As the new school year commences, it brings back fond memories of my days attending school back home in Cornell. If you didn’t guess it already, I was one of those geeky kids who loved school, much to my parents’ delight. Sure, I enjoyed summer as much as the next kid, but, for some reason, I yearned to go back each fall and bury my nose in books and homework.
I loved homework, writing and being artistic – which really hasn’t changed all that much, I guess. Regardless of how hard I worked at getting straight A’s, it was sometimes difficult for me to stay focused in school.
No, I’m not talking about passing notes during class or whispering about boys in a secluded corner of the library. Granted, there are many of those instances I can recall that have been stored in my memory banks, I’m referring to the harsh reality that school can oftentimes be a horrific place for a kid. Though I had an affinity for learning, I neglected to mention that I was also a pudgy kid who was blessed with Coke-bottle spectacles by the time I was in fourth grade.
While that period of my life has come and gone – for the most part – I, like many other kids that age, became the subject of ridicule from my classmates. Words like ‘fatty’ and ‘four eyes’ were thrown my way on a daily basis. Meant to be a place where kids felt safe and did the majority of their maturing, I quickly discovered that school wasn’t always a conducive environment for learning.
When I started kindergarten, I remember a choice few of my classmates who were just plain mean to me. Though I wasn’t the one who bore the brunt of their wrath, it still hurt. I was only leafy to imagine how other kids who were incessantly teased felt.
While there were others who saw humor in this kind of behavior and joined in on the pranks and jokes on occasion, class clowns they certainly were not.
As we grew older, several of those same mean kids continued to tease and torment classmates, so much so that it brought kids to tears. And while I’d like to say I was merely a victim, innocent when it came to bullying, I admit that there were times I caught myself laughing at the expense of others. Looking back, I can’t help but shake my head in disgust. It’s not funny, whatsoever. But, as they say, hindsight is 20/20. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear as though much has changed since my elementary and high school days.
Through all the technological advancements that education has seen, as well as the many fads that have come and gone – from the leather and grease of the ‘50s and the hippie chic of the ‘70s to the big hair of the ‘80s and punk and grunge styles of the ‘90s – bullying seems to be the one constant that every generation has endured. As tragic as it is to imagine, bullying has always been a problem within the confines of any educational institution, whether it be in the cafeteria, out on the playground or in the classroom.
And, sadly, with new conveniences like cell phones and computers, bullying has become even worse. Threats and torments are now as easy as sending a message via Facebook or text message. And while I know, from experience, that kids don’t like being tattletales – not to mention the fact that it can be embarrassing for them to admit to being bullied – parents need to make sure their children are not being victimized. While I know that schools have bullying policies in place, this kind of behavior should be nipped in the bud before these kids even enter the hallways. Parents need to instill in their children that teasing of other individuals won’t be tolerated. Not only should they respect their elders, but they should be taught to respect everyone.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Fatality Raises Concerns
It’s no secret that the Amish population in northern Wisconsin is on the rise. And that’s all fine and good with me. However, I do have reservations about the way in which automobiles and buggies are required to share roadways. I’m not going to sugar-coat this, by any means. Buggies should not be allowed to travel on highways where the posted speed limit is 55 mph and above. I’m not saying that Amish and Old Order Mennonite folks should be banned from all roadways if they are traveling by buggy, but, in my eyes, it’s just too dangerous.
First off, most buggies are not equipped with proper lighting, thus posing a huge threat, especially if they happen to be traveling along the road near or after sundown, which I’ve witnessed. Add to that the fact that buggies typically don’t reach speeds in excess of 15 mph. When operating lightweight, wooden vehicles on the same roads with heavy, metal 4-by-4 pickups and 18 wheelers, lives most certainly will be lost. And they have been.
Granted, the most recent fatality that occurred near Whitehall was a buggy vs. sedan, I’d hate to imagine what might have happened had that sedan been a semi, which are quite prevalent in the area, mind you. Those buggies are oddly built so that the passengers are ejected if it is rear-ended, what with the seating area above the impact zone. Another thing that concerns me is the way in which buggies are allowed to operate on state highways without meeting the required safety measures – child safety seats, seat belts and airbags, to name a few.
