Does the American dream still exist despite America’s troubled economic teams? Did the dream ever exist in the first place? Well, I guess that depends on who you ask. One thing for sure is that the vast influence the United States has globally is astonishing. Typical American business including the Coca Cola Company and McDonalds, to name few of many, can be found all over the world. In many of these hundreds of countries other than the country of origin, the USA, American brands sell their products for more expensive than they would be in the US. For example, a can of coke in the US may cost 50 cents whereas in Mexico, the same can of coke would cost upwards of around 70 cents. I have noticed that the McDonalds value menu in Mexico has been significantly reduced with the normal “value items” being much more than the 1 dollar that is advertised.
So this is a global phenomenon, hundreds American business stretch in almost every country on the planet and marking up the price. Whether it be food items of brand-name clothing such as Abercrombie, American Eagle or Hollister. Nonetheless, despite the sometimes 3 to 4 times mark-up on many of these items people around the world, even those who aren’t in the greatest financial situations try to settle for these brand names even if it means purchasing sometime with a domestic name takes pennies out of one’s wallet. Why? There must be some type of ideology out there that people want to know what it is like experiencing something almost exactly as it is in the United States. I mean, let’s face it. Let’s face it a McDonald’s Big Mac isn’t going to taste much different in Brazil than it is does here. Let’s not forget who wants to be caught wearing your X domestic brand when you can have you American Ralph Lauren look. A lot of people with any ability to afford such a brand name have shown an unwillingness to settle for anything less when it comes to looks.
It seems almost baffling that the McDonald’s or KFC’s abroad (both chains I am not particularly fond of) get massive lines of customers while your family-owned restaurants or domestic chains get little to no support. CEO’s stationed in the US are receiving massive revenue for products being sold abroad. Whether other countries are to seriously blame for their weaker economies and overwhelming dependence on the US is a topic of another discussion. One thing for sure is that America’s influence has been stretched out with a remarkable amount of success. Maybe the American dream doesn’t involve going to the US at all. After all, many can recall the utter disappointment witness when living in the United States and realizing that the “land of opportunity” was hardly more than a catch phrase. Maybe the American dream is merely having the opportunity to sit down, relax, and enjoy your Whopper and a Coke.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Acceptable Form of Racism?
In the United States, many Americans, in fact probably the majority of white Americans have had a prevailing negative attitude towards Mexican immigration. Not only do many people put an unnecessary stigmatization on illegal immigration, but American society has gotten to the point that illegal immigrants have been treated as inferior beings and have been labeled as "criminals" simply because of harsh U.S. law that makes it virtually impossible for Mexicans to migrate into America.
While I consider myself to be moderate, many people know my strong liberal views on immigration. Immigration is the fuel of America’s economy and illegal immigration is a necessary aspect of it. For me, this characterization of “illegal” immigration is preposterous considering the average Mexican immigrant is in America for one reason and one reason only – work. Additionally, there is a labor shortage in many American businesses and small business owners would have a virtually impossible time competing if they couldn’t hire illegal immigrants. There is simply not enough people to fill some of these minimum wage jobs.
I have gotten sick of this. There are way too many Americans who have racist views towards immigration including evil Senator John Kyl who now plans to build a fence and deport all immigrant families. People like Kyl could care less how many immigrants die trying to cross the border in search for a better life. While in Arizona where I live there are several enlightened Americans thanks to the beneficial influence Mexican can immigration can have, there are also several other Americans who have the prevailing attitude that Mexican immigrants simply don’t belong. On more than one occasion I have heard shouts telling immigrants, “Go back to where you came from” or “Your not wanted here!” I have a hard time understanding how that could be possibly be acceptable. I don’t see too much difference between these “Go back to Mexico” chants and the obviously racist remarks of “Go back to Africa!” in the Jim Crowe south when racism and segregation was extremely prevalent. Yet, somehow it is not exactly racist to have these harsh opinions of Mexican immigrants. To me this is just baffling. I thought our society advanced past that. Anyone who has had the pleasure to work in an immigrant rich area knows the great cultural and economic influence that immigrants have provided.
While I consider myself to be moderate, many people know my strong liberal views on immigration. Immigration is the fuel of America’s economy and illegal immigration is a necessary aspect of it. For me, this characterization of “illegal” immigration is preposterous considering the average Mexican immigrant is in America for one reason and one reason only – work. Additionally, there is a labor shortage in many American businesses and small business owners would have a virtually impossible time competing if they couldn’t hire illegal immigrants. There is simply not enough people to fill some of these minimum wage jobs.
