Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Concerns
I am concerned that I don't have a strong enough thesis. I also am concerned that my writing is wordy and vague. I wonder if there is another good reason to use to back up my proposal also. I feel like I set the paper up well but I thought that before so I'm not sure if it really is.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
USC policy
A policy USC should make is that students can park in meters on campus for up to two hours but no money involved. They should have a card or a pass of some kind that gives them permission to park there and the meter should only allow up to two hours for that particular student. Right now parking is awful around school and the school could stand to make a huge profit from parents buying their kids this pass or card. This policy will never probably be put in place because the city makes money from those meters and from the tickets that come with them.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Planning essay 4
My four perspectives in my last draft were two groups for legalizing drugs and and two groups for not legalizing drugs. Two groups for were people that wanted them for medical and health increases and the other group was wanted them for sports to be taken to a higher level. Two groups that are against were the parent/child group and the group that didn't want the respect of the game to be tarnished.
I think I want to write a proposal paper. I might propose that performance enhancing drugs be legalized but only as that organization sees it. It should be on the basis that you are an adult so 18 years or older and they should have to be distributed my a medical staff.
I think I have done enough research for this but I might have to add one or two articles talking about how much is too much.
I think I want to write a proposal paper. I might propose that performance enhancing drugs be legalized but only as that organization sees it. It should be on the basis that you are an adult so 18 years or older and they should have to be distributed my a medical staff.
I think I have done enough research for this but I might have to add one or two articles talking about how much is too much.
ICWA
I went through my essay and made sure I didn't share my own bias throughout it. The analysis of the student essay helped to see an idea of what I want my paper to finally look like at the end. It didn't help too much though because it's hard to base my paper off of someone else style of writing. The peer comments helped my confidence in my paper.
The strongest element of my paper are my four different perspectives on my issue. It makes the paper much more interesting to read when there are so many different things to read about I think.
I am concerned that I think I did well writing this paper and am not going to get the results again.
The strongest element of my paper are my four different perspectives on my issue. It makes the paper much more interesting to read when there are so many different things to read about I think.
I am concerned that I think I did well writing this paper and am not going to get the results again.
Chicken in the Henhouse
1)
Sedaris' arguments about sexuality, stereotypes, and intolerance are all focused around society have a typcial perception and that perception being distorted. He uses his experience at a hotel and listening to the radio to enhance his argument on all three. With himself as primary evidence he shows that people have a stereotype on homosexuals like himself. Adults and children's intolerance on the topic of homosexuality are distorted in his eyes and he makes fun of this with humor.
2)
He uses humor to strike back at Audrey when she says talk about the proverbial chicken in the henhouse. She describes homosexuals as being recruiters because they cannot reproduce themselves. He uses humor to mock Audrey by saying nobody recruited him and he begged for it. His sarcastic tone makes the humor that much more affective.
Sedaris' arguments about sexuality, stereotypes, and intolerance are all focused around society have a typcial perception and that perception being distorted. He uses his experience at a hotel and listening to the radio to enhance his argument on all three. With himself as primary evidence he shows that people have a stereotype on homosexuals like himself. Adults and children's intolerance on the topic of homosexuality are distorted in his eyes and he makes fun of this with humor.
2)
He uses humor to strike back at Audrey when she says talk about the proverbial chicken in the henhouse. She describes homosexuals as being recruiters because they cannot reproduce themselves. He uses humor to mock Audrey by saying nobody recruited him and he begged for it. His sarcastic tone makes the humor that much more affective.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Annotated Bibliography
Kayser, Bengt, and Thomas H. Murray. "Should the Use of Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports Be Legalized?" Sports and Drugs - ProCon.org. 15 Dec. 2008. Web. 31 Oct. 2011. <http://sportsanddrugs.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001226>.
This article is a summation of other articles laying out the pros and cons to legalizing performance enhancing drugs in sports. Bengt believes the pros to legalizing drugs in performance enhancing drugs outweigh the cons as long as they are distributed by medical staff accordingly. This would in turn help to encourage a more sensible use of the performance enhancing drugs. While on the other hand the cons in Murray’s eyes far outweigh the pros because they change multiple aspects of the sporting world. He believes they tarnish the respect for the games and cut out people’s natural talent. Both sides of the argument seem to be the more prototypical sounding arguments. This will be useful in showing two perspectives to my argument but finding a third party, new perspective on performance enhancing drugs is my ultimate goal.
Balko, Radley. "Should We Allow Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports?" Reason Magazine. 23 Jan. 2008. Web. 01 Nov. 2011.<http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/23/should-we-allow-performance-en/singlepage>.