I recall a very similar scenario playing out last summer when a van rear-ended an Amish buggy, resulting in the death of an infant. The 6-week-old girl’s parents were riding in the buggy with her when the accident occurred, but what concerns me is why the girl was killed. The baby was not secured in a car seat (as she should have been if she were in a motorized vehicle) and was ejected from her mother’s arms when the buggy was struck from behind. Again, I understand the need to adhere to the Ordnung, but, not having a child in a safety seat would be, by today’s standards, considered negligent.
There are even some who refuse to display slow-moving vehicle signs on their buggies because they are too flashy. I respect the need for members of the Amish and Old Order Mennonite communities to respect and honor their heritage, but when it comes to safety, I don’t think they should be afforded the opportunity to refuse to comply with state laws. No one else can … at least not without paying some sort of forfeiture, that is. And, at this point, there’s no way to tell if the driver of the sedan had been distracted or experienced sun-blindness, when the setting sun hinders vision.
Regardless, I think everyone traveling on our roadways needs to be a lot more attentive and aware of what’s going around them. Distractions like cell phones, radios and everything else aside, more attention needs to be paid to the actual act of driving. There’s no doubt in my mind that cutting down on the number of driving-related fatalities is a group effort.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
First off, most buggies are not equipped with proper lighting, thus posing a huge threat, especially if they happen to be traveling along the road near or after sundown, which I’ve witnessed. Add to that the fact that buggies typically don’t reach speeds in excess of 15 mph. When operating lightweight, wooden vehicles on the same roads with heavy, metal 4-by-4 pickups and 18 wheelers, lives most certainly will be lost. And they have been.
Granted, the most recent fatality that occurred near Whitehall was a buggy vs. sedan, I’d hate to imagine what might have happened had that sedan been a semi, which are quite prevalent in the area, mind you. Those buggies are oddly built so that the passengers are ejected if it is rear-ended, what with the seating area above the impact zone. Another thing that concerns me is the way in which buggies are allowed to operate on state highways without meeting the required safety measures – child safety seats, seat belts and airbags, to name a few.
I recall a very similar scenario playing out last summer when a van rear-ended an Amish buggy, resulting in the death of an infant. The 6-week-old girl’s parents were riding in the buggy with her when the accident occurred, but what concerns me is why the girl was killed. The baby was not secured in a car seat (as she should have been if she were in a motorized vehicle) and was ejected from her mother’s arms when the buggy was struck from behind. Again, I understand the need to adhere to the Ordnung, but, not having a child in a safety seat would be, by today’s standards, considered negligent.
There are even some who refuse to display slow-moving vehicle signs on their buggies because they are too flashy. I respect the need for members of the Amish and Old Order Mennonite communities to respect and honor their heritage, but when it comes to safety, I don’t think they should be afforded the opportunity to refuse to comply with state laws. No one else can … at least not without paying some sort of forfeiture, that is. And, at this point, there’s no way to tell if the driver of the sedan had been distracted or experienced sun-blindness, when the setting sun hinders vision.
Regardless, I think everyone traveling on our roadways needs to be a lot more attentive and aware of what’s going around them. Distractions like cell phones, radios and everything else aside, more attention needs to be paid to the actual act of driving. There’s no doubt in my mind that cutting down on the number of driving-related fatalities is a group effort.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Apathy Is Not The Answer
One day, as I was going through an old edition of the News-Leader, picking out news stories of yore for the “From Our Files” section, something struck me as surprising. In 1960, about 200 people turned out for the Arcadia School District's annual meeting. Ironically, one of my very first assignments as editor was to attend the annual meeting last October and report on it. Let me tell you, there were nowhere near 200 people in attendance. That begs the question: when did people stop being so actively involved in these types of public meetings? But, more importantly, why?
