Reaction and inspired by the article of Don Ferguson.
Our manners and etiquette weigh deeply on our reputation. A price popular people pay for the simplest mistake they do caught by the media. Unfortunately, our society is not so forgiving. A lapse in these manners are ridiculed and laughed at, worse it can be spread all over the internet.
A fact about having good manners, is you hardly get noticed when you follow suit, then you are put in a spotlight when you misbehave. Someone from the older generation will probably give you an earful and tell you that during their time such attitudes are unacceptable.
Just like most, I also don’t have a high positive record on manners and conduct. I am not as dainty as women are known to be. However, I try to behave as much as I could.
I have to be true to say that proper behavior does count and it is worth practicing. Certain acts are really not pleasant to the eye, and modest etiquette does give you class. There are places where such decorum is a must, and we have to respect that practice.
Ferguson may give examples of gum chewing but it is still a courthouse. It is not a fancy mall or a disco or a movie-house where less manners are tolerated. It is a place where people’s respect and sensitivity is very much counted because a person’s right is at stake. Clearly, it is not a place where to chew gum.
For someone who has worked in a courthouse, people chewing gum in court should be an insult for you. It should be a place you give high regard to and it would be reasonable to comment on people who disrespect it by chewing gum. Be courageous to say that they need to learn proper etiquette because such practices are done in a courthouse.
But to have a sign at the door would truly be disturbing for the community, because the rule of “no gum chewing in the courthouse” should be naturally given.
A loner's culture
Inspired by the article of Saritha Prabhu.
I am a solitary being from a social country.
In my Asian land (Philippines), especially if you stay in the metropolis, majority of the people you know have close family and friends. You see them around malls, movie-houses, commercial eating spots, and most of all- night life hang-out areas. Cafes like Starbucks becomes a pal hub, filled with caffeine chat-mates sharing stories.
The consequences of my size and history made me adapt to the life of being alone. From fate, it became a choice. Then eventually I discovered the joys of just being by myself. Examples like watching a favorite movie on a couch, or dipping on a tub, marathoning a series, reading in a quiet space, etc… There will always be a part of me who will enjoy these kinds of freedom.
Though too much of something is also not healthy. I admit I also get lonely. That is how I realized how true the saying is that “man is a social being” and “no one is an island.” From time to time I also would like to talk to people and know what is happening. Thus, a balance is needed.
Saritha’s article focused on the pros and cons of culture, and I completely understand what she meant. It would be hard for a born and raised American citizen to see how different it is for us foreigners in their land. But knowing how one culture varies from another keeps us grounded. We do not forget our roots, it is part of who we are, and we value them.
For me, the individualist culture of America is a positive blend with my solitary nature and social yearnings. Then with their social structure, I also remain collective, strongly bonded to my family. Through this way, there is balance.
I am a solitary being from a social country.
In my Asian land (Philippines), especially if you stay in the metropolis, majority of the people you know have close family and friends. You see them around malls, movie-houses, commercial eating spots, and most of all- night life hang-out areas. Cafes like Starbucks becomes a pal hub, filled with caffeine chat-mates sharing stories.
The consequences of my size and history made me adapt to the life of being alone. From fate, it became a choice. Then eventually I discovered the joys of just being by myself. Examples like watching a favorite movie on a couch, or dipping on a tub, marathoning a series, reading in a quiet space, etc… There will always be a part of me who will enjoy these kinds of freedom.
Though too much of something is also not healthy. I admit I also get lonely. That is how I realized how true the saying is that “man is a social being” and “no one is an island.” From time to time I also would like to talk to people and know what is happening. Thus, a balance is needed.
Saritha’s article focused on the pros and cons of culture, and I completely understand what she meant. It would be hard for a born and raised American citizen to see how different it is for us foreigners in their land. But knowing how one culture varies from another keeps us grounded. We do not forget our roots, it is part of who we are, and we value them.
For me, the individualist culture of America is a positive blend with my solitary nature and social yearnings. Then with their social structure, I also remain collective, strongly bonded to my family. Through this way, there is balance.
A murky system
Image Source: http://media.buffalonews.com/smedia/2009/08/11/16/568-0812adamz.standalone.prod_affiliate.50.jpg
Reaction and inspired by the article of Margaret Sullivan.
