In keeping with the eco-conscious theme, I'm going to tackle another of my favourite Earth-friendly alternatives: cleaning! (I know, exciting right?) But seriously, one of the best things I have learned in my time playing house is that no cleaner, Earth friendly or not, compares to good old fashioned baking soda and vinegar.
As someone interested in Earth-friendly alternatives to regular products, I had been relying on the Clorox Green Works all-purpose cleaner for several months. From the first time I picked up the bottle I was wary of just how "environmentally-friendly" the stuff actually was. It says right on the back of it "If swallowed, call a Poison Control Centre or Doctor immediately". I mean, my first inclination would be that something that isn't supposed to be harmful to the environment should also not be harmful to humans. But of course, this is silly, as there are many plants that are poisonous to humans, so fair enough. Still, I was a bit disappointed because one of my biggest complaints with cleaning products in general is that, when cleaning a kitchen counter, you are covering a food preparation area with toxins. Doesn't make much sense to me. Also, when you read the info under the "Design for the Environment" logo from the US EPA, it says "Recognized for Safer Chemistry". Safer than what? Bleach? 'Cause that's not saying much.
Anyway, after a little while of using the Green Works stuff, our bathroom sink started to develop a yellowish/brownish film that never could be properly scrubbed away. My theory is the coconut-based cleaning agent was leaving a coconut-based film behind. Plus, mold started to develop on the grout between tiles in the shower. Despite frequent cleanings. Seriously, a week after I'd used the stuff I would start to notice mold again.
After a few months I got pretty fed up with the detrimental effects of using Green Works and I vowed never to buy it again. I was however, disappointed that this might have to mean buying harsher chemical cleaners. Though I try to avoid corrosive chemicals as much as possible, I bought some CLR to try to fix the unacceptable state the Green Works had left my bathroom in. What a mistake that was.
Oddly enough, I noticed the CLR bottle carried the same "Design for the Environment" US EPA logo as Green Works. It also says on the front that it contains no phosphates. While phosphates in and of themselves aren't bad for us, they can be very harmful to lakes and rivers. To learn more about that, check out this website. But there are also a lot of more harmful things that CLR does contain.
Without going into too many details, I will just relate to you my experience with CLR. I was cleaning our tiny bathroom, and I had followed the directions exactly. I was wearing polyurethane gloves, and had the fan turned on. I not only got a little bit of a chemical burn through my gloves, but I got very dizzy and felt like I was going to pass out. It took a good 15 minutes or so of sitting outside on the front porch for this feeling to go away. And I refused to use CLR ever again.
So, in looking for a solution to my problem, I decided to attempt something I'd heard of, but never really thought of actually trying. I grabbed our bottle of white vinegar from the pantry, and the box of baking soda from the cupboard, and I went to town. (Figuratively, not literally. Literally I went to the bathroom). I sprinkled baking soda in the sink, dumped some vinegar on top, and started scrubbing with the sponge. I immediately saw the dirt stick to the chunks of baking soda and come right off the sink. It didn't take much elbow grease at all. Then I went to the grout in the shower. Put a bit of baking soda and vinegar on the sponge, and rubbed the mold away. Then I did the same with some rust spots that had developed on the counter (side note: never buy a soap dish with a metal bottom). The rust spots, especially, were things that I thought would never be removed. Prior to this I had even tried a bleach-based cleaner on them to no avail. But the baking soda and vinegar did the job perfectly.
Honestly I was pretty excited, not to mention amazed. I mean, the problem went from being this elusive, seemingly unsolvable issue, to actually having the simplest solution ever. And the benefits of using vinegar and baking soda abound.
For starters, just like with lawn mowing, the most environmentally friendly option is also the most cost-effective. I mean you can get a one-gallon jug of white vinegar for like, 2 bucks and a store brand box of baking soda for not much more. A bottle of Green Works will run you at least $3.50 (probably more) and you'll only be getting 1/4 of a gallon. And yes, vinegar does kill germs. In fact, there are a number of sources on the internet quoting a Heinz spokesperson as stating that the regular household white vinegar that you find at the grocery store "kills 99 percent of bacteria, 82 percent of mold, and 80 percent of germs". (See here and here for example.)