The same goes for city council meetings. Not very many members of the public turn out for those either. Regardless of the fact that my job description requires me to be in attendance, I have no doubt that, even if I were not in this position, I’d be there. I like to knowing what is happening in the community in which I reside. I don’t think my parents have once gone to a city council meeting and they’ve been living in Cornell about 30 years. Though I’d like to just chock that up to apathy, I’ve come to realize that it’s not just them.
For most, public meetings are the ideal time to express concerns and vent frustrations to the powers that be. However, they serve a much bigger purpose – awareness. While I understand people lead extremely busy lives, I think many have forgotten the importance of being involved in the politics of the communities in which they live. As sad as it is, more often than not, people only attend a meeting after something goes wrong. Not to play devil's advocate, by any means, but, perhaps, whatever went wrong could have been avoided had he or she been a regular attendee of public meetings. I don’t mean to be blunt, but those who don’t care enough to be involved should have nothing to complain about.
Don’t get me wrong, I am fully aware that much of the responsibility to keep the residents of Arcadia informed and in the know lands on my shoulders. However, there is no feasible way for me to hit on everything. Meetings of the school board and city council oftentimes last three hours (sometimes longer) and can consist of 20-plus agenda items. Plus, there may be certain items that only pertain to and affect a choice few individuals. There’s no way every little morsel of information discussed at these meetings will wind up in print, which makes public involvement that much more important.
During my three years working as reporter/editor, it astounds me how few people actually take advantage of those outlets. You can't just stand idly by and hope things go your way. Not only do you need to actively make sure you hold those who represent you accountable, but you also need to get involved and let your voice be heard. With that, I’d just like to remind everyone of three upcoming opportunities to do just that. The Arcadia City Council meets Aug. 12 at 6 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall; the Trempealeau County Board of Supervisors (courthouse in Whitehall) and the Arcadia School Board of Education (high school LMC) will hold their regular monthly meetings on Aug. 16 at 7 p.m. and 8 p.m., respectively. I hope to see some new faces in attendance.
Jennie Oemig,
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
The same goes for city council meetings. Not very many members of the public turn out for those either. Regardless of the fact that my job description requires me to be in attendance, I have no doubt that, even if I were not in this position, I’d be there. I like to knowing what is happening in the community in which I reside. I don’t think my parents have once gone to a city council meeting and they’ve been living in Cornell about 30 years. Though I’d like to just chock that up to apathy, I’ve come to realize that it’s not just them.
For most, public meetings are the ideal time to express concerns and vent frustrations to the powers that be. However, they serve a much bigger purpose – awareness. While I understand people lead extremely busy lives, I think many have forgotten the importance of being involved in the politics of the communities in which they live. As sad as it is, more often than not, people only attend a meeting after something goes wrong. Not to play devil's advocate, by any means, but, perhaps, whatever went wrong could have been avoided had he or she been a regular attendee of public meetings. I don’t mean to be blunt, but those who don’t care enough to be involved should have nothing to complain about.
Don’t get me wrong, I am fully aware that much of the responsibility to keep the residents of Arcadia informed and in the know lands on my shoulders. However, there is no feasible way for me to hit on everything. Meetings of the school board and city council oftentimes last three hours (sometimes longer) and can consist of 20-plus agenda items. Plus, there may be certain items that only pertain to and affect a choice few individuals. There’s no way every little morsel of information discussed at these meetings will wind up in print, which makes public involvement that much more important.
During my three years working as reporter/editor, it astounds me how few people actually take advantage of those outlets. You can't just stand idly by and hope things go your way. Not only do you need to actively make sure you hold those who represent you accountable, but you also need to get involved and let your voice be heard. With that, I’d just like to remind everyone of three upcoming opportunities to do just that. The Arcadia City Council meets Aug. 12 at 6 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall; the Trempealeau County Board of Supervisors (courthouse in Whitehall) and the Arcadia School Board of Education (high school LMC) will hold their regular monthly meetings on Aug. 16 at 7 p.m. and 8 p.m., respectively. I hope to see some new faces in attendance.