One of the mediums I rely on in balancing truths is the media. Even if oftentimes they take advantage of their power, their competition keeps them grounded. What I’m saying is we are not stuck in one resource alone. There are various forms of media that can help us decide and study on what is really happening. Fortunately, many people are obsessed in knowing what is happening to the system. Their analysis guides us in finding the real facts.
Thus, they become voices when something wrong is going on. In this case, public records are not easily given and it is a human right. Many dishonest people that are into power deprive us from this freedom to know. It is very clear and simple, they make it so consuming and laborious. So it is logical to doubt and suspect because the people we are suppose to rely on are not transparent.
The important part is, it was noticed at the exact time it was not given, at the very moment the privilege was disrespected. It shows the truth and cannot be labeled as propaganda or gossip. Then it will be remembered come election time when the power shifts to us to put the right person in place.
Ok, so what’s my point? We should be aware when someone in our system deprives us of this kind of right and claim justice at the exact time it is done. It is our responsibility as part of a society. Then let us not forget what this person did when it is our turn to choose who to put in power. I stated the article because it was a good example.
Margaret did the proper thing in fighting for justice. We are entitled to the truth.
One of the mediums I rely on in balancing truths is the media. Even if oftentimes they take advantage of their power, their competition keeps them grounded. What I’m saying is we are not stuck in one resource alone. There are various forms of media that can help us decide and study on what is really happening. Fortunately, many people are obsessed in knowing what is happening to the system. Their analysis guides us in finding the real facts.
Thus, they become voices when something wrong is going on. In this case, public records are not easily given and it is a human right. Many dishonest people that are into power deprive us from this freedom to know. It is very clear and simple, they make it so consuming and laborious. So it is logical to doubt and suspect because the people we are suppose to rely on are not transparent.
The important part is, it was noticed at the exact time it was not given, at the very moment the privilege was disrespected. It shows the truth and cannot be labeled as propaganda or gossip. Then it will be remembered come election time when the power shifts to us to put the right person in place.
Ok, so what’s my point? We should be aware when someone in our system deprives us of this kind of right and claim justice at the exact time it is done. It is our responsibility as part of a society. Then let us not forget what this person did when it is our turn to choose who to put in power. I stated the article because it was a good example.
Margaret did the proper thing in fighting for justice. We are entitled to the truth.
Baby For Sale...tsk tsk!
Reaction and inspired by WayOdd News.
Baby selling is not new news. Various odd things have happened (and still happening) in our world that impressing someone is not easy anymore. It is actually a threat kids hear (and I heard when I was young too) to behave. Of course nannies say it with jest but quite an effective strategy for children to do good.
I am neither a mother nor a nanny. This is so because I’m aware of the huge and serious responsibilities of the role. It also means I know how terribly depraving it could be to put a price on a breathing baby. Buying one’s dignity is corrupt as it is, all the more the situation of purchasing a life.
For the sake of argument, let us see the positives. It is better than abortion, and whoever buys could be serious in raising a child. But that does that make it acceptable? Does that make it okay? Does that make selling the child forgivable? I see it as a lesser evil but it is still wrong.
I do not want to sound too righteous because it’s truly different when you hold the crying infant and you have nothing to feed. On that moment, anything becomes reasonable and you would not give a damn about morals. However, we still need to say and remind the right values on what lead the person to be in a dire situation. We have to admit that along the way, wrong choices were made. It may be consequential to carry a hungry baby but before you reached that state you had the power to choose. Thus, for us to remind people what is moral makes sense.
It is commendable for Joel to let the media be aware of the sale. Balancing it by concealing where offer took place. I did not expect it to come from a hip young popular band guy from Hollywood. His move gave me an idea how mature he is as a family man even if he lives and is surrounded by a carefree modern world.
In the end we still stand firm to say selling babies is wrong.
Baby selling is not new news. Various odd things have happened (and still happening) in our world that impressing someone is not easy anymore. It is actually a threat kids hear (and I heard when I was young too) to behave. Of course nannies say it with jest but quite an effective strategy for children to do good.
I am neither a mother nor a nanny. This is so because I’m aware of the huge and serious responsibilities of the role. It also means I know how terribly depraving it could be to put a price on a breathing baby. Buying one’s dignity is corrupt as it is, all the more the situation of purchasing a life.
For the sake of argument, let us see the positives. It is better than abortion, and whoever buys could be serious in raising a child. But that does that make it acceptable? Does that make it okay? Does that make selling the child forgivable? I see it as a lesser evil but it is still wrong.
