RU 4 Online Dating?

I have been contemplating the way(s) that our increasing devotion to technology has affected the ways we communicate with each other and develop realationships. One obvious part of this discussion is the issue of Internet dating. I am really curious to hear your opinions on this topic. There are, of course, convincing arguments for dating online (you can find who/what you are looking for a lot easier; it gives you access to a larger "dating pool"; you can communicate and find out if there is any real compatability beyond physical attraction), but there are also a lot of reasons not to do it (first and foremost, there are a lot of freaks in the world, and many of them spend a lot of time online; the people you meet often live too far away for a real relationship; you can't know if you have chemistry with someone until you meet that person face to face; people are fake online, putting forth a false, or idealized, version of themselves). These are all arguments I have heard, not necessarily my own arguments. I'm sure you have heard these arguments, or similar ones.

So my question to you is this: Is online dating a good thing? Is it improving or hindering the way we meet and fall in love? Is it speeding up an outdated process or taking all of the fun and tradition out of what my grandparents would call "courting"? Feel free to share personal experiences. Do you meet people online? Do you have success stories? Horror stories? I am really interested in hearing your views on this topic, as well as your own diverse experiences.
~D

Here it is, you've all been waiting for it. What has Trey written? This, my peers, is it.

Feeling Lucky? Good
Rhetorical strategy is exactly that, a strategy. Planned, exact, and designed these strategies often times get the better of us. They work. Habitually, these plans of attack overcome our emotions, senses, and thoughts until we become what the strategist wants us to become. These attacks aren’t always obvious, free for us to consciously overcome them, although they are free for us to see, hear and read. They lurk superimposed between our logical freethinking mind and our irrational subconscious waiting for the time to strike. We are bombarded with these strategies to persuade us, to force us to believe what they want, do what they, even buy what they want when they want us to. Who are they? Everyone, our friends, family, teachers, writers, but most effective and most eager to sway our judgments are the marketing agents. From commercials to billboards to the magazines we bring into our homes, they are all strategies to influence and that’s exactly what they do.
The ad I choose to rhetorically analyze is from Smith and Wesson, a gun manufacturer. In order to accurately create an angle of vision through dissecting the ad, the target audience of the ad must first be identified. The ad tells us of the back in production Model 29 .44 magnum revolver, it also shows a list of three other model revolvers coming back to life, but its target is the .44 because is the largest image on the page. The Model 29 was made famous by Clint Eastwood in the movie Dirty Harry, and the ad plays into that. The movie was a man’s man movie of a super tough cop in San Francisco taking down the bad guys. Immediately I can say the target audience would be men. And not only men, but men from an older generation because not only is the movie nearly forty years old, but the model 29 was first produced in 1955 and only manufactured for 20 years, leaving over thirty years since the last time it was made. The revolver is classic handgun and typically not seen as prevalent in gun shops any longer. Other than older men, whom else might the ad be targeting? The revolver is a handgun that isn’t as popular nowadays with semi-auto pistols as competition. It certainly wouldn’t be used for personal or home safety so the average gun owner wouldn’t be the target of Smith and Wesson. They are targeting serious collectors or shooters that enjoy the traditional, timeless feel of the revolver. Now that the target audience is established how does the ad appeal to that audience in ways other than already mentioned?
The headline of the ad reads “Famous for over five decades of making punks question how lucky they feel”. That is the part of line in Dirty Harry that made the gun so famous in the first place, again appealing to the rough, tough ultra- masculine gun owner. Moreover, it states it has been famous for over 50 years, giving the gun as well as Smith and Wesson great accomplishment and precedence over the market, a textbook example of using ethos to appeal to an audience. The catch is this though, Smith and Wesson would assume the audience already knows this and so how can it still make the viewer interested enough to buy the product? It assures the potential consumer of what Smith and Wesson assumes the viewer already knows by cleverly stating “Smith and Wesson, The Revolver Manufacturer” at the bottom of the ad. This line makes the viewer more confident in the already outstanding manufacturer that is Smith and Wesson. The ending sentence in the paragraph telling the reader about the new manufacturing and availability of the Model 29 and other back-in-production models states, “Go ahead, make your day with a piece of history”. Again, they use play on words with a line from Dirty Harry appealing to their sense of ethos. Smith and Wesson is The Revolver Manufacturer and it has and continues to make guns etch their way into history through people, time, movies and most of all the ability to shoot accurate and reliable, which is the purpose of a gun. Smith and Wesson knows they are top-dog and they use their status to sell their product in this ad.
The target consumer audience has been identified; the strategies used to appeal to the audience have been analyzed, how effective is the ad? I cannot accurately say how effective the ad is because I am not part of the target audience, but the ad worked on me. I am not a revolver fan, but after taking an intellectual dive into the ad I feel I would be more likely to purchase a revolver. I can only imagine the excitement of a revolver collector seeing the ad and learning of the remanufacturing of the Model 29. The ad accurately and effectively brings forth its product in a way to make consumers want to buy the product and make Smith and Wesson part of their history.