While you may not like the idea of rubbing something that smells as strong as vinegar all over your house, its smell dissipates relatively quickly, and it actually gets rid of other odours. So once you stop smelling vinegar, you don't smell anything left behind that other products may just mask. And if the smell really bothers you, try adding a couple drops of an essential oil that you like the smell of, just to kind of personalize it.
Seriously, vinegar is an edible, safe on skin, safe to breath, even safe to get in your eyes (though I wouldn't recommend it) alternative to chemical cleaning products. And a bit of baking soda really helps when it comes to tougher areas. To be more efficient, pick up a spray bottle to pour your vinegar in, so that you aren't just dumping loads of it all over the place. And for extra-tough areas, try a bristle brush with the baking soda and vinegar to really scrub away the build-up. Just try it, even once, and you will be impressed.
Thursday 2 June 2011
Friday 13 May 2011
Eco-Lawn Mowing... Yeah, I'm a nerd. What of it?
So I’m shifting focus from politically charged entries to environmentally focused ones for a bit now. It only seems appropriate since my degree is in Environmental Studies and all...
Since graduating, I’ve really tried to look critically at everything I do in my day-to-day life, to determine what can be done in a more Earth-conscious way. Especially now that Bill and I are “homeowners,” I’ve discovered a lot of different approaches for tackling things around the house. And the first thing I’d like to focus on is lawn mowing. (...NOT the euphemism.)
Having done lawn and garden maintenance daily for a summer job, I have often thought about the impact of all that gas people used, just for the sake of keeping up appearances. It especially bothered me when we were doing weekly maintenance on places that were used for maybe two weeks of the entire year. I remember hearing about one girl that was interviewed to work with our company who refused the job because our boss would not use anything but gas-powered mowers. I thought that this was fantastic. Having never used a hand-powered mower before however, and knowing that some of the lawns we were responsible for were quite large, I didn’t think this was a very practical approach to the business we were in, and I liked the work, so I stayed. This was a few years ago now, when gas was cheaper, weed killer was allowed, and global warming was still debated as being a possible “myth”. Besides, there weren’t many people who would take you seriously if you were combating the evils of gas-powered lawn mowers, even just those few years ago.
When we first took over the house, I was actually excited to buy a “reel” lawn mower. I know this sounds dumb, but I’ve always liked mowing the lawn (again, NOT implying a euphemism here!!!!) I think it’s because I’m a little OCD and like to keep things groomed and tidy. (.... Ok, the innuendo just keeps coming to mind now... so let’s just move on...)
As mentioned, I was really looking forward to buying a hand-powered lawn mower, but most people I talked to about it were cynical naysayers. “Have fun pushing that thing around the yard five times” or “Yeah, I’d like to see you try to move one of those things” were the most common reactions. To be honest, I was starting to question my thinking, but I’m stubborn and like to prove people wrong, so I convinced Bill (who only agreed with the condition that I would have to be the one to do all the mowing) that we should buy a reel mower. I am so glad I didn’t listen to all of the negative comments, because I am so happy with our hand powered mower!
It is SOO much easier on my wrists and hands than pushing around a motorized mower, and despite what people think, it’s actually lighter and easier to move. Cost-wise it is absolutely the best investment. It was cheaper to buy than any other type of mower, we don’t need to purchase any fuel, and it doesn’t add to our electric bill like a plug-in mower. The only maintenance fee is sharpening the blades, and you aren’t going to get away from that with any other mower either. Honestly, the only cheaper option is not mowing your lawn. And of course it is more environmentally friendly than burning through gas and oil, or plugging into the questionably sourced electric grid.