I have gotten sick of this. There are way too many Americans who have racist views towards immigration including evil Senator John Kyl who now plans to build a fence and deport all immigrant families. People like Kyl could care less how many immigrants die trying to cross the border in search for a better life. While in Arizona where I live there are several enlightened Americans thanks to the beneficial influence Mexican can immigration can have, there are also several other Americans who have the prevailing attitude that Mexican immigrants simply don’t belong. On more than one occasion I have heard shouts telling immigrants, “Go back to where you came from” or “Your not wanted here!” I have a hard time understanding how that could be possibly be acceptable. I don’t see too much difference between these “Go back to Mexico” chants and the obviously racist remarks of “Go back to Africa!” in the Jim Crowe south when racism and segregation was extremely prevalent. Yet, somehow it is not exactly racist to have these harsh opinions of Mexican immigrants. To me this is just baffling. I thought our society advanced past that. Anyone who has had the pleasure to work in an immigrant rich area knows the great cultural and economic influence that immigrants have provided.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
The Palin Option
When McCain announced Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, I, along with millions of Americans, was shocked. After Obama’s choice of Biden, there was nothing but rumors for six straight days regarding who McCain will or should pick. Moreover, few if any of these rumors involved Palin who until now has been rather unknown for citizens outside of the state of Alaska.
To say the least, Palin was a masterful choice for McCain’s running mate. Is Palin my favorite politician? No. Are there other potential vice presidents I personally might have preferred? Yes. However, in terms of a political strategy in an attempt to capture the White House, I honestly do not think McCain could have chosen better. Palin is articulate, charismatic and she seems to share the country first at all costs philosophy that has gotten McCain where he is. You may not agree with all of her views, but she certainly is not stupid and her introduction speech was excellent. This is a progressive reformer who I can back. Also, McCain picking her has not only maintained his maverick unorthodox self, but also showed the public that voting Republican will also change the make-up of Washington by electing the first woman as Vice President. Choosing Palin was a smart choice for letting Obama knows that completely overlooking Hillary was a mistake. Obama’s biggest claim is that he represents the people in that he is a break away from “Carl Rove” politics and he was the self-made man representing some of the poorest in Chicago. However, to some extend Palin represents Americans in an even greater way that a lot of American families can relate too, especially the most hardworking of them all. Palin is conservative a mother of five who characterizes herself as your typical “hockey mom.” She also has a young child with down syndrome as well as a son who is a soldier in Iraq so she really knows what it is like to be a hardworking mother. I really do think this will encourage McCain to get some of the “soccer mom” vote that he wouldn’t have got otherwise. To be honest, I really do think that a lot of Democrats will vote McCain in November, who definitely would not have voted for a Romney or Huckabee candidacy.
The choice of Palin not only encourages bipartisan support, but it definitely helps unite conservatives. Name one Republican figure that hard-line conservatives can legitimately be happy with, while still allowing McCain to preserve his maverick image. To be honest, I really can’t name anyone outside of Palin. McCain has a lot of buddies, some of who I really like including independent Joe Lieberman; however, you as well as I know that this pick would have been political suicide for capturing the conservative base. Palin has a strong conservative philosophy also representing religious family values.
At the same time Mitt Romney seemed like the obvious choice for McCain, and I feel that most people who are unhappy with McCain’s choice of Palin are the people upset the Romney didn’t get picked. However, Romney would have been an awful pick in several ways.
First, had McCain picked Romney, he would have had to somehow resolve all of the banter that was going on during the race to the White House including the name calling. I even believe the word “pig” was used at one point. To see the vehement disagreement just YouTube the “Republican Debate Ronald Reagan Library.” Secondly, Romney is your traditional Republican, there really is not anything that truly makes him stand out from your old-fashioned hard-line conservative. Choosing Romney would signal a regression to the past Washington which is exactly what both Obama and McCain are trying to avoid. Politics as usual seems to clearly be the opposite of what voters want.
