How could you feel comfortable in your own skin if it isn’t yours in a picture? It is a product of airbrushing: flawless in every way.

Living in a society so engrossed in physical perfection is getting old, unfortunately, not for everyone. In Say ‘Chesse!’ And Now Say ‘Airbrush!’ the question whether digital perfection is beneficial for a child’s self-esteem comes up.

“Retouching was always meant for problems like a bump or a scrape, but it’s gotten to be a vanity.”
- Danielle Stephens

When airbrushing is meant for more than just a quick fix, the message “you’re not good enough” is communicated to a child. They work toward attaining an unreachable perfection only seen in magazines. Then again, those models are also retouched… proving that no one is perfect.

Plus, airbrushing deprives children of a good laugh. My seventh grade school picture for example.

Here’s beauty in a nutshell.

Insecurity exists in the absence of knowledge.
-unknown

Never lacking a modicum of apprehensiveness was the only assurance I had on the SAT last Saturday. If anything, the test was lengthy but not too painful (surprisingly). Getting a bad score on the SAT wasn’t the worst thing that could have happened considering the person next to me didn’t realize he was at the wrong school until the last minute. At least I ate a big breakfast, and was one of the few students more focused on the test than their stomachs growling. My tummy was happy and I got a good six hours of sleep, but I was not mentally prepared for the exam. I prayed a lot the night before, so I decided to settle for wishful thinking.

“Five Lies About the SAT” is just one of those articles that would have been nice to read prior to taking the exam. It could have appeased my many worries about the math portions on the test, but nothing soothed me more than knowing that I had gotten it over with.

Hopefully the second or third time I take it, knowledge will overshadow any degree of insecurity :]

“Art Aimed to Shock” (one of the most unsettling articles I have ever read in Newsweek) fails to answer the questions that it originally evoked in me.

Aliza Shvart’s induced-miscarriage display is one of many works of art crafted to stir up a storm. Well, mission accomplished! This piece with the “aim to shock” has undoubtedly created controversy; people are quickly taking sides on the debate whether banning the art is or is not in violation of the right to free speech. On a strictly moral level, driven by my love for animals and people, I would side with banning such art in a heartbeat. Although, looking at it from a more liberal perspective, I would want the art to be permissible only because it is a basic right that we possess as citizens. Whatever message the artists were trying to communicate, they should be protected under law.

The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.
-Henry Steele Commager

The article also reflects on the idea that banning the piece deterred others from formulating their own thoughts on the issue. It did not grant individual people the choice to accept it or reject it. Through an ethical outlook and a liberal lens, I see two different approaches emerging from the same problem and because of it, I don’t know where I stand.

Children will watch anything, and when a broadcaster uses a crime and violence and other shoddy devices to monopolize a child’s attention, it’s worse than taking candy from a baby. It is taking precious time from the process of growing up.
-Newton N. Minow

How could tiny ten-year-old bodies conjure up inexplicable amounts of aggression fueling a plot like the one presented in Not Child’s Play?

It’s one of those stories you feel compelled to tell the people around you. In my case I would simply read the first two sentences providing the gist of it.

Parents nationwide are reacting with shock to news reports that a group of 8- to 10-year-old kids in Waycross, Ga., were so mad at their teacher that they apparently planned to knock her unconscious with a glass paperweight and stab her with a steak knife.
-Karen Springen

The author’s interview with a child psychiatrist, Elizabeth Berger M.D. explored possible causes for such effects. Of course the issue of violence in video games and television was not left out. Though aggression depicted through media may contribute to such hostility in reality, it doesn’t mean it is the sole reason. After all, violence is literally ancient history; just look at the Bible. Berger suggests personal problems with the family or one’s hardships at home are the driving forces behind such aggression. She refers to childhood as the progression toward self-control eventually enabling people to repress violent behavior. To address the opening quote, newscasters do not usually have such young audiences that are genuinely interested in the crime reported to them. And in this case, the only thing depriving kids from childhood are the bars that could possibly confine them.

Slavery still exists. If you didn’t know or can’t believe it, then “Bottom of the Barrel” could tell you again. Times have not really changed: there was coverage of child slavery in an article written in 1996(contained within Life magazine), and according to a Newsweek editorial forced labor in Malaysia is still customary in 2008.

The immoral realism of slavery is being kept from the public eye. The only way we can learn about it is to dig deep. Journalists do this for us but reporting on such a controversial subject can be extremely dangerous, and not just for the writers. Both articles include actual stories told by people who have experienced slavery first-hand. They merely remain anonymous sources to readers ultimately avoiding retribution.

“At one compound that resembles a nest of grungy one-car garages, with no lights or ventilation, the soccer masters run shed to shed, yelling at the children to strip off the rubber finger-wraps designed to protect them from vicious thread cuts and to flee for cover. But one child doesn’t get out in time. As the masters glare and mutter, I ask him about his work.”
-Sydney H. Schanberg

The excerpt above is one of those stories contained within journalism aimed at exposing the truth, but at what cost? These writers put other people in jeopardy to present some awareness to the rest of us; unfortunately we don’t always want to listen.

“The Incredible Shrinking Bride” highlights the extremes women are willing to go to satisfy their shallow values. The Newsweek article reveals these extremes: over exercising, eating disorders, Botox, tanning, etc. But aside from that, the article also reveals the narcissism manifested in people these days. I too am guilty of creating those shallow lists containing an inventory of make-up and trips to the mall :[

Reading this article only impressed the guilt I felt even deeper into my core. You see, before this I watched a biography on Mahatma Gandhi. It felt like the longest movie I have ever watched and it definitely was the only film I have ever seen with an intermission. Aside from the movie being exceptionally long, it was very inspiring. Gandhi preached about