I will admit there is at least one major drawback to the reel mower though. No, I do not have to go over the lawn multiple times – it cuts all the grass just fine the first time around. But dandelions? Forget it. You can go over dandelions (and similar weeds) 50 times if you want to, but for some reason they just will not be defeated by a hand powered mower. Sure the weed might get a little hacked up here and there, but you just won’t be able to chop it down nearly as well as with a motorized mower. But don’t let that little issue stop you from choosing to buy a reel mower over a motorized one. With the new laws regarding weed killers, and the push toward eco-conscious lawn maintenance, the best and most effective way to get rid of weeds on your lawn is to actually physically hand-weed them anyway. And there are lots of tools you can buy to make this easier, including those ones that allow you to rip the weed up without even having to bend over. Not that I’m recommending that style, because I hear it leaves a big hole in the ground... but you know, you do have options.
Forget the environmental aspect for a minute. If you’re looking for the lightest, easiest to use, most cost-effective lawn mower, it doesn’t make sense to buy anything but a hand-powered reel mower. If you’re not looking for those things, you should be, because honestly, why make your life any harder than it has to be? Even if you don’t care about the environment at all, there are enough selfish reasons to buy a reel mower that cancel out the eco-conscious aspect, so you don’t have to come across as a tree-hugging hippy.
And now that I’m writing about home maintenance I officially feel like an old lady.
Thursday 14 April 2011
Independent/Alternative Candidates
So I've started volunteering with TV Cogeco in my explorations of the journalism field, and last night I helped cover the Muskoka-Parry Sound candidate debate. It was a lot more interesting than the Huntsville town council meeting I'd helped with in the past to say the least...
All six candidates were present, including a Marxist-Leninist candidate. (Yeah, I had no idea we had a local Marxist-Leninist represenetative here either), and an independent whose main focus is on health care issues. Personally I appreciate the need for discussions, and alternative view points when it comes to politics, so I was happy to see these candidates running and presenting their cases to the general public. But I did hear people questioning why anyone would waste their time and money running, without a hope of winning. Are these people actually crazy enough to believe that they have a chance of winning a seat? Probably not. In fact they're not as crazy as you might think. The sad part, however, is that these people who "have no chance of winning" could arguably make some of the best representatives.
It might sound crazy, when you think about what that person would be able to accomplish as one stand alone voice in the house of commons. But don't you think someone who is so passionate about the state of this country that they would invest their time and money into something they know they have a snowball's chance in hell of winning, would be a passionate representative of the people they are supposed to represent? We're talking about someone who cares so deeply about politics, that they will put their "hard-earned money" where their mouths are, knowing full well that that money is leading only to public discourse. But they realize that discussion is needed, and so they make it their responsibility to bring that discussion to the fore. Now that, to me, shows that they truly care. Unfortunately, the specific issues they are channeling that passion into are perhaps not the types of things most people can get behind.
The Marxist-Leninists chose specifically to run a candidate in this area because of the high profile of our current representative. Check out this article to get a better understanding of their position, and why they're running in Parry Sound-Muskoka. Say what you will about Marxism, but as an ideology I've always found it to be attractive and sensible. Who wouldn't want to live in a state of equality, where all of our needs are met, instead of some people having gold letters on their private jets, while others are starving? Unfortunately, it (like all other ideologies) has never actually been achieved in practice. And the examples of Marxism gone wrong are all too rampant to be ignored. It seems the people of this world are not ready to handle the responsibilities associated with the Marxist ideology, and realistically the people of this country would not adjust well to such a dramatic switch at this point in time. But I do respect and appreciate the fact that they are there to challenge the current state of affairs, and remind people that things have not always been, and will not always be, the way they are now.