Balko takes an interesting perspective on the allowance of performance enhancing drugs in our sports world. He argues that as times change, society needs to go with those times. As medical practices are enhanced Balko believes that sports should go hand in hand and these enhancing drugs are the way to go. A very pertain ate argument in Balko’s article is the numbers behind health issues from these drugs versus just actually playing the sport. For instance, the NFL has been in serious talks with the players union on keeping health after players retire because it has become such a huge issue. I tend to agree with Balko’s argument, that if the times are changing and the athletes want to take these drugs then it should be allowed. This article will help to give a slightly different viewpoint on why these drugs should be legal or allowed to be used in sports for my exploratory essay.
Jost, Kenneth. "Performance Enhancing Drugs: An Overview." Proxy Login – University Libraries – USC.2008. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDe tailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints>.
This article has reasons for anti-doping through many medical stand points. Jost says that anti-doping officials like Norman Fost believe generally healthy people don’t benefit from these performance enhancers. Fost is against anyone under 18 years old using these drugs because it is all the kids that think these drugs will make them look like Arnold Schwarzenegger when in fact the effects of these drugs are widely exaggerated. Fost goes on to say any sport involves health consequences as it is so that shouldn’t be such a huge factor. I agree with the fact that the side effects of all these drugs are widely exaggerated but Jost seems to have a very casual outlook on all the side effects.
Guénette, Jasmin. "The Decision to Use Performance-Enhancing Drugs Should Be Personal." Proxy Login - University Libraries - USC. 18 June 2006. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDe tailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints>.
Guenette takes performance enhancing drugs to a personal level. She believes that performance enhancers are a personal choice and compares them to something like eating a hamburger or choosing to go to the movies. It is your choice and you should not be held accountable by anybody but yourself for it. Using the example of Greg Valentino she shows how this is a one in a million case of steroids going that badly and someone abusing them that badly. She turns choosing to use steroids into a respect factor that no one should have someone make the decisions for them but themselves. I learned that not everyone is against making the choice for themselves. I completely agree with this article because the choice is always yours and shouldn’t be regulated by anyone but a medical staff.
“ENHANCED PLAYERS WOULD GIVE US BETTER GAMES." Proxy Login – University Libraries - USC. St. Petersburg Times, 16 Dec. 2007. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/NewsDetailsPage/NewsDetailsWind ow?displayGroupName=News>.
This is the most interesting article I have found so far. It has a rebel tone because it compares steroids to the things that people “probably” did back in the day like spit balls, corked bats, and cocaine. They say just to legalize performance enhancers so we can have some good baseball again. It ends by saying we use them for injuries so what’s the difference. I agree with some of the points of this article but it goes to an extreme comparing steroid to other miniscule things.
Dickey, Glenn. "Looking for an Edge Is Part of Sports." Proxy Login - University Libraries USC. 16 Feb. 2007. Web. 08 Nov. 2011. <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsD etailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints>.
Dickey makes an interesting claim that government money would be better on more important issues than steroids. He claims that the use of steroids is just athletes trying to find another edge on their opponents. I completely agree that if everyone can just come to terms that athletes are always going to be trying to find alternatives and move on to more important issues. Even for sports fans there are more important issues to attend to. This will be another helpful article to my paper because it brings government spending into the issue.
"What Are Performance Enhancing Drugs?" WiseGEEK: Clear Answers for Common Questions. WiseGeek. Web. 08 Nov. 2011. <http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-performance enhancing-drugs.htm>.
This is a very informational article that I think will help to benefit exploring the straight up facts about performance enhancing drugs scientifically. I’m going to use it to help inform the reader in the beginning about the use of these drugs, good and bad. This is also interesting because it touches on how even musicians have started to use performance enhancing drugs to help distress themselves. This articles position is obviously on enforcing the ban of steroids and other drugs and informs that they are used to help increase a particular skill-set. I don’t agree that they should be completely banned but I enjoyed how informational this article is.
Katz, Jeffrey. "Should We Accept Steroid Use in Sports? : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. 23 Jan. 2008. Web. 08 Nov. 2011. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18299098>.
This article spiked my interest due to one fact. Near the end of Katz’s part of the article he says before the debate 18 percent were for using the drugs and 63 percent were opposed. While after the debate 37 percent were for and only 59 percent were against. I like what Julian Savulescu said during the debate that, “To say that we should reduce drugs in sport or eliminate them because they increase performance, is simply like saying that we should eliminate alcohol from parties because it increases sociability.” This will help to contribute because it has simple comparisons that are quite compelling.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Topic Proposal
The topic of my exploratory paper is on whether performance enhancing drugs should be legalized in sports around the world or not. Athletes both professional and amateur have stepped in to what has been known as the era of performance enhancers. Some say it has tainted our nation’s pastime, baseball and others believe it could be an advance in the medical world for the greater good of sports. It is obvious that there are two viewpoints on this topic, either for or against the use of these drugs. However, the perspectives on why or why not is what I will be diving into. The first group’s perspective on why there should not be performance enhancers is because it tarnishes the respect for the game and cheats god given natural talent. The second group believes athletes should use these drugs for health reasons and to help solidify athlete’s health after their careers are over. The third party that I’m going to dive into believes that athletes should use the drugs because it takes each sport to another level and if these athletes are adults and want to do that to their bodies then they should be allowed. The last position that most parents and adults take on the issue is the fact that seeing superstars take these drugs affects our youth into believing that that is the only way to attain success. This issue has a very significant effect on parents, pro athletes, the medical world, and children around the world. I personally believe that performance enhancing drugs should be legalized as long as they are emitted by a medical staff and in healthy dosages.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
ICR
The problem is that kids and adults alike are abusing performance enhancing drugs all over the world. It is important because it drastically affects one's health and could be a turning point in the sports world if legalized. The people affected are the athletes using these drugs, the doctors or trainers giving the drugs, and anyone surrounding those people using the drugs such as the organization they play for. People might disagree with these performance enhancing drugs being legalized in sports but both sides of the argument are out there.
