? Why are there rules as to what we should look like? Mirrors are of course very useful when it comes to applying make-up. Oh make-up, a bunch of chemicals that we put layers after layers onto our faces to hide our flaws. If others can't accept us for who we are without all of the judgemental thoughts and comments, it's not worth it.

Victim of Secret Dorm Sex Tape Posts Facebook Goodbye, Jumps to His Death

Cyber bullying has increased over the past few years. That is the downside to all of the technology we have today. Unfortunately, things like this happen all the time. It is disgusting to think that someone could spy on people like that, let alone putting it online for the world to see. There is a growing trend of people targetting the homosexuals because of their lifestyle. Even though it may seem a bit extreme to others, no one will ever feel what the victim felt before taking his own life. I don't understand what the two students were thinking. What were they thinking when they spied on the victim? What were they thinking when they put videos online? Did they think it was fun? Did they view it as a prank? It disgusts me.

Is the Net Closing on Web Freedom

Summary:
According to "Is the Net Closing on Web Freedom" by Alex Hudson, our freedom in the online world may be in danger. Hudson states that Egypt went through a "World Web War I" with the Internet shut down for 5 days.

The Internet is becoming the new social form. According to the statistics, the top ten sites are responsible for about 75% of the Internet traffic; Facebook alone is responsible for 25% of all Internet traffic in the U.S.A.

The issue of people's rights concerning the Internet rises. In the article, Hudson states Al Gore's opinion on this issue. He thinks that people need to defend the Internet instead of letting governments or corporations control it.

Hudson quotes an opposition's belief. The opposition thinks Al Gore's idea is not practical. The opposition expresses that it is necessary for governments to be involved in the world of Internet. He states that governments are there to keep order, and laws need to be enforced online.

Some think that governments' roles in the online world are affecting human rights. Many countries, such as China, and even America, censor information on the Internet, preventing citizens from accessing it. The idea of a "kill-switch" is being brought up. Hudson states that the existence of a "kill-switch" is a powerful tool and quotes that it is a must; however, it may limit people's interaction online.

Response: I believe this issue cannot be solved easily. Both sides' arguments are supported well. The Internet is a popular social room; it allows people to talk to others who they would have never met if it weren't for the Internet. People need to stand up to organizations that want to control the Internet in order to protect our access through the means of Internet. On the other hand, the Internet also needs to be looked after. Because of its usefulness and vastness, a set of laws need to be in place. The concern is, who should have the power to shut down the Internet in case of an emergency? Who should be able to control it, but still give people their rights online?

Quoting, Paraphrasing, and Summarizing

Quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing are using someone else's words to provide support to your own work.

Summarizing is shortening what you have read and only writing down the key points and ideas. You can also use quoting and paraphrasing in your summary.


Writing a summary: Start with a sentence naming the writer and article title and stating the essay's main idea. The title of the article must be in quotation marks. Then write your summary, omitting nothing important and striving for overall coherence through appropriate transitions.

Be concise in order to compress your ideas. Focus on the most important general ideas put forth by the writers and leave out the supporting details.

Refer to the writer of the article throughout your summary. Ex. John Brown believes that poverty in Canada is caused by unemployment.

Never include your own opinions in a summary.

Conclude with a final statement reflecting the significance of the article-not from your own point of view, but from the writer's.



Quotes should not be used a lot, and should only be used when they add to your writing. You can insert a short quote within a sentence or a longer quote by itself.



Paraphrasing is using someone else's work without quoting, and it is more detailed than summarizing. Your goal is to express the same idea as the original.



Writing a response:

A response to an article is your own personal opinion about the content of the piece. You can use "I think" and "I believe: in a response. There are no right or wrong answers. You can agree or disagree with the writer. Try some of these questions if you are stuck:

a) What did you know about the topic?

b) What did you learn about the topic?

c) What else do you want to know about the topic?

d) How does this knowledge connect to your life?

e) How has this knowledge changed how you think?

f) How has this knowledge changed how you will act?

g) Would you recommend this article? Why or why not?

Pregnant Woman Gets Abortion Drug Instead of Antibiotic
By: Susan Donaldson James

Summary: Susan Donaldson James, the author of "Pregnant Woman Gets Abortion Drug Instead of Antibiotic", describes the aftermaths of a pregnant woman who was mistakingly given an abortion drug. James states that the woman, Mareena Silva, may lose her six-week-old fetus because of this mix-up. This drug is sometimes used for early-stage pregnancy termination and may cause some serious side effects. Silva went to the pharmacy to pick up her bacterial infection medicine. The prescription was filled at a Safeway. Silva was rushed to a medical centre where she was given charcoal to absorb the fatal drug. James concludes the article by informing that the drugs given to Silva were intended for a 59-year-old woman who has the same last name and a similar first name as Silva. The supermarket chain apologized for the mistake, but Silva's pregnancy may be affected greatly.


Response: It is a tragic to hear that these stories exist. I think the pharmacists who prescribed the drugs are at fault. Pharmacists are paid a lot of money; they're supposed to know what kind of drugs they are handing out to patients. Pharmacists are supposed to hand out the right drugs. They can't expect patients to look up every drug they receive. Why do doctors and pharmacists go through years of school? The answer to that is so they can aid others and keep them healthy, and that is not by handing out the wrong drugs. Maybe the doctor is at fault also. It is a well known fact that doctors have some of the worst hand-writing. The lesson I learned from this article is to never put too much trust into the pharmacist and doctor. They are human after-all, and we all make mistakes.