As I have mentioned before. Obama’s primary message which is “change we can believe in” is really lost with a McCain candidacy and even more so now that McCain has chosen Palin, a “soccer mom” outside of Washington beaurocratics. Yes, this was a true maverick choice, yet still a Republican choice. Palin is a progressive Replublican with a soaring approval rate. Nonetheless, I really like how perfectly the New York Times put it:
“Yet if he disregarded more conventional prospects, like former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, it might be that Ms. Palin was still the fallback from a more audacious decision that Mr. McCain ultimately eschewed.”
Politics has gotten interesting and the playing field is getting much tougher than I thought possible.
To say the least, Palin was a masterful choice for McCain’s running mate. Is Palin my favorite politician? No. Are there other potential vice presidents I personally might have preferred? Yes. However, in terms of a political strategy in an attempt to capture the White House, I honestly do not think McCain could have chosen better. Palin is articulate, charismatic and she seems to share the country first at all costs philosophy that has gotten McCain where he is. You may not agree with all of her views, but she certainly is not stupid and her introduction speech was excellent. This is a progressive reformer who I can back. Also, McCain picking her has not only maintained his maverick unorthodox self, but also showed the public that voting Republican will also change the make-up of Washington by electing the first woman as Vice President. Choosing Palin was a smart choice for letting Obama knows that completely overlooking Hillary was a mistake. Obama’s biggest claim is that he represents the people in that he is a break away from “Carl Rove” politics and he was the self-made man representing some of the poorest in Chicago. However, to some extend Palin represents Americans in an even greater way that a lot of American families can relate too, especially the most hardworking of them all. Palin is conservative a mother of five who characterizes herself as your typical “hockey mom.” She also has a young child with down syndrome as well as a son who is a soldier in Iraq so she really knows what it is like to be a hardworking mother. I really do think this will encourage McCain to get some of the “soccer mom” vote that he wouldn’t have got otherwise. To be honest, I really do think that a lot of Democrats will vote McCain in November, who definitely would not have voted for a Romney or Huckabee candidacy.
The choice of Palin not only encourages bipartisan support, but it definitely helps unite conservatives. Name one Republican figure that hard-line conservatives can legitimately be happy with, while still allowing McCain to preserve his maverick image. To be honest, I really can’t name anyone outside of Palin. McCain has a lot of buddies, some of who I really like including independent Joe Lieberman; however, you as well as I know that this pick would have been political suicide for capturing the conservative base. Palin has a strong conservative philosophy also representing religious family values.
At the same time Mitt Romney seemed like the obvious choice for McCain, and I feel that most people who are unhappy with McCain’s choice of Palin are the people upset the Romney didn’t get picked. However, Romney would have been an awful pick in several ways.
First, had McCain picked Romney, he would have had to somehow resolve all of the banter that was going on during the race to the White House including the name calling. I even believe the word “pig” was used at one point. To see the vehement disagreement just YouTube the “Republican Debate Ronald Reagan Library.” Secondly, Romney is your traditional Republican, there really is not anything that truly makes him stand out from your old-fashioned hard-line conservative. Choosing Romney would signal a regression to the past Washington which is exactly what both Obama and McCain are trying to avoid. Politics as usual seems to clearly be the opposite of what voters want.
As I have mentioned before. Obama’s primary message which is “change we can believe in” is really lost with a McCain candidacy and even more so now that McCain has chosen Palin, a “soccer mom” outside of Washington beaurocratics. Yes, this was a true maverick choice, yet still a Republican choice. Palin is a progressive Replublican with a soaring approval rate. Nonetheless, I really like how perfectly the New York Times put it:
“Yet if he disregarded more conventional prospects, like former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, it might be that Ms. Palin was still the fallback from a more audacious decision that Mr. McCain ultimately eschewed.”
Politics has gotten interesting and the playing field is getting much tougher than I thought possible.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Playing Cards with a Political Twist
PoliticallyWild.com has unleashed a humorous and innovative form of playing cards called Politically WILD! Playing Cards. Forget the mundane deck of playing cards, now you can get a full version of playing cards that feature political figures. Each numbered card features the face of a political celebrity with the body of the animal. Above each image there is a brief description of the animal of the politician’s body. These descriptions can often be quite comical. For example, for Ann Coulter is a pink flamingo in the eight of hearts and above her image the description reads: Pink Flamingo: Bird having very long legs and neck. Additionally, beneath the image of each politician there is a funny comment. The royalty cards (Jack, Queen and King) are extremely original because they each feature a hot-button political issue with a witty comment. Even cooler is that you submit your own ideas for each card by posting a comment on the Politically Wild Blog at http://blog.politicallywild.com/.