Jennie Oemig,
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Tribal Retribution
Last week, the Osseo-Fairchild School District was ordered, by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, to drop its Chieftains nickname and logo, which it has used for many years. With so much rich, Native American culture in Wisconsin, I’m sure Osseo-Fairchild will only be the first of many districts to fall under scrutiny after the passage of a new state law that went into effect in May. That particular law allows for any resident who lives within the district and objects to the usage of a race-based nickname, logo or mascot to file a complaint with the state superintendent. The same day the law was passed, residents within the Osseo-Fairchild district filed a complaint over the logo.
Since the verdict was handed down last Tuesday, the Gale-Ettrick-Trempealeau School District decided to do away with its Redmen mascot, as well. And, with good reason. If the state has ordered one district to drop its nickname and logo, chances are the rest will eventually have to follow suit. All it takes is one person who objects to its usage. My question is, why is it necessary to do away with these mascots? I honestly don’t see why they are so offensive ... and I hardly doubt I’m the only one.
When I attended high school, I was proud to be a Cornell Lady Chief. And Justin, over there, was a Lake Holcombe Chieftain. We had uniforms, sweatshirts, T-shirts, all adorned with the school mascot and chief head logo. To me, it was a tribute to the roots of the region ... and reminded us kids of the heritage and history of our country. It was about the time I became a sophomore that the shit really started to hit the fan and people began regarding those mascots and logos as demeaning, stereotypical and discriminatory. I don’t see it that way.
School mascots are not meant to be derogatory in any way, shape or form. From the get-go, it was supposed to exemplify our appreciation for the Native American heritage. What better way for us to express that than to name our school mascots in their honor? At some point, though, the meaning became skewed and Native American descendants began taking offense at the way they were being portrayed. As such, our gym floor was replaced, removing the chief head that was in the center. What took its place was a flaming C, which made absolutely no sense to me, especially since the district only relinquished the logo and not the mascot name. Somewhere along the way, the school digressed back to using a Native American headdress in its logo ... one step forward, two steps back, I guess.
Other schools in the region faced the same issues: the aforementioned Lake Holcombe Chieftains, Winter Warriors, Elmwood Raiders, Greenwood Indians. Arcadia even went through the process of eliminating the American Indian reference from its logo. The order that was handed down last week stated that the school district did not have permission of any federalized American Indian tribe to use the name or logo. So, what are they really saying? If the school somehow obtained permission to use that logo, that would be OK?
And where do you suppose this type of legislation will cease? Ancestors of pirates might find those mascot names and logos offensive. The same goes for lumberjacks, vikings, medieval warriors and spartans. The Butternut and Hurley High School nicknames are Midgets ... now you can't tell me that's not offensive. Before long, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) will seek to stop the use of animals as mascots, as well. Eventually, all team names – if there are any down the road – will need to be inanimate objects like lightning, magic or evergreens.
It’s just a vicious cycle that will eventually lead to the demise of all high school mascots. But, then again, why do high school teams need to have mascots in the first place? It's a nice, traditional concept and all, but, truth be told, they don’t.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Since the verdict was handed down last Tuesday, the Gale-Ettrick-Trempealeau School District decided to do away with its Redmen mascot, as well. And, with good reason. If the state has ordered one district to drop its nickname and logo, chances are the rest will eventually have to follow suit. All it takes is one person who objects to its usage. My question is, why is it necessary to do away with these mascots? I honestly don’t see why they are so offensive ... and I hardly doubt I’m the only one.
When I attended high school, I was proud to be a Cornell Lady Chief. And Justin, over there, was a Lake Holcombe Chieftain. We had uniforms, sweatshirts, T-shirts, all adorned with the school mascot and chief head logo. To me, it was a tribute to the roots of the region ... and reminded us kids of the heritage and history of our country. It was about the time I became a sophomore that the shit really started to hit the fan and people began regarding those mascots and logos as demeaning, stereotypical and discriminatory. I don’t see it that way.
School mascots are not meant to be derogatory in any way, shape or form. From the get-go, it was supposed to exemplify our appreciation for the Native American heritage. What better way for us to express that than to name our school mascots in their honor? At some point, though, the meaning became skewed and Native American descendants began taking offense at the way they were being portrayed. As such, our gym floor was replaced, removing the chief head that was in the center. What took its place was a flaming C, which made absolutely no sense to me, especially since the district only relinquished the logo and not the mascot name. Somewhere along the way, the school digressed back to using a Native American headdress in its logo ... one step forward, two steps back, I guess.