The truly independent candidate is a little more difficult to figure out. His issue is so specific, that it is downright confusing. His focus is on health care, but more distinctly, the toxic side effects of prescription drugs. In fact, if you check out his website here you will discover that he actually killed his own son, and it was determined to be a result of severe mental health problems, which were exacerbated by his prescription medication. (I'm pretty sure he failed to mention this at the debate however... unless I was in the washroom at the time). He is probably the most passionate candidate up there, but his case is so specific to his own life struggles that it is somewhat difficult to see why he is running in this position. Again, he knows, I'm sure, that he will not win this election. But he obviously feels so strongly about this one issue - likely as a result of his unimaginable guilt - that he has dedicated himself to bringing attention to it in the best way he could come up with. It's a difficult situation to wrap your head around in some ways. The pharmaceutical industry has such a stranglehold in this country, and most doctors don't care enough to even attempt to avoid doling out prescription drugs (in my experience - though luckily my own doctor is an exception to this). But to attempt to make an election about such a specific cause is perhaps not the best way to achieve change. Then again, it could be effective at getting people talking about the issue in greater detail... but not if the candidate himself avoids bringing it up at public forums like last night's debate! (I hope he didn't mention it while I was in the bathroom or I will be making myself look really stupid right now, but I really don't think he did). Plus, I think he would find the Green Party to be in line with the issue he is championing here, but perhaps he didn't feel that was good enough, or that it was getting the attention it needed. I do think the side effects of prescription drugs should be a serious concern in this country, and the world today. Whether or not he is going about his fight in the right way is a matter of opinion, but at least he is doing something. And that is what this country needs more of.
Too many people are content to just complain about life, accept it, and move on. We need the passionate, independent people to continue stepping up so that we don't become so complacent with the state of things that laws being broken by government in parliament that "the Canadian people don't care about" don't become laws being broken in the rest of the country, or world, that the Canadian people don't care about. Seriously, the apathy and acceptance in this country (which I blame partially on everyone having Seasonal Affective Disorder) can be downright scary, and consuming all at the same time. But that's another topic in itself.
Addendum: I left out the obvious point that perhaps electing someone who murdered someone else - whether he was acquitted or not - might not be a wise thing to do. I mean, what's to say he's completely stable now, or forever will be? But, I figured the argument for not electing a murderer was obvious enough on its own that it need not be mentioned.
All six candidates were present, including a Marxist-Leninist candidate. (Yeah, I had no idea we had a local Marxist-Leninist represenetative here either), and an independent whose main focus is on health care issues. Personally I appreciate the need for discussions, and alternative view points when it comes to politics, so I was happy to see these candidates running and presenting their cases to the general public. But I did hear people questioning why anyone would waste their time and money running, without a hope of winning. Are these people actually crazy enough to believe that they have a chance of winning a seat? Probably not. In fact they're not as crazy as you might think. The sad part, however, is that these people who "have no chance of winning" could arguably make some of the best representatives.
It might sound crazy, when you think about what that person would be able to accomplish as one stand alone voice in the house of commons. But don't you think someone who is so passionate about the state of this country that they would invest their time and money into something they know they have a snowball's chance in hell of winning, would be a passionate representative of the people they are supposed to represent? We're talking about someone who cares so deeply about politics, that they will put their "hard-earned money" where their mouths are, knowing full well that that money is leading only to public discourse. But they realize that discussion is needed, and so they make it their responsibility to bring that discussion to the fore. Now that, to me, shows that they truly care. Unfortunately, the specific issues they are channeling that passion into are perhaps not the types of things most people can get behind.
The Marxist-Leninists chose specifically to run a candidate in this area because of the high profile of our current representative. Check out this article to get a better understanding of their position, and why they're running in Parry Sound-Muskoka. Say what you will about Marxism, but as an ideology I've always found it to be attractive and sensible. Who wouldn't want to live in a state of equality, where all of our needs are met, instead of some people having gold letters on their private jets, while others are starving? Unfortunately, it (like all other ideologies) has never actually been achieved in practice. And the examples of Marxism gone wrong are all too rampant to be ignored. It seems the people of this world are not ready to handle the responsibilities associated with the Marxist ideology, and realistically the people of this country would not adjust well to such a dramatic switch at this point in time. But I do respect and appreciate the fact that they are there to challenge the current state of affairs, and remind people that things have not always been, and will not always be, the way they are now.