I wish i had a picture of the ad to post with it....Too lazy to scan it and upload it and all that junk.

Congratulations are Due

This is my first blog and, rather than posing a problematic question or insight to make you think, I want to give a big high five and pat on the back to Daniel for completing his Doctoral thesis. It is a big deal and deserves a lot of respect. Hats off to soon to be Dr. Dan.

ha ha ha

hey speaking of calvin klein,
did anyone see his reference last night on family guy?
i think it was kinda funny because we were totally just talking about him, and stewie got on and did a photo shoot for his designer diapers, lol

Are You Sold on Sex?

Today we had a really great discussion about visual rhetoric, and one topic that generated a lot of conversation was sexuality in advertising. "Sex sells" is a truism that we hear from time to time, but we went a little deeper than that today. We discussed what ads that appeal to human sexuality say about us. Do they reveal how far we've come, to a point where we can openly celebrate the human body and our sexual nature, or are they gratuitous appeals to base impulses that exploit and objectify the body? Do they promote unrealistic ideals to consumers, especially young consumers? Or do such images depict common fantasies and impulses that we no longer, in 2008, have to keep hidden? And, from a rhetorical point of view, do these ads work for you? Does this image at all persuade you to buy these jeans? I would love for any of you to sound off on this.

Contempt prior to examination

While thinking about class last week i was reminded of a quote and i thought i would just share it.  

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information; which is proof against all argument; and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is contempt prior to examination."   Herbert Spencer

I completely agree that we should step out of our comfort zone from time to time.  If that is by learning about a different culture or a race we usually don't converse with, so be it.  There is much to be learned when facing the unknown and even more when it is something feared because of cultural differences.  It isn't hard to find diverse culture even here in Utah, where it is thought to be such a ethically dull place.  Just start looking for an opportunity to learn something of a different culture and try to understand why you don't like the things you don't like.  I am almost certain that close to 90% of the things we don't like about another race or culture is because we fall into the category of people being "contempt prior to examination".  Just as Herbert Spencer said,  this will do nothing less of keep you in an ignorant state and in my opinion very uneducated.  

Chivalry is Alive

Dave Chappell once said, “Chivalry is dead, and women have killed it.” This statement is as far away from the truth as you can get. Today, honesty and knightliness are attributes most people aspire to because they want to be more than they can be, like John Thatcher said in A Knight’s Tale, “Change your stars, and live a better life than I have.” People are trying to live a better life, and attract the people that will encourage them living a life of honor and charity. There was this time I was in Bolivia, and we were all rushing to get onto the boats because whoever missed this boat got left behind. So someone had fallen down, and instead of trampling over her, everyone stopped and helped her get up which may have saved her life, because there were so many people trying to get on the boat, which is a chivalrous thing to do. So the simple act of opening a door for your date, or letting your date open the door for you could be more vital than the actual conversation. The qualities that people have determine who they are going to become, and chivalry is that of an upper class nature. Third Eye Blind once wrote “She Likes Me For Me” which is a song about how a guy meets a girl who likes him just because of his personality. We are all one for earth is legion, essentially, but with different personalities, which define who we are, and what kind of people we have around us. The people we have around us also affect how we act, and which is a case of enviroment. Alec Guinness in “Star Wars A New Hope” said, “Stretch out with your feelings, and trust your instinct,” which is something most people do on a subconscious level, and instinctively we do the right thing, and behave like adults, as opposed to children. Mature adults naturally act chivalrous in their behavior, and therefore chivalry is not dead but very much alive.