Other schools in the region faced the same issues: the aforementioned Lake Holcombe Chieftains, Winter Warriors, Elmwood Raiders, Greenwood Indians. Arcadia even went through the process of eliminating the American Indian reference from its logo. The order that was handed down last week stated that the school district did not have permission of any federalized American Indian tribe to use the name or logo. So, what are they really saying? If the school somehow obtained permission to use that logo, that would be OK?
And where do you suppose this type of legislation will cease? Ancestors of pirates might find those mascot names and logos offensive. The same goes for lumberjacks, vikings, medieval warriors and spartans. The Butternut and Hurley High School nicknames are Midgets ... now you can't tell me that's not offensive. Before long, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) will seek to stop the use of animals as mascots, as well. Eventually, all team names – if there are any down the road – will need to be inanimate objects like lightning, magic or evergreens.
It’s just a vicious cycle that will eventually lead to the demise of all high school mascots. But, then again, why do high school teams need to have mascots in the first place? It's a nice, traditional concept and all, but, truth be told, they don’t.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Dealing with Growing Pains
Whenever a huge construction project gets underway, one thing is certain ... someone or several someones are going to be unhappy about it. Let’s face it, no one – myself included – likes to see heavy machinery when they look out their window. And barricades that prevent people from getting from point A to point B in a straight line are simply a nuisance. But that’s the hand that the people of Arcadia have been dealt this summer.
In order for a city or town to be the best that it possibly can be, these are necessary evils that we must deal with as a community. And I can certainly empathize with those whose businesses are bearing the brunt of the inaccessibility. As it turns out, I live in an upstairs apartment along Main Street right next to Anytime Fitness. Needless to say, I share your pain. While I have grown accustomed to the hustle and bustle of Main Street since I moved here, I am really starting to miss the days when the loudest noises I heard were Ashley and Gold’n Plump trucks rumbling by. Now replaced with backhoes digging, trucks hauling and the incessant beeping, warning of heavy machinery in full reverse mode, it’s not surprising why there are times when I want to just scream at the top of my lungs.
I am not, nor have I ever been, a morning person. Anyone who knows me can tell you that I’m pretty much useless before my first mug – or two – of coffee. But I’ll be damned if those construction workers aren’t trying to change that. So, when crews first started tearing up Main Street one morning just over a week ago, I was startled into awake – not because of the noise, but because the entire house was shaking and the windows were rattling. If I hadn’t known any better, I could have sworn I was living on a fault line and I had just survived my first earthquake. Not so much.
While I had considered for a split-second, actually waking up, hopping in the shower and heading into work early, I took one look at my clock – it was only 7 a.m. – and changed my mind. While it didn’t completely block out the noise, I put the earbuds of my iPod in my ears and tried desperately to fall back to sleep. This has become a daily routine for me, it seems, but I deal with it. Then, of course, there’s the daily question of “how am I going to get out of the driveway today?” With so much going on in front of the house, it’s oftentimes difficult to actually just drive out to the street. So there I am, driving over lawns, dodging trees and shrubs, using the neighbor’s driveway ... it becomes more of a game than an inconvenience. Either way, I know it will all be over before long and I will be able to go back to life as usual.
And that’s exactly what people need to realize. This inconvenience is only temporary. As the old saying goes, you have to take the good with the bad. Once the intersection is complete, everyone can rest assured that the downtown area will be much more inviting and aesthetically pleasing ... not to mention how much more functional and safer it will be with the heavy traffic flow. So the next time you find yourself growing irate over the mayhem going on downtown, just take a deep breath and try to picture the end result. These are just growing pains we must deal with in order for Arcadia to be more.