The truly independent candidate is a little more difficult to figure out. His issue is so specific, that it is downright confusing. His focus is on health care, but more distinctly, the toxic side effects of prescription drugs. In fact, if you check out his website here you will discover that he actually killed his own son, and it was determined to be a result of severe mental health problems, which were exacerbated by his prescription medication. (I'm pretty sure he failed to mention this at the debate however... unless I was in the washroom at the time). He is probably the most passionate candidate up there, but his case is so specific to his own life struggles that it is somewhat difficult to see why he is running in this position. Again, he knows, I'm sure, that he will not win this election. But he obviously feels so strongly about this one issue - likely as a result of his unimaginable guilt - that he has dedicated himself to bringing attention to it in the best way he could come up with. It's a difficult situation to wrap your head around in some ways. The pharmaceutical industry has such a stranglehold in this country, and most doctors don't care enough to even attempt to avoid doling out prescription drugs (in my experience - though luckily my own doctor is an exception to this). But to attempt to make an election about such a specific cause is perhaps not the best way to achieve change. Then again, it could be effective at getting people talking about the issue in greater detail... but not if the candidate himself avoids bringing it up at public forums like last night's debate! (I hope he didn't mention it while I was in the bathroom or I will be making myself look really stupid right now, but I really don't think he did). Plus, I think he would find the Green Party to be in line with the issue he is championing here, but perhaps he didn't feel that was good enough, or that it was getting the attention it needed. I do think the side effects of prescription drugs should be a serious concern in this country, and the world today. Whether or not he is going about his fight in the right way is a matter of opinion, but at least he is doing something. And that is what this country needs more of.
Too many people are content to just complain about life, accept it, and move on. We need the passionate, independent people to continue stepping up so that we don't become so complacent with the state of things that laws being broken by government in parliament that "the Canadian people don't care about" don't become laws being broken in the rest of the country, or world, that the Canadian people don't care about. Seriously, the apathy and acceptance in this country (which I blame partially on everyone having Seasonal Affective Disorder) can be downright scary, and consuming all at the same time. But that's another topic in itself.
Addendum: I left out the obvious point that perhaps electing someone who murdered someone else - whether he was acquitted or not - might not be a wise thing to do. I mean, what's to say he's completely stable now, or forever will be? But, I figured the argument for not electing a murderer was obvious enough on its own that it need not be mentioned.
Monday 11 April 2011
Join the Protest...or Don't.
Something that has bothered me, ever since I was a teenager, was the state of protests in this country. I was VERY political in high school, and under the influence of some very socialist/anarchic music, so, like many others, the prospect of joining the ranks of those who inspired me through protest was exciting. Yet from my very first march, I started questioning what the hell we were all doing.
Aside from the fact that most big "political protests" in this country accomplish nothing, the argument of showing solidarity through "protest" is not a good one. Now, don't get me wrong; I think showing solidarity with different people from around the world is important. I just don't believe that the current state of protests in this country do a good job of accomplishing this.
Having just begun my second year of high school in September of 2001, my first protest (and many subsequent) was, of course, related to the war in Afghanistan. It was exciting, and it probably gave me my first sense of being a global citizen. Now, if I remember correctly this was one of those nation-wide organized protests which took place in communities all across the country.This was a great introduction to the protest movement for someone such as myself, because it showed country-wide solidarity, and drove home a message to the world that the people of Canada did not uniformly agree with what it's government was doing. Did it bring home the troops? No. But it was still somewhat effective at conveying a message. Having said that, this was the only time that I have felt any march I've participated in was worth the effort.