There are two different types of decks a Democrat Deck and a Republican Deck. As it would appear, the Democrat Deck caters towards the Democrat Party and the Republican Deck caters to the Republican Party. The aces of the Democrat Deck advocate support for Barack Obama and the aces of the Republican Deck feature McCain. For just $15.98 you get two decks. You can elect to purchase two Democrat Decks, two Republican Decks or one of each. If you are interested in politics and enjoy some witty political humor, you will love these new political playing cards which are very pertinent to the current political arena.
Go to www.politicallywild.com today and get your own deck of Politically Wild! Playing Cards.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
And What Change is that Mr. Obama?
“No more Carl Rove politics.” “Change you can believe in.” Sound familiar? If you have been following American Politics it should appear to follow pretty closely to the whole image of Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama. From Obama, we have heard the same old cheesy lines over and over again regarding how he represents change…but then again, doesn’t everybody? This message might have worked against a Mit Romney “I love America as it is” type of candidate, but against McCain simply claiming some ideological benefit is not going to do anything but start to make people question whether Obama is merely composed of false hopes. The problem with Obama is he does not stand for anything. He is the type of person that will outright avoid the loaded political questions, whereas McCain is very upfront on where he stands. Sure, McCain has made some mild flipped flops on issues such as tax cuts, but at least he will express his views in terms of policies. On the other hand, who knows where Obama stands. All we can assume is that he will take a very liberal platform.
A few weeks ago somebody asked Obama what individuals can do to help the oil crisis and Obama mentioned that people can inflate their tires to the appropriate dimensions and immediately the McCain campaign made a mockery of such a thing. McCain and his followers decided to pass out air gauges that said “Obama’s Energy Policy.” Once Obama caught word of this, Obama tried to do a two for one: he denied that his energy policy was to inflate tires as well as defended inflating tires. This approach may have actually worked if he actually detailed in his speech what his energy policy consisted of, but instead he avoided the policy issues all together. Obama tried to retaliate and made fun of the Republicans stating: “It’s like Republicans take pride in being ignorant.” Congratulations Obama, I am not a Republican and you still may have just lost my vote. Obama is very charismatic and a pleasure to listen to which makes him a widely followed candidate, however, he needs to find out what type of campaign he wants to run and he needs to choose fast. If Obama is going to make a mockery of the opposing candidate he is likely going to lose a lot of support particularly among the moderate swing voters who are key to win the election. Obama may lose the hard-line Republicans regardless, but McCain has a maverick appeal that may give him added support among moderates. These are the votes Obama needs to fight for, not simply joke around with some buddies who are going to vote for you anyway. You do that and you may have just lose the key to the White House.
Obama must begin to mention his specific goals as opposed to his general goals. We all know the generics, but how exactly is he going to change America? As of now Obama seems little more than a big mouth. As the old adage goes, “you can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?” This is the ultimate question that most people would like to at least get some indication of before going to the polling booths.
A few weeks ago somebody asked Obama what individuals can do to help the oil crisis and Obama mentioned that people can inflate their tires to the appropriate dimensions and immediately the McCain campaign made a mockery of such a thing. McCain and his followers decided to pass out air gauges that said “Obama’s Energy Policy.” Once Obama caught word of this, Obama tried to do a two for one: he denied that his energy policy was to inflate tires as well as defended inflating tires. This approach may have actually worked if he actually detailed in his speech what his energy policy consisted of, but instead he avoided the policy issues all together. Obama tried to retaliate and made fun of the Republicans stating: “It’s like Republicans take pride in being ignorant.” Congratulations Obama, I am not a Republican and you still may have just lost my vote. Obama is very charismatic and a pleasure to listen to which makes him a widely followed candidate, however, he needs to find out what type of campaign he wants to run and he needs to choose fast. If Obama is going to make a mockery of the opposing candidate he is likely going to lose a lot of support particularly among the moderate swing voters who are key to win the election. Obama may lose the hard-line Republicans regardless, but McCain has a maverick appeal that may give him added support among moderates. These are the votes Obama needs to fight for, not simply joke around with some buddies who are going to vote for you anyway. You do that and you may have just lose the key to the White House.
