Identity and Labels
Can identity come without labels? Are labels our identities? Or can person know who they are without being labeled? I think labels in modern society can be both detriments and assets.

Assets:

People who are organized into labels have a sense of who they are. They are allowed to express themselves through those labels. They provide communities and ideas of belonging. Labels can be incredibly useful in discussions about privilege and power. Most of modern day labels are used to categorize."Labels are important. They allow us to not only understand the world around us, but ourselves. Many of us struggle with what labels to apply to ourselves. We cycle through them, try them on like shirts, and discard the ones that do not fit. Some of us try on many more labels, while others may be perfectly fine with those assigned to them through others. I mean, some of us do take longer to get ready, no? Some people see certain labels as problematic, in fact, the only time this type of discussion is brought up is when people see labels as being such. For example, you never see people complain about being labeled as nice, kind, unique, outgoing, and so on. The only time people bring labels into question is when they are used to help describe and bring to light inequality. As I previously mentioned, the whole ordeal with “I don’t see race/gender/sexuality/etc”, is about saying how someone does not treat someone differently because they do not see difference."

Detriments:

Labels can cause discrimination in the work place. It can cause low self steam, there can also be issues of falls labels. "Removing labels is not only impossible, but dangerous and harmful. As mentioned, we would have to effectively remove adjectives from our vocabulary, or, never apply them to people. If we only applied them to non-human animals or objects, why should they be afforded language that shows how wonderfully diverse they are, but humans are not? To deny labels is to deny diversity. It is to deny human experience. In fact, to remove labels is vastly anti-human in a way. It removes the very things that make up each unique (another label) individual. In fact, I cannot hold a conversation about labels without using labels."

EDUCATE

The idea that people are more concerned with what other people are doing with their bodies than what is going into their own is mind boggling. If people were educated about food in America I think most of them would be dumb-founded. I think America has issues when in come to federal regulation regarding food, and the deep dark connection those regulations have too money.

While the rest of the world has very strict regulations, America cannot say the same. We allow chemicals, yes, I said chemicals into our food that the rest of the world could not even fathom the connection they have too food. While there are dozens of additives that, in a perfect world, you would scratch from your diet, here are the 13 worst of the worst that you should try to avoid:

Sodium Nitrate. Sodium Nitrate and Nitrate itself are two additives that producers add to meat products to keep them edible for longer periods of time. These two terrible additives are put in hot dogs, lunch meat, sausage, and bacon. They are meant to control the growth of mold and bacteria. They also, not surprisingly, make the meat look pink and healthy. Instead of actually being healthy though, nitrates are also a carcinogen and are extremely dangerous. While the FDA admits they are dangerous, this isn’t widely publicized because they keep meat safe for longer periods of time. Nitrates have disturbing side effects like nausea, headaches, and dizziness.

BVO. BVO, or brominated vegetable oil, is another additive that you should steer clear of. It is meant to keep the oils in our soft drinks suspended. Bromate is actually poison, and even a small consumption of this poison could cause sickness, especially in children. It can deplete your immunity, cause allergic reactions, cause organ failure, birth defects, and more. While the FDA, again, knows that there is an issue with BVO and has it on their radar, it has not required companies to take products made with BVO off the market and it is still being used legally. What is most terrifying is that most people don’t even know it exists due to the fact that there is no publicity and the beverage manufacturers like to suppress this information. It doesn’t even need to be listed on the labels of the foods and beverages that it is in!

Why are such things allowed? How can the Food and Drug Administration allow such scary fillers and chemicals in our food. Do people even truly know if these chemicals effect ones body positively or negatively. I guess what it comes down to is the American population needs to educate themselves on what they think should and shouldn't be allowed in their bodies.

OH EDUCATION!

I've heard one too many conversations regarding education. We should teach like this or implement that. There should be more money for this program or that program. Blah blah blah...at this point, these teaching theories are like  cell phones everyone has one but nobody truly knows the right way to use them (because there isn't just one right way). Same goes for education. Until you know the true depths of every single style and way people learn there will never be a piece de resistance, nor should there be. As humans evolve and technology advances so does the styles, understandings and ways of learning.  

Education shouldn't be regulated with set standards and structure, it should evolve, advance, and change when it no longer becomes relevant or "top of the line" so to speak. Nobody watches television on a box T.V.. Why would they? The same should work in regards to how we should teach and learn. If there comes a time when the current styles of learning are no longer the best or "latest and greatest" why must they continue to be implemented?

Why is education even regulated on such a large scale? It doesn't even make sense. Fathom this: a couple dozen people created a curriculum implemented for an entire nation, yeah I said an entire nation. How could one curriculum work for millions and millions of different thinkers, learners and backgrounds. It can't!

No. Dos

Perrier recently published/released a commercial called "Thirst For the Extraordinary". The commercials ability to grasp the attention of viewers who enjoy an extraordinary lifestyle was very apparent from the moment it came on the screen. The vibrant colors and choice of sound during the first scene evoked a sense of wonder.

Then out of no where the loud and vibrant notes of In The Hall of the Mountain King by Peer Gynt a choice of music that in turn makes the viewer feel familiar but also in anticipation of what is to come.

As the anticipation builds, chaos breaks. The music heightens and attention to detail becomes fragmented yet obvious. You begin to feel as thought you are on a extravagant journey where the party never stops. Then when you've reached the climax of this extraordinary journey, you are brought back through an ever so tasteful soft diffusion to emphasize the true content of what you have just experienced.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=verzNYAOQ7s

I feel the producer of this commercial spoke to a very specific audience (young adults) and did so in a very well and tasteful manner. The greatest idea of emphasis was a colorful, vibrant and extraordinary time. I feel one of the most effect ways they were able to portray these ideals was through their choice of sound. I feel we can assume every one has had an encounter with that beautiful piece of music. So with that idea in mind, the viewer can correlate the type of emotion being portrayed unto them. The correlation being made regarding the product is a drink for the extraordinary.

to p

Do beverage commercials give the audience the power to interpret commercials as they wish? Or do they make it so the audience is only provoked by what the presenter wants them to see? Should PSA's market accordingly to the audience or should we the viewers be allowed to pass judgement on what we feel is morally corrects.

In referendum to Coke-a-Cola:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhP5sDUnF6c

During the 2015 Suberbowl Coke-a-Cola release a commercial regarding patriotism. Young children of all ethnic backgrounds and tongues sang “America the Beautiful”. I thought about not the controversy surrounding it, because I knew my stance, but more to the idea of, is there a correlation?  Does a can of soda and my love of country relate? Are they allowed to be considered in the same context? Should singing a song about my country make me want to drink a Coke (Coke-a-Cola)? If I don’t like Coke does that make me any less patriotic?

Should I want to get up and dance due in part to the idea of a women dancing because she’s holding a Coke? Do I even need a beverage to have a good time? Do people feed into these ideas? Is that why there is such a high repetition of these “feel good commercials” and their correlation to a beverage. In my humble opinion I know that answer is yes i.e. in 2010 Redbull was hit with a lawsuit in regards to their “Red Bull Gives You Wings” campaign. Personally not knowing the logistics of the case I can assume the following: I think we can all assume that they might have been sued because some genius person assumed the beverage really gave you wings and jumped off something and injured themselves.

Should something as simple as a beverage company be allowed to have that much of an influence on modern day society, especially not knowing who might be watching the said commercial. Whether it be a beverage that makes you want to signs songs of country or one that gives you wings, should beverage companies be allowed to market ideals that have no general correlation to the beverage itself?