Jennie Oemig,
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
In order for a city or town to be the best that it possibly can be, these are necessary evils that we must deal with as a community. And I can certainly empathize with those whose businesses are bearing the brunt of the inaccessibility. As it turns out, I live in an upstairs apartment along Main Street right next to Anytime Fitness. Needless to say, I share your pain. While I have grown accustomed to the hustle and bustle of Main Street since I moved here, I am really starting to miss the days when the loudest noises I heard were Ashley and Gold’n Plump trucks rumbling by. Now replaced with backhoes digging, trucks hauling and the incessant beeping, warning of heavy machinery in full reverse mode, it’s not surprising why there are times when I want to just scream at the top of my lungs.
I am not, nor have I ever been, a morning person. Anyone who knows me can tell you that I’m pretty much useless before my first mug – or two – of coffee. But I’ll be damned if those construction workers aren’t trying to change that. So, when crews first started tearing up Main Street one morning just over a week ago, I was startled into awake – not because of the noise, but because the entire house was shaking and the windows were rattling. If I hadn’t known any better, I could have sworn I was living on a fault line and I had just survived my first earthquake. Not so much.
While I had considered for a split-second, actually waking up, hopping in the shower and heading into work early, I took one look at my clock – it was only 7 a.m. – and changed my mind. While it didn’t completely block out the noise, I put the earbuds of my iPod in my ears and tried desperately to fall back to sleep. This has become a daily routine for me, it seems, but I deal with it. Then, of course, there’s the daily question of “how am I going to get out of the driveway today?” With so much going on in front of the house, it’s oftentimes difficult to actually just drive out to the street. So there I am, driving over lawns, dodging trees and shrubs, using the neighbor’s driveway ... it becomes more of a game than an inconvenience. Either way, I know it will all be over before long and I will be able to go back to life as usual.
And that’s exactly what people need to realize. This inconvenience is only temporary. As the old saying goes, you have to take the good with the bad. Once the intersection is complete, everyone can rest assured that the downtown area will be much more inviting and aesthetically pleasing ... not to mention how much more functional and safer it will be with the heavy traffic flow. So the next time you find yourself growing irate over the mayhem going on downtown, just take a deep breath and try to picture the end result. These are just growing pains we must deal with in order for Arcadia to be more.
Jennie Oemig,
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Technology Does Not Always Equal Advancement
When I began my schooling quite a few years ago, we didn’t have computers, there was no such thing as e-mail and we were lucky if we had a functional overhead projector (many of you might remember it as the predecessor to PowerPoint). And before that, teachers had to settle for a plain old blackboard as a means of presenting information to their students. In this ever-changing, fast-paced world, when it comes to presentation of information, it is presumed the quicker, the better. However, when you take into consideration just how quickly we’re moving, I have reason to believe that speed is not always a good thing when the minds of today’s youth are at stake.
With the advent of computers, it seems that a lot has been sacrificed. Writing, penmanship, proper word usage and vocabulary have all been taking a hit now that we have software programs that do all the work. Sure, when someone has horrific handwriting skills, it may be harder for the teacher to make out words; either way, it should be practiced regularly in the classroom for other reasons. Writing aides in the process of forming sentences and learning words and word usage. Like one of my old high school English teachers spouted off on a regular basis: “You ARE spell check.”
While I admit that I rolled my eyes just about every time those words escaped her lips, I totally understand what she was getting at all those years ago. Just because you have a machine that corrects spelling and, sometimes, grammar, that doesn’t mean it will fix everything. For example, if you type “witch” when what you meant was “which” or you type “right” when you should have entered “write,” you’re on your own. If you just let the computer do all the work, you may end up with correct spelling, but you’ll end up looking like an imbecile in the long run.
Having spent the better part of my educational career studying the English language, I have a keen disdain for people who misspell or use the wrong form of words ... especially when we have all this technology to give us the right answers. If it weren’t bad enough that generation X already has a difficult time comprehending the their/there/they’re, to/too/two and you’re/your conundrums, we now have messaging geniuses (and I use that term loosely, mind you) further corrupting the English language. For all of you out there who have, thus far, been lucky enough to avoid this plague, here’s a brief synopsis.