I do not want to sound too righteous because it’s truly different when you hold the crying infant and you have nothing to feed. On that moment, anything becomes reasonable and you would not give a damn about morals. However, we still need to say and remind the right values on what lead the person to be in a dire situation. We have to admit that along the way, wrong choices were made. It may be consequential to carry a hungry baby but before you reached that state you had the power to choose. Thus, for us to remind people what is moral makes sense.
It is commendable for Joel to let the media be aware of the sale. Balancing it by concealing where offer took place. I did not expect it to come from a hip young popular band guy from Hollywood. His move gave me an idea how mature he is as a family man even if he lives and is surrounded by a carefree modern world.
In the end we still stand firm to say selling babies is wrong.
These days...
For days and days I’ve been surfing the net jumping from page after page searching for something to write about. I was embracing the vast and wide space of information superhighway, finding inspiration to react on certain things. Anyway, not much have caught my attention long enough for me to expound further. So, instead of reacting to someone’s article this time, I’ll just tell you the results of my online journey.
The first set of writers I explored on were the opinion columnists of online newspapers. I became curious on their positions on current events, and from the news what catches their attention. Obviously, majority leaned on politics which is a topic I try to avoid. Then as my clicks and reads went on, as you will see from the previous blog entries, most became really serious. My writings need the light side too. Thus I decided to stop surfing opinions columns for a while and surf and search for another resource of information.
Other blogs are also fun to read. There are those though, whose entries remain puzzling especially if the topic is too personal. Of course! We are just visitors, so how can we know. It would help if what they talk about is something we relate too.
I must remember the reason for my blog – it’s not just a diary but a training ground for online earning possibilities. It is my writing exercise. So now what? I still want to keep on searching, and reading, and reacting and writing. I can do this! Hehehe!
In the meantime… yippee! I have a blog entry.
The first set of writers I explored on were the opinion columnists of online newspapers. I became curious on their positions on current events, and from the news what catches their attention. Obviously, majority leaned on politics which is a topic I try to avoid. Then as my clicks and reads went on, as you will see from the previous blog entries, most became really serious. My writings need the light side too. Thus I decided to stop surfing opinions columns for a while and surf and search for another resource of information.
Other blogs are also fun to read. There are those though, whose entries remain puzzling especially if the topic is too personal. Of course! We are just visitors, so how can we know. It would help if what they talk about is something we relate too.
I must remember the reason for my blog – it’s not just a diary but a training ground for online earning possibilities. It is my writing exercise. So now what? I still want to keep on searching, and reading, and reacting and writing. I can do this! Hehehe!
In the meantime… yippee! I have a blog entry.
Read, watch, and listen responsibly
Reaction and inspired by the article of Paul Murray.
The people in the media strongly influence us in life. May it be written, said and shown from paper to internet to radio to tv, we cannot deny how it has endlessly tested our beliefs and our morals.
The sad truth about people earning from our sorrows and shame is not new. It is a brutal reality we accept and even guilty of at times. A person’s crucial fault or embarrassment is entertainment for us. But when it is us who get to the hot seat, we conceal our darkest shades at most we can.
There is a difference though when the media professional take responsibility in being sensitive to his/her work. When there is a balance in respect between the featured person and the watching or listening or reading public. Humiliation should never be an option. You must, as a public relations worker, know what is right and wrong, what is hurtful and what is not. It should also not be done for reputation, but for personal dignity.
Paul was right in writing as a protest on how two adults publicly handled the case of the young teen. It would have been water under the bridge if the talk show were not hitting high ratings. When it is something that makes the majority listen, then rules should truly be followed and not the money. It is not a change-the-station solution because as he said the program goes on.
It would be utterly frustrating if the public continued to patronize the program simply because it was hot news. If that happens, then Paul was right, we truly have lost our moral compass. Just when media people can be strictly scrutinized by the people who value the dignity of man especially the young.
This also serves as a lesson for us at the receiving end. These are the giants who earn from our attention so we have the power to show them what is acceptable to us and what is not, that we will not allow such wrong-doings to happen. We already know that not all that we see, hear, or read our correct.
Let us be responsible on what media injects in us.
The people in the media strongly influence us in life. May it be written, said and shown from paper to internet to radio to tv, we cannot deny how it has endlessly tested our beliefs and our morals.
The sad truth about people earning from our sorrows and shame is not new. It is a brutal reality we accept and even guilty of at times. A person’s crucial fault or embarrassment is entertainment for us. But when it is us who get to the hot seat, we conceal our darkest shades at most we can.