Obama must begin to mention his specific goals as opposed to his general goals. We all know the generics, but how exactly is he going to change America? As of now Obama seems little more than a big mouth. As the old adage goes, “you can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?” This is the ultimate question that most people would like to at least get some indication of before going to the polling booths.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
The Biofuel Question
I have done tons of research on biofuel and have encountered some very interesting information. No matter how much research I conduct, I will not be awarded any fancy PhD or anything; however, I definitely feel very informed in this subject. Heck, I have even composed a file of roughly seventy pages that outline different areas of biofuel technology.
A biofuel is a form of alternative energy that is grown from crops and can be used in place of fossil fuels. Because biofuels are essentially grown from the ground, they are considered to be a renewable resource. The United States federal government currently provides several incentives for industries to produce biofuels. In fact, the diesel fuel at your typical gas station is a blend of both petroleum diesel and biodiesel. Biodiesel is a biofuel because it is made from vegetable oil that goes through a transestrification process. But it is not just diesel engines that use biofuel. Unleaded gasoline is typically mixed with ethanol. These blends some of which have been governmentally mandated, have tried to reduce our oil dependency; however, they nearly scrape the surface of the problem.
For one, straight vegetable oil as a biofuel has been prohibited by the federal government. The Environmental Protection Agency through the Clean Air Act has established standards that make it illegal to fuel your vehicle off straight vegetable oil (SVO). However, many Americans use SVO illegally and several citizens from other countries have used SVO quite successfully. Several tests have been conducted in Japan which indicate that Straight Vegetable Oil is a environmentally healthy form of fuel…and what’s more it is practically free. Restaurants dump millions of gallons of vegetable oil into landfills which can further harm the environment. When vegetable oil is discarded, it is often referred to as waste vegetable oil. As a result, most restaurants will happily give you their waste vegetable oil free of charge.
Before I go any further it must be said that straight vegetable oil is not the easiest of biofuels to use. While any diesel engine can technically use vegetable oil, it is strongly discouraged. Unlike biodiesel, vegetable oil risks gumming up engines causing permanent corrosive damage when placed directly into engines. However, there is a way around this. Diesel engines can be equipped with a separate engine such as a greasecar kit that allows diesel vehicles to successfully run of straight vegetable oil. These kits are typically not very expensive and prevent any problems of losing engine life.
Probably the biggest advantage of vegetable oil is that vegetable oil reduces global warming because they run off of the closed carbon cycle. This means that the vegetable oils will emit simply what has already been absorbed by the plants. On the other hand, fossil fuels emit dormant carbon dioxide causing a net gain in carbon dioxide.
After looking at both the numerous advantages as well as the disadvantages of biofuels, I have come to the conclusion that biofuels provide an excellent source of energy for America.
Is biofuel a silver bullet to solve the energy crisis? Probably not. Nonetheless, if biofuel can at least minimize the burden Americans place on fossil fuels, why should we neglect to pursue additional biofuels?
A biofuel is a form of alternative energy that is grown from crops and can be used in place of fossil fuels. Because biofuels are essentially grown from the ground, they are considered to be a renewable resource. The United States federal government currently provides several incentives for industries to produce biofuels. In fact, the diesel fuel at your typical gas station is a blend of both petroleum diesel and biodiesel. Biodiesel is a biofuel because it is made from vegetable oil that goes through a transestrification process. But it is not just diesel engines that use biofuel. Unleaded gasoline is typically mixed with ethanol. These blends some of which have been governmentally mandated, have tried to reduce our oil dependency; however, they nearly scrape the surface of the problem.
For one, straight vegetable oil as a biofuel has been prohibited by the federal government. The Environmental Protection Agency through the Clean Air Act has established standards that make it illegal to fuel your vehicle off straight vegetable oil (SVO). However, many Americans use SVO illegally and several citizens from other countries have used SVO quite successfully. Several tests have been conducted in Japan which indicate that Straight Vegetable Oil is a environmentally healthy form of fuel…and what’s more it is practically free. Restaurants dump millions of gallons of vegetable oil into landfills which can further harm the environment. When vegetable oil is discarded, it is often referred to as waste vegetable oil. As a result, most restaurants will happily give you their waste vegetable oil free of charge.