Chivalry is Dead

“Chivalry is dead, and woman has killed it,” Dave Chappell once said this on the Dave Chappell Show, and at first I did not believe that honorable men existed no more. My opinion has greatly changed after I watch boys fighting over nothing at all. In Medieval times, the term chivalrous was a term that linked a man into knighthood, and granted him God’s blessing on the battle field. Where he would not pillage, or fight on uneven ground, but had a “courtesy” to his enemies, and would grant them the honor of fair combat, and did not bare any hate to his fallen opponents, and would bless them in hopes that they might find peace.
Today, there are but a handful of men who possess the attributes of chivalry, mainly because chivalry is so unknown to people that it appears creepy, outlandish, and outdated. Women today are in a man’s world, and are affected by man’s decisions, and thusly have to protect themselves from the idiocy of a man’s demeanor, hence the mace, R.A.D. classes, and putting bouncers at the clubs and bars. Then when a girl meets a chivalrous man, they don‘t understand what that man is trying to do. Assumptions get made, and the guy is marked a pervert, and is now the newest social pariah. But when she meets a guy who is kind of nice but is still a dick to her, she won’t leave his side because girls love to change boys into chivalrous men, and take the drama along the way. Or maybe another reason is because when you constantly have something, its value is less than something that is rare, and when a guy is a dick all the time, his nice moments mean a lot more than if he were nice all the time.
Chivalry is not only lacking in men, but in women too, in Kanye West’s song Gold Digger, he explains how women are no longer interested in the men, but they are interested in the man’s financial ability to take her out and buy her something nice, or let her ride in his fancy car. Eddie Griffin said, “What happened to just falling in love with someone with a bus pass just because you love the person?”(Ed-U-Cation 2001) As far as who is responsible for the fall of honor and chivalry, I place the blame on the woman because she is no longer interested in the man alone.

Why Drug Addiction Is So Hard to Kick

Why Is Drug Addiction So Hard To Kick?
Zach Himelright
As a recovering addict I have a lot of insight as to why drug addiction is so hard to kick. A lot of people don’t know but there are two parts to a drug addiction. You have your physical addiction, and you have your mental addiction.
Many people will disagree that addiction is not a disease, but it is an actual medical disease. The definition for a disease is, a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment. Now according to this definition an addiction is an incorrectly functioning organ (the brain) resulting from poisons (the drug).
Now with this little bit of information it gives us insight as to why an addiction is so hard to kick. The physical addiction of the drug goes away within a matter of about a week to two weeks. So you could just take an addicted person and lock them in a cell, room or just put them in a place where they have no access to drugs for a week and they won’t be addicted anymore right? Wrong, and I will tell you why. All you have done is taken away the physical addiction, but you have left the most important part of the addiction out of the picture, the mental addiction.
Let me tell you why the mental addiction is so hard to kick. The reason why is because you never stop wanting the drug. Why? Because as humans we like things that make us feel good. Another part to this is we are lazy and we like the easy way out of a problem. This is made clear by our technological advances. We have the car so we don’t have to walk, and soon we will be having robots doing our normal day to day chores.
Now you may ask what this information has to do with drug addiction. It has everything to do with drug addiction. What do drugs do? They provide an easy escape to how we are feeling. They are an easy solvent to our problem. And because of this the mental addiction never goes away. As soon as a trigger hits us we begin to brainstorm ways to solve the problem. And we always look for the easiest way to solve that problem. A person who has never done drugs doesn’t know what the relief that drug can bring. So all a person who has kicked the drug addiction have really done Is come up with a way to divert their mind so they don’t choose the easy way out and do the drug. This is what specialists, and any person who is teaching or trying to get someone to kick the habit, call coping skills. And having good healthy coping skills so that we don’t do the drug is the second most important part of a drug addiction. The first is the will to change. I am a firm believer that if a person doesn’t want to change or doesn’t think they have a problem they are not going to change no matter how much you tell them that their behavior is destructive.

Pretty much i have no idea what i'm doing here so i hope this works!!!

Sarah Palin Continued...

Based on our class discussion yesterday, I thought I might point you toward two editorials I read this morning. The first is by Jack Shafer, and he writes about the media and the "appropriateness" issue we discussed in class. The URL for his piece is http://www.slate.com/id/2199121/. The second editorial is by Bonnie Fuller, who argues that Palin is exploiting her daughter's pregnancy and is forcing her to have a shotgun wedding. The URL for that piece is http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bonnie-fuller/sarah-palin-she-has-chose_b_123282.html. Please feel free to respond to either, or both, of these editorials on the blog. See you tomorrow.








Sarah Palin as runner-up in the Miss Alaska pageant (left) and as Governor of Alaska (right)