Having since participated in a few "protest" rallies and marches, I'm afraid I have lost faith in this country's protests. The sensationalized aspects of the Seattle protests of 1999 seem to influence a lot of people to come out, just because it's "cool" and makes people pay attention to you. But for what? During a provincial, high-school student led walk-out, I had the embarrassing displeasure of standing next to someone the principal decided to question. He wanted to know what it was we were all leaving class for. A fair question that, if answered appropriately would have garnered a lot of respect from him I'm sure. Unfortunately, the bumbling idiot he chose to ask rambled about nonsense. So I spoke up, and began discussing with him the issues that I, myself was concerned about - only to be interrupted and spoken over by the dumbass beside me, who I guess hadn't made herself out to be enough of an idiot just yet. If someone is that determined to make an ass of themselves I will let them, so I just stood there shaking my head. Later, moving to Toronto for University, and attending York, which is known to be a little more of a "leftist" school, I had the opportunity to participate in a great number of rallies and events. And with each one, I became more and more disheartened by the idiotic antics of those who only came out for the sake of satisfying their Freudian destructive instinct. Stirring the pot just because it looks cool and makes you feel important, takes away from any message those who are actually concerned are trying to send. Much like the protests in Seattle, if you give the media something sensational to focus on, like violence and their miss-interpretations of anarchy, they aren't going to spend time talking to the "boring", non-violent people with the real messages. Causing a violent scene just because your country gives you the freedom to do so, does nothing for your cause, and only confuses people. You just look like a crazy person who lacks the ability to reason.
Now, with the recent political uprisings in Egypt, Libya, etc. etc. we see the place for those violent acts of defiance. When people have to risk their lives to have their voices heard, violent protests are called for, and have my full respect. When you have to kill or be killed, and when you are so oppressed by your government that any rational approach to political dissent is met with violence, then your retaliatory violence is valid, and sends a clear message. When the day comes that people in this country are shot at and beaten solely for declaring their dissatisfaction with the government, I will get my ass down to Toronto or Ottawa and fight back. But while irrational sensationalists are running around ruining the chances of sending a clear message in this country, I will not participate in a political-based march. That being said, there are still protest lines and rallies that are important, make sense, and send clear messages in this country. Labour disputes, as an example, are important times and places for protest marches. The recent "Slut Walk" in Toronto sent a clear message too (although I'm sure it likely attracted some attention seeking "I protest because it's cool" types as well).
My point is, if you aren't angry, if you don't know why people are protesting, and if you can't articulate what it is you're trying to accomplish, do everyone a favour and avoid the rally. There may be strength in numbers, but if you're watering down a real message you're hurting more than you're helping. If you're just looking for attention, or to destroy something, try finding a more productive outlet. Hell, go to the Middle East and join forces with the people who are dying for their causes. Because when you start destroying small businesses here, and terrifying the members of the population who have no idea what's going on, or why you're so angry, you are not going to gain anything but enemies.
Don't try to pigeon-hole my statements here.
Aside from the fact that most big "political protests" in this country accomplish nothing, the argument of showing solidarity through "protest" is not a good one. Now, don't get me wrong; I think showing solidarity with different people from around the world is important. I just don't believe that the current state of protests in this country do a good job of accomplishing this.
Having just begun my second year of high school in September of 2001, my first protest (and many subsequent) was, of course, related to the war in Afghanistan. It was exciting, and it probably gave me my first sense of being a global citizen. Now, if I remember correctly this was one of those nation-wide organized protests which took place in communities all across the country.This was a great introduction to the protest movement for someone such as myself, because it showed country-wide solidarity, and drove home a message to the world that the people of Canada did not uniformly agree with what it's government was doing. Did it bring home the troops? No. But it was still somewhat effective at conveying a message. Having said that, this was the only time that I have felt any march I've participated in was worth the effort.
Having since participated in a few "protest" rallies and marches, I'm afraid I have lost faith in this country's protests. The sensationalized aspects of the Seattle protests of 1999 seem to influence a lot of people to come out, just because it's "cool" and makes people pay attention to you. But for what? During a provincial, high-school student led walk-out, I had the embarrassing displeasure of standing next to someone the principal decided to question. He wanted to know what it was we were all leaving class for. A fair question that, if answered appropriately would have garnered a lot of respect from him I'm sure. Unfortunately, the bumbling idiot he chose to ask rambled about nonsense. So I spoke up, and began discussing with him the issues that I, myself was concerned about - only to be interrupted and spoken over by the dumbass beside me, who I guess hadn't made herself out to be enough of an idiot just yet. If someone is that determined to make an ass of themselves I will let them, so I just stood there shaking my head. Later, moving to Toronto for University, and attending York, which is known to be a little more of a "leftist" school, I had the opportunity to participate in a great number of rallies and events. And with each one, I became more and more disheartened by the idiotic antics of those who only came out for the sake of satisfying their Freudian destructive instinct. Stirring the pot just because it looks cool and makes you feel important, takes away from any message those who are actually concerned are trying to send. Much like the protests in Seattle, if you give the media something sensational to focus on, like violence and their miss-interpretations of anarchy, they aren't going to spend time talking to the "boring", non-violent people with the real messages. Causing a violent scene just because your country gives you the freedom to do so, does nothing for your cause, and only confuses people. You just look like a crazy person who lacks the ability to reason.