Before I go any further it must be said that straight vegetable oil is not the easiest of biofuels to use. While any diesel engine can technically use vegetable oil, it is strongly discouraged. Unlike biodiesel, vegetable oil risks gumming up engines causing permanent corrosive damage when placed directly into engines. However, there is a way around this. Diesel engines can be equipped with a separate engine such as a greasecar kit that allows diesel vehicles to successfully run of straight vegetable oil. These kits are typically not very expensive and prevent any problems of losing engine life.
Probably the biggest advantage of vegetable oil is that vegetable oil reduces global warming because they run off of the closed carbon cycle. This means that the vegetable oils will emit simply what has already been absorbed by the plants. On the other hand, fossil fuels emit dormant carbon dioxide causing a net gain in carbon dioxide.
After looking at both the numerous advantages as well as the disadvantages of biofuels, I have come to the conclusion that biofuels provide an excellent source of energy for America.
Is biofuel a silver bullet to solve the energy crisis? Probably not. Nonetheless, if biofuel can at least minimize the burden Americans place on fossil fuels, why should we neglect to pursue additional biofuels?
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
The Absence of College Dating
Just yesterday I was discussing how college dating doesn't exist. I mean for people who are in college or recently graduated from a university will likely agree. People do not date in college like they might have used to. Many people are shocked regarding the lack of dating in college, for me, this isn't very shocking at all.
First of all, dating as a whole has been taken into a new dimension. Dating has transformed in general. This does not just hold true for the younger, college-age generation but the older folks as well. With dating websites such as eHarmony and Match.com (along with the myriad of other similar sites), older people no longer find themselves in the dilemma of how to possibly meet people. Now this may seem strange for some people who haven't gone through the online dating process, but if you think about it, it really isn't.
Say you just retired from work, you are in your mid 50s and you recently had a divorce. Most likely you are going to want to find someone else to spend the rest of your life with. However, being in such a position, finding someone poses quite a problem. While there are millions of single like-aged people interested in finding a mate, there are very few avenues to find any if you take online dating out of the equation. Online dating allows people to immediately search hundreds of profiles of potential matches at the comfort of one's home. My parents have been through this process and while you are unlikely to find who you are looking for on your first try, online dating allows people to experience dates with several different people.
College students tend to have the attitude that online dating is a copout and there is no reason to find someone online when they are immersed in an environment with thousands of single students. Unfortunately, the way the college environment is structured, dating has been a challenge.
In college, there are three main ways to meet someone else:
1. Someone you know from class.
2. Someone from a club or activity.
3. Friend or a friend of a friend
4. Someone you meet at a party
The top three tend to be awkward whereas the fourth, finding someone you meet at a party is a no risk issue.
Let's analyze #1 Someone From Class
Say you meet someone from a class and start dating him or her, class is probably going to be a little awkward on your initial dates. Are you going to sit by him/her? Are you going to try and participate more/less? Moreover these questions are only the tip of the iceberg. While going out with someone from class may change classroom dynamics there is one far more important issue that should be kept in mind...the break-up. While anyone who initially dates someone else hopes that it will last, the chances are it won't. If you break-up with someone you met from a class while still in that same class, it is going to be both painful and awkward to go to that same class for the next few days.
Let's analyze #2 Club or Activity
This one I think is more doable than the other options when it comes to dating specifically. However, meeting someone from a club or activity also poses some risks. Often times it can create drama with the entire activity knowing and talking about it, but then again...if you are serious about dating, you could probably care less. More importantly this also involves an issue where tensions in such a relationship often can cause one or both members to leave the club/activity. Many people do not want to run this risk if the activity in question is one they absolutely love.
Let's analyze #3 Friend or Friend of a Friend
This one regardless is virtually guaranteed to create a lot of drama and probably cause a huge change in group dynamics. I have friends who have dated other friends of mine, and I got to say, it can get pretty awkward. For friends who have friends in a relationship, they will notice changes right of the bat. The biggest one being how their friends (who are now a couple) treat each other.
Finally we look at the #4 situation - The Party
Almost every college is infested with parties, which is the primary way campus life gets shaped outside of the classroom. I say that parties are zero-risk situations because often times people who meet and get together at parties are people who know very little about each other going in. College students have managed to eliminate the awkward nervousness entailed when asking someone out on a date by finding someone at a party. At parties, students tend to have their inhibitions reduced and are willing to be more upfront on who they are willing to be with. Parties also provide the avenue for people to meet someone without much cost. This has created the hook-up culture where students can hook-up and then leave it as if it never happened. Why, because it was supposedly fun while it happened. Even if a legitimate relationship is formed from a party, breaking-up poses very little of an issue. After all, you will probably rarely even see that person again considering you may have hardly if at all none the person you were with prior to the party. Dating has no longer becomes a necessity for many college students (both guys and girls believe it or not) when many people take temporary pleasure in hooking up with someone if they feel that they don't necessarily have the obligation to stay with him or her.
