This is your captain speaking...

Dr. Wade Horn's analogy comparing married, straight couples to airplanes that almost always reach their destination helps to illustrate his point that straight couples are the most effective style of parenting teams. He groups all other types of couples into a category that is "significantly less successful." This is in and of itself incorrect, because it is not right to group injured jets with fully-functional turbo-prop airplanes. By this, I mean that you cannot group divorced/separated straight couples with perfectly healthy gay couples. In doing this, he is essentially saying that gay couples cannot work. As history has shown, they obviously can work, and in a good number of cases work out better than straight couples. In short, the problem with Dr. Horn's argument is that he bases the "correlation" of the outcome of children on the composition of the parents, rather than the condition of the relationship between the parents. I would find it excruciatingly hard to believe that a constantly fighting straight couple would produce a happier child than that of a typically happy gay couple.

Vestis Virim Facet (Latin: "Clothes Make the Man")

You know, i have to think that the Romans were on to something. The image one proliferates is crucial in first impressions. This can be such a positive thing: such as in an interview where a well-dressed individual automatically gives the impression that they take the working world seriously and would therefore be the right person for the job. However, the darker side of this quirk of society manifests itself in the worst ways imaginable. Because people are so quick to judge others based entirely on stereotypes, they, in this case, caused potentially lethal harm to people that were only presumed to be a certain way. This shows the true darkness of the widespread belief in stereotypes and how we must try to lessen the hatred that exists towards certain groups that don't "fit the norm."

Male

Don't hurt your brother; you're skating on thin ice; quit crying; those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones; if you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all; you can pick any color as long as it's not pink; Oh, suck it up!; What are you a boy-kisser?!?


Fragments of my early life.
Let me say that I'm glad I chose pink.

Sissy

According to Mansfield, there are the two separate entities to men, that society has demanded remain separate. There is the side that is your stereotypical man; chivalrous yet unemotional. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is your "Nancy boy." Your "Pansy," your "sissy". Of course, I speak of the men who are more in touch with their emotions. Because of the strict guidelines that society at large has placed upon the realms of "manliness," the type of men who show their emotions are typically shunned and derided because of their "unmanly" ways. It's tragic to think that the two sides cannot find some sort of even ground in the eye of the common man. It's sad to think that the man is reduced to an unfeeling beast of a being, while women are afforded an equally dehumanizing label of character.

The "Last" "American" Man

Gilbert believes that Eustice is the last American man because he is the embodiment of a lifestyle that was once common; that defined what America was per se. Eustice is your classic example frontiersman who is almost entirely self-sufficient. He's "Davey Fuckin' Crockett." In this right, he is the last American man as the tall tales have defined this character to be. There is the common conception that the man who lives on his own, dependent on no other man is American; that the freedom of providing for yourself is supposedly parallel to the entire concept of America in and of itself. In short, because Eustice is the way he is and does the things he does, he is labeled as being the "Last American Man."

DJ Paul Bunyan

The story of Paul Bunyan, the larger-than-life (literally) lumberjack, carries with it an interesting mix of life lessons to take away from it. Primarily, the story of Paul Bunyan is the story of one man's perseverance and courage in the face of a challenge. It teaches people to never give up even despite the odds of a situation. While this in and of itself is relatively harmless (and dare I say, beneficial?), this is not the only message that this seemingly innocent story carries with it. Paul Bunyan is a class example of your stereotypical "man." He is tall, strong, rugged, and emotionally tough. Because of the glorified position in which he is placed, it instills in kids the concept that they have to be strong and be able to fell tall trees in a single sweeping motion of the ax. It instills in them that "real men" should be rugged and mysteriously always have 5 o'clock shadow. This lesser-recognized aspect of the story is detrimental, as it predisposes kids to a concept of conformity rather than the pursuit of seeking out one's own personality. This could also predispose kids to become judgmental of other boys who are not "real men."

Nature

The interesting part about nature is that if enough time is spent observing and appreciating it, then they do begin to feel as if they are a part of it. This typically carries with it a sense of peace wth nature; a sense that there would be nothing short of a bomb going off that could disturb this ethereal connection.