Now, with the recent political uprisings in Egypt, Libya, etc. etc. we see the place for those violent acts of defiance. When people have to risk their lives to have their voices heard, violent protests are called for, and have my full respect. When you have to kill or be killed, and when you are so oppressed by your government that any rational approach to political dissent is met with violence, then your retaliatory violence is valid, and sends a clear message. When the day comes that people in this country are shot at and beaten solely for declaring their dissatisfaction with the government, I will get my ass down to Toronto or Ottawa and fight back. But while irrational sensationalists are running around ruining the chances of sending a clear message in this country, I will not participate in a political-based march. That being said, there are still protest lines and rallies that are important, make sense, and send clear messages in this country. Labour disputes, as an example, are important times and places for protest marches. The recent "Slut Walk" in Toronto sent a clear message too (although I'm sure it likely attracted some attention seeking "I protest because it's cool" types as well).
My point is, if you aren't angry, if you don't know why people are protesting, and if you can't articulate what it is you're trying to accomplish, do everyone a favour and avoid the rally. There may be strength in numbers, but if you're watering down a real message you're hurting more than you're helping. If you're just looking for attention, or to destroy something, try finding a more productive outlet. Hell, go to the Middle East and join forces with the people who are dying for their causes. Because when you start destroying small businesses here, and terrifying the members of the population who have no idea what's going on, or why you're so angry, you are not going to gain anything but enemies.
Don't try to pigeon-hole my statements here.
Friday 8 April 2011
I stopped sharing my views on politics and other things a few years ago for a few different reasons. First and foremost, I was tired. I was tired of only being half-listened to, and half-heard, and having people focus on one minute thing I said instead of the message I was trying to convey. I was tired of taking on the world with views that can't be pigeon-holed, yet made people label me one thing or another, which I am not. And I was tired of having people think they were on the same page as me, only to find that I did not agree with everything they agreed with. I was tired of trying to have a serious conversation about issues with people who would only regurgitate something they'd read, and taken on as their own, without fully considering every aspect of it. So, after graduating from university, I stopped having conversations about these types of issues. If all I was going to get out of my fellow graduates was something they'd read in a book required by their courses, why would I want to hear it from them instead of reading the book myself?
Now, as I am considering pursuing journalism as a career path, I've been told multiple times to "start a blog". So when I started thinking about what it was I would blog about exactly, it didn't take long for me to come up with a concept. What better place to share my opinion, in full, without interruption? Here I can lay out my entire argument without going off topic. And if someone doesn't like what I have to say, it isn't being shoved in their face - they can just stop reading it. So, what follows will be my best attempt at articulating the different perspective I have on the issues I've taken the most time to consider.
Also, I like debates, so if you feel you have a valid argument to something I've said, I'd love to hear it. It's how we all learn, and grow.
Now, as I am considering pursuing journalism as a career path, I've been told multiple times to "start a blog". So when I started thinking about what it was I would blog about exactly, it didn't take long for me to come up with a concept. What better place to share my opinion, in full, without interruption? Here I can lay out my entire argument without going off topic. And if someone doesn't like what I have to say, it isn't being shoved in their face - they can just stop reading it. So, what follows will be my best attempt at articulating the different perspective I have on the issues I've taken the most time to consider.
Also, I like debates, so if you feel you have a valid argument to something I've said, I'd love to hear it. It's how we all learn, and grow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)