Beginning with the dawn of instant messaging, people, for some reason or another, decided to exercise their right to be lazy, exchanging a few letters for entire words or even whole sentences (i.e. brb = be right back; lol = laughing out loud; your/you’re = ur; nm = never mind; b4 = before). While those are just a few examples, it upsets me that these are becoming part of everyday interaction via this blasted thing we call the Internet and has become even more popularized since cell phone companies introduced text messaging. I’m not going to lie, I cringe every time someone sends me a text that says, “k, thnx.” I mean, I understand the message being conveyed, but did I somehow miss the memo about vowels becoming optional?
I guess I just don’t understand how people can be in such a hurry that all of that quality education just goes right out the window. All I know is I either hope this is just a passing trends or that I’m not around when this abbreviated language becomes everyday practice taught in a classroom. I shudder to think that, one day, there might be a class in school entitled “Introduction to Text Messaging.”
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
With the advent of computers, it seems that a lot has been sacrificed. Writing, penmanship, proper word usage and vocabulary have all been taking a hit now that we have software programs that do all the work. Sure, when someone has horrific handwriting skills, it may be harder for the teacher to make out words; either way, it should be practiced regularly in the classroom for other reasons. Writing aides in the process of forming sentences and learning words and word usage. Like one of my old high school English teachers spouted off on a regular basis: “You ARE spell check.”
While I admit that I rolled my eyes just about every time those words escaped her lips, I totally understand what she was getting at all those years ago. Just because you have a machine that corrects spelling and, sometimes, grammar, that doesn’t mean it will fix everything. For example, if you type “witch” when what you meant was “which” or you type “right” when you should have entered “write,” you’re on your own. If you just let the computer do all the work, you may end up with correct spelling, but you’ll end up looking like an imbecile in the long run.
Having spent the better part of my educational career studying the English language, I have a keen disdain for people who misspell or use the wrong form of words ... especially when we have all this technology to give us the right answers. If it weren’t bad enough that generation X already has a difficult time comprehending the their/there/they’re, to/too/two and you’re/your conundrums, we now have messaging geniuses (and I use that term loosely, mind you) further corrupting the English language. For all of you out there who have, thus far, been lucky enough to avoid this plague, here’s a brief synopsis.
Beginning with the dawn of instant messaging, people, for some reason or another, decided to exercise their right to be lazy, exchanging a few letters for entire words or even whole sentences (i.e. brb = be right back; lol = laughing out loud; your/you’re = ur; nm = never mind; b4 = before). While those are just a few examples, it upsets me that these are becoming part of everyday interaction via this blasted thing we call the Internet and has become even more popularized since cell phone companies introduced text messaging. I’m not going to lie, I cringe every time someone sends me a text that says, “k, thnx.” I mean, I understand the message being conveyed, but did I somehow miss the memo about vowels becoming optional?
I guess I just don’t understand how people can be in such a hurry that all of that quality education just goes right out the window. All I know is I either hope this is just a passing trends or that I’m not around when this abbreviated language becomes everyday practice taught in a classroom. I shudder to think that, one day, there might be a class in school entitled “Introduction to Text Messaging.”
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Equality in Unity
A friend of mine recently made the comment to me that people shouldn’t get married anymore. While, at first, I found fault in that statement, it didn’t take me long to jump on board and agree with that sentiment, especially when you take the staggering divorce rate into consideration. Before I begin my rant, I’d like to take the time to congratulate my parents, who will celebrate their 32nd wedding anniversary this November. Having been there through the majority of their union, I know that it wasn’t always easy.
Marriage is work, meaning you have to actually make an effort if you want it to last. That seems to be a fatal error in most marriages. One or both parties doesn’t put forth the extra effort to work out their differences. Instead, they take so-called “easy” way out by filing for divorce. While, over time, people may grow apart and find that their lives just don’t mesh well anymore, oftentimes people just jump into the commitment too quickly or without thinking through the seriousness of the vows they’re taking. Like I said, I’m not a big fan of marriage; however, I wholly believe that everyone who wants to try their hand at monogamy, in the form of marriage or civil union, should be allowed the right to do so ... no matter what their sexual orientation.