Over the long haul, most college students would still prefer a greater dating scene take place in college. The hook-up culture has created an artificial form of relationships where physical actions and words mean far less than they should.
First of all, dating as a whole has been taken into a new dimension. Dating has transformed in general. This does not just hold true for the younger, college-age generation but the older folks as well. With dating websites such as eHarmony and Match.com (along with the myriad of other similar sites), older people no longer find themselves in the dilemma of how to possibly meet people. Now this may seem strange for some people who haven't gone through the online dating process, but if you think about it, it really isn't.
Say you just retired from work, you are in your mid 50s and you recently had a divorce. Most likely you are going to want to find someone else to spend the rest of your life with. However, being in such a position, finding someone poses quite a problem. While there are millions of single like-aged people interested in finding a mate, there are very few avenues to find any if you take online dating out of the equation. Online dating allows people to immediately search hundreds of profiles of potential matches at the comfort of one's home. My parents have been through this process and while you are unlikely to find who you are looking for on your first try, online dating allows people to experience dates with several different people.
College students tend to have the attitude that online dating is a copout and there is no reason to find someone online when they are immersed in an environment with thousands of single students. Unfortunately, the way the college environment is structured, dating has been a challenge.
In college, there are three main ways to meet someone else:
1. Someone you know from class.
2. Someone from a club or activity.
3. Friend or a friend of a friend
4. Someone you meet at a party
The top three tend to be awkward whereas the fourth, finding someone you meet at a party is a no risk issue.
Let's analyze #1 Someone From Class
Say you meet someone from a class and start dating him or her, class is probably going to be a little awkward on your initial dates. Are you going to sit by him/her? Are you going to try and participate more/less? Moreover these questions are only the tip of the iceberg. While going out with someone from class may change classroom dynamics there is one far more important issue that should be kept in mind...the break-up. While anyone who initially dates someone else hopes that it will last, the chances are it won't. If you break-up with someone you met from a class while still in that same class, it is going to be both painful and awkward to go to that same class for the next few days.
Let's analyze #2 Club or Activity
This one I think is more doable than the other options when it comes to dating specifically. However, meeting someone from a club or activity also poses some risks. Often times it can create drama with the entire activity knowing and talking about it, but then again...if you are serious about dating, you could probably care less. More importantly this also involves an issue where tensions in such a relationship often can cause one or both members to leave the club/activity. Many people do not want to run this risk if the activity in question is one they absolutely love.
Let's analyze #3 Friend or Friend of a Friend
This one regardless is virtually guaranteed to create a lot of drama and probably cause a huge change in group dynamics. I have friends who have dated other friends of mine, and I got to say, it can get pretty awkward. For friends who have friends in a relationship, they will notice changes right of the bat. The biggest one being how their friends (who are now a couple) treat each other.
Finally we look at the #4 situation - The Party
Almost every college is infested with parties, which is the primary way campus life gets shaped outside of the classroom. I say that parties are zero-risk situations because often times people who meet and get together at parties are people who know very little about each other going in. College students have managed to eliminate the awkward nervousness entailed when asking someone out on a date by finding someone at a party. At parties, students tend to have their inhibitions reduced and are willing to be more upfront on who they are willing to be with. Parties also provide the avenue for people to meet someone without much cost. This has created the hook-up culture where students can hook-up and then leave it as if it never happened. Why, because it was supposedly fun while it happened. Even if a legitimate relationship is formed from a party, breaking-up poses very little of an issue. After all, you will probably rarely even see that person again considering you may have hardly if at all none the person you were with prior to the party. Dating has no longer becomes a necessity for many college students (both guys and girls believe it or not) when many people take temporary pleasure in hooking up with someone if they feel that they don't necessarily have the obligation to stay with him or her.
Over the long haul, most college students would still prefer a greater dating scene take place in college. The hook-up culture has created an artificial form of relationships where physical actions and words mean far less than they should.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
