Where is you home?

So over my Spring break this year I got to go visit a friend in southern California. We went to the San Diego zoo, Disneyland, and this little island called Balboa. It was so much fun. I have to say one of my favorite things were the panda bears at the zoo(consequently that is one of them over there). They were so cute I very nearly hopped the fence to go hug them. But, the sun was out, it was a perfect temperature. I was nearly converting to a Cali girl. Maybe it's that my mother is from southern California originally but moved away because she didn't like it. But I have never had this wonderful of an impression from that state as a whole. Yes I'm sure there is some stereotyping involved there, but really I came out of my trip loving it.
This got me thinking about what I will do after graduation. Which may be a year away, but at the same time, it's only a year away. For college student what to do after you graduate is a big deal. I come from an immediate family who moved away from the majority of their family to start a new life somewhere else. My mother moved out of California, and my dad from Oregon. I have grown up thinking that when you grow up, you move away. Over the last few years I have come to realize that so many more people than I realize stay close to home their whole life.
While I have no idea where my life will take me after graduation, I am open to the possibilities. I am open to staying close to home. However I am also open to the idea of moving away. If I were to move away I know that I would want to move away for a good reason. I would move because I had roots there, or a way to set down new roots.
I feel like in college I have learned that you can create a new home somewhere else, you just have to have the resources and the desire to.
SO think about it. How far would you go from home? Even better, think about why you would go.

Breaking News: texting kills comm major

Many of you who know me, may already know that I suck at texting. Maybe it's that I only get a limited number a month and therefore don't text as often as some(sometimes intentionally). Maybe it's my personal vendetta against excessive texters. However it is this journalist's opinion that texting is the source of the slow painful death of interpersonl communication in our culture.
Do I understand the occasional text when you are not in a position where you are able to call someone? Sure. Do I get that sometimes it's just easier to send someone a quick text. Yes. Do I understand the people who use it as their only medium of communication. No.
Texting has taken over our lives. Some no longer even like to call their friends anymore. All they do is text. To me texting is so much more impersonal. Yes it can be made personal by what you type etc, but it has become a crutch to our culture and quite frankly it bothers me.
If I have learned one thing as a communication studies student, it is that good interpersonal communication skills are important no matter what field you go into. Business, science, music, even accountants all have to interact with people in some capacity and our generation is losing the ability to communicate with each other because of texting.
I understand that this does not apply to everyone, however I routinely ask people to call me, one, because I think it is easier and less time consuming. Two, because it is clear and easier to understand. Three, because is more personal because you can hear the other person's voice.
I love my friends very much and getting to talk to them is one of my favorite things. It means that I get to have a conversation with them and that I want to talk to them personally.
I do not have a problem with the principle of texting, seeing as I do in fact text from time to time. Really its the people who have deep intense conversations over texting that bother me. I have had this happen to me, where I am talking to someone and they pause to text a friend but apologize to me for doing so but they say it was necessary because they are in the middle of a "deep intense conversation" with their other friend. If that is the case, then neither party is that focused on the conversation at hand, so how can it be that meaningful? I would hold that it means less to text someone than to call them and make the effort to hit the send button than fidget around on your phone's keypad.
While searching through facebook fan pages I found pages advocating for texting and found all sorts of comments on the pages about how people "hate calling people" and "only use calling as a last resort." I think my favorite may have been the one that said "I asked a girl out, but she was too shy to text back." Seriosuly, if this guy was too shy to have the guts to call this girl up and ask her out properly and she was too shy to even text back, neither of them deserve a relationship. What would an actual relationship be like between two such people I wonder?
The art of interpersonal communication is dying a slow and painful death even though no one knows it yet. It's rather akin to the story about the frog who was boiled alive without realizing what was happening until it was done. If we keep sacrificing our interpersonal skills, then we are going to lose them before we know it.
So go ahead. Be brave.
PICK UP THE PHONE.
People aren't that scary to talk to. I promise.

Whitworthian-3 Whitworth-0

I would like to take this post to thank the Whitworthian for attempting to uphold dwindling moral standards on the Whitworth campus. This past week in the Whitworthian there were multiple articles calling attention to the falling standards with regards to the entertainers Whitworth has brought to campus. I'm sure everyone remembers the email headline "live group sex therapy" that circulated around. While this did in fact get me to read the email, I was slightly offended that this is the level that Whitworth was sinking to in order to get my attention. Because of night class I was not able to attend this "therapy session" but did talk with others afterward. Whether this was a comedy act or not was up for debate.
This has been a common pattern among recent entertainers on Whitworth's campus. I remember attending a comedian about a month ago and while I was only there for about 20 minutes of it I left feeling unimpressed and offended by the humor.
I am the kind of person who can take a bit of what is considered "dirty" humor. If cleverly used. However this comedian was more offensive than funny. The only laughter was nervous laughter.
This combined with Daniel Packard's performance that inspired no less than three articles in the Whitworthian about his offensive performance leads be to believe that Whitworth needs to consider who they endorse on campus. In one article, the writer reported being so offended in her interview with Packard that she ended the interview prematurely. In another article, the writer expressed similar concerns about Whitworth's boundaries and standards.
I recently attended the slam poet on campus and he was practically boring in comparison to the uprising about the Packard performance. He still used inflammatory content in an attempt to "make a point" as he said.
As I walked away from the poet with my friends there was a distinct divide in opinions about the poet. Everyone agreed that he was talented but there was a great discrepancy as to the nature of the content in his performance. Some of my friends thought it was great that the poet was touching on awkward topics, others did not and thought that Whitworth needed to uphold their standards a little better.
While this is a topic that has been covered in recent Whitworthian articles I am simply taking the time to agree with them and let them know that I appreciate the honest work the Whitworthian does in trying to hold the administration accountable for their actions. If that's not what journalism is all about, then I don't know what is.