That said, I think it’s quite obvious by now that I am in complete disagreement with last week’s Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that upheld the ban on gay marriages and civil unions. For some reason, I just don’t see what right the government has in determining who people should marry. I know that I wouldn’t want some matchmaker or – gasp! – my parents, choosing my spouse. So, why then, should the government be able to dictate who each individual can marry?
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I have several close friends who just happen to be homosexual. Or maybe it’s simply because I wholeheartedly believe in the old saying that “all men are created equal.” And, as such, we should be treated equally, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. After all, this is the 21st Century. How are we going to continue to evolve as a species if we don’t allow for things like growth, change and open-mindedness? The vast majority of us no longer use a horse and buggy as a primary mode of transportation, so why is it that people insist upon living in the past when it comes to defining what a marriage should and should not be?
While I’ve heard many people take a religious approach to the subject, arguing that the Bible and dictionary both define marriage to be the sacred union of one man and one woman, there are many faults in those arguments.
First, I find difficulty in calling wedding vows sacred. Divorce has become far too common in this country for me to deem marriage a sacred union. Apparently, in this day and age, marriage just doesn’t hold the same bearing it once did. Just ask Elizabeth Taylor.
Next, there are those who believe that allowing homosexuals to legally marry will only devalue and weaken the institution of marriage ... as if the skyrocketing divorce rate is strengthening it.
Last, but certainly not least, is the definition of what constitutes a marriage. I apologize for not having my Bible handy, but if you look up “marriage” in Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary, you will find this definition: “(1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law; (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage.” How about that? Definitions can be redefined. Hopefully, one day, so will the laws of our great nation, which prides itself on its citizens’ freedoms.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Marriage is work, meaning you have to actually make an effort if you want it to last. That seems to be a fatal error in most marriages. One or both parties doesn’t put forth the extra effort to work out their differences. Instead, they take so-called “easy” way out by filing for divorce. While, over time, people may grow apart and find that their lives just don’t mesh well anymore, oftentimes people just jump into the commitment too quickly or without thinking through the seriousness of the vows they’re taking. Like I said, I’m not a big fan of marriage; however, I wholly believe that everyone who wants to try their hand at monogamy, in the form of marriage or civil union, should be allowed the right to do so ... no matter what their sexual orientation.
That said, I think it’s quite obvious by now that I am in complete disagreement with last week’s Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that upheld the ban on gay marriages and civil unions. For some reason, I just don’t see what right the government has in determining who people should marry. I know that I wouldn’t want some matchmaker or – gasp! – my parents, choosing my spouse. So, why then, should the government be able to dictate who each individual can marry?
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I have several close friends who just happen to be homosexual. Or maybe it’s simply because I wholeheartedly believe in the old saying that “all men are created equal.” And, as such, we should be treated equally, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. After all, this is the 21st Century. How are we going to continue to evolve as a species if we don’t allow for things like growth, change and open-mindedness? The vast majority of us no longer use a horse and buggy as a primary mode of transportation, so why is it that people insist upon living in the past when it comes to defining what a marriage should and should not be?
While I’ve heard many people take a religious approach to the subject, arguing that the Bible and dictionary both define marriage to be the sacred union of one man and one woman, there are many faults in those arguments.
First, I find difficulty in calling wedding vows sacred. Divorce has become far too common in this country for me to deem marriage a sacred union. Apparently, in this day and age, marriage just doesn’t hold the same bearing it once did. Just ask Elizabeth Taylor.
Next, there are those who believe that allowing homosexuals to legally marry will only devalue and weaken the institution of marriage ... as if the skyrocketing divorce rate is strengthening it.
Last, but certainly not least, is the definition of what constitutes a marriage. I apologize for not having my Bible handy, but if you look up “marriage” in Merriam Webster’s Online Dictionary, you will find this definition: “(1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law; (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage.” How about that? Definitions can be redefined. Hopefully, one day, so will the laws of our great nation, which prides itself on its citizens’ freedoms.
Jennie Oemig
Editor
Arcadia News-Leader
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)