SWA #20
Kayser, Bengt, and Thomas H. Murray. "Should the Use of Performance Enhancing
Drugs in Sports Be Legalized?" Sports and Drugs - ProCon.org. 15 Dec. 2008. Web. 31 Oct.
2011. <http://sportsanddrugs.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001226>.
This article is a summation of other articles laying out the pros and cons to legalizing performance enhancing drugs in sports. Bengt believes the pros to legalizing drugs in performance enhancing drugs outweigh the cons as long as they are distributed by medical staff accordingly. This would in turn help to encourage a more sensible use of the performance enhancing drugs. While on the other hand the cons in Murray’s eyes far outweigh the pros because they change multiple aspects of the sporting world. He believes they tarnish the respect for the games and cut out people’s natural talent. Both sides of the argument seem to be the more prototypical sounding arguments. This will be useful in showing two perspectives to my argument but finding a third party, new perspective on performance enhancing drugs is my ultimate goal.
Balko, Radley. "Should We Allow Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports?" Reason
Magazine. 23 Jan. 2008. Web. 01 Nov. 2011.
<http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/23/should-we-allow-performance-en/singlepage>.
Balko takes an interesting perspective on the allowance of performance enhancing drugs in our sports world. He argues that as times change, society needs to go with those times. As medical practices are enhanced Balko believes that sports should go hand in hand and these enhancing drugs are the way to go. A very pertain ate argument in Balko’s article is the numbers behind health issues from these drugs versus just actually playing the sport. For instance, the NFL has been in serious talks with the players union on keeping health after players retire because it has become such a huge issue. I tend to agree with Balko’s argument, that if the times are changing and the athletes want to take these drugs then it should be allowed. This article will help to give a slightly different viewpoint on why these drugs should be legal or allowed to be used in sports for my exploratory essay.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
SWA #21
1)
It is very obvious what is being argued right off the bat in this article by The Onion. They are arguing that society never reads anything in a newspaper they only skim and look at pictures because they want to move on with their lives and don't have the time to read all those words. Everyone freaks out when all they can do is read a big article versus just reading a subtitle or looking at a picture. I can tell this is the argument because the quotes in this article from random people convey that they hate having to take the ten minutes out of their day to read and if it was something important, there would be a picture.
2)
This article uses hyperbole to convey the extreme impatience that Americans have when someone puts down a large article to read with only words. For instance, when they say, "endless 500 words" it is an exaggeration because 500 words is not that much writing to read. The best example of hyperbole in this article is when they say, "Sources also reported a 450 percent rise in temple rubbing and under-the-breath cursing around this time." This is extreme exaggeration and shows that society is in that much of an uproar over something as small as reading an article. All of the hyperbole helps to advance The Onion's argument because to a degree it is true and all of the reader's of this article know it. It strengthens the argument because mixed in with the quotes it is just proof such as Landsman saying "Whatever it is, I'm pretty sure it doesn't even have a point."
It is very obvious what is being argued right off the bat in this article by The Onion. They are arguing that society never reads anything in a newspaper they only skim and look at pictures because they want to move on with their lives and don't have the time to read all those words. Everyone freaks out when all they can do is read a big article versus just reading a subtitle or looking at a picture. I can tell this is the argument because the quotes in this article from random people convey that they hate having to take the ten minutes out of their day to read and if it was something important, there would be a picture.
2)
This article uses hyperbole to convey the extreme impatience that Americans have when someone puts down a large article to read with only words. For instance, when they say, "endless 500 words" it is an exaggeration because 500 words is not that much writing to read. The best example of hyperbole in this article is when they say, "Sources also reported a 450 percent rise in temple rubbing and under-the-breath cursing around this time." This is extreme exaggeration and shows that society is in that much of an uproar over something as small as reading an article. All of the hyperbole helps to advance The Onion's argument because to a degree it is true and all of the reader's of this article know it. It strengthens the argument because mixed in with the quotes it is just proof such as Landsman saying "Whatever it is, I'm pretty sure it doesn't even have a point."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)