There is a difference though when the media professional take responsibility in being sensitive to his/her work. When there is a balance in respect between the featured person and the watching or listening or reading public. Humiliation should never be an option. You must, as a public relations worker, know what is right and wrong, what is hurtful and what is not. It should also not be done for reputation, but for personal dignity.
Paul was right in writing as a protest on how two adults publicly handled the case of the young teen. It would have been water under the bridge if the talk show were not hitting high ratings. When it is something that makes the majority listen, then rules should truly be followed and not the money. It is not a change-the-station solution because as he said the program goes on.
It would be utterly frustrating if the public continued to patronize the program simply because it was hot news. If that happens, then Paul was right, we truly have lost our moral compass. Just when media people can be strictly scrutinized by the people who value the dignity of man especially the young.
This also serves as a lesson for us at the receiving end. These are the giants who earn from our attention so we have the power to show them what is acceptable to us and what is not, that we will not allow such wrong-doings to happen. We already know that not all that we see, hear, or read our correct.
Let us be responsible on what media injects in us.
Written daggers
Reaction and inspired by the article of Diane Williamson.
Insult, no matter how it is delivered, it is still a severe blow to anyone’s character. It is seriously important to be tactful on any comment or discussion for it not only stakes your dignity, it also affects the society.
I am a victim of unpleasant social preference. My huge size is not favorable to the majority. I receive harmful feedbacks, reactions, gossips and comments and they oftentimes gravely disturbed me. If only for the name of justice they could get a strike of their own attack. Nonetheless, I learn to guard my words because I know how hurtful they can be.
Free speech? Sure! If a certain someone’s existence, attitude, words, reactions alone aggravates every nerve of your system, you can vent it out on someone you trust. You can lay your litany of complaints and irks as long as it is not seen by those who may not understand you. There are really those kinds of people. I also air out my rants and ramblings to the ones I can confide in when the “pricks” are around. That is controlled free speech.
The line crosses the moment the expression gets direct without just cause. They may be there and they may irritate me, but I cannot hit (not physically) them because they did not do anything to intentionally harm me personally. The same way, it’s different when the person strikes you directly with insults or degrading responses. That is when free speech gets wrong.
In the case of Diane’s article, it is clear for a cause for punishment because the comment came from sworn public servant. The moment you promise the law to be given the right to correct society, you also promise to be a role model. That is a respect you earn. That’s the difference between the actors and politicians. Actors entertain us as their job, they do not have responsibility towards us. Politicians do because they took an oath to serve our society. They have social responsibilities.
Whether you are an officer or not, even if you are just a simple citizen, you are adult enough to know that to speak negative about others is wrong. They do not only cause injury to their feelings, they terribly destroy lives.
Insult, no matter how it is delivered, it is still a severe blow to anyone’s character. It is seriously important to be tactful on any comment or discussion for it not only stakes your dignity, it also affects the society.
I am a victim of unpleasant social preference. My huge size is not favorable to the majority. I receive harmful feedbacks, reactions, gossips and comments and they oftentimes gravely disturbed me. If only for the name of justice they could get a strike of their own attack. Nonetheless, I learn to guard my words because I know how hurtful they can be.
Free speech? Sure! If a certain someone’s existence, attitude, words, reactions alone aggravates every nerve of your system, you can vent it out on someone you trust. You can lay your litany of complaints and irks as long as it is not seen by those who may not understand you. There are really those kinds of people. I also air out my rants and ramblings to the ones I can confide in when the “pricks” are around. That is controlled free speech.
The line crosses the moment the expression gets direct without just cause. They may be there and they may irritate me, but I cannot hit (not physically) them because they did not do anything to intentionally harm me personally. The same way, it’s different when the person strikes you directly with insults or degrading responses. That is when free speech gets wrong.
In the case of Diane’s article, it is clear for a cause for punishment because the comment came from sworn public servant. The moment you promise the law to be given the right to correct society, you also promise to be a role model. That is a respect you earn. That’s the difference between the actors and politicians. Actors entertain us as their job, they do not have responsibility towards us. Politicians do because they took an oath to serve our society. They have social responsibilities.
Whether you are an officer or not, even if you are just a simple citizen, you are adult enough to know that to speak negative about others is wrong. They do not only cause injury to their feelings, they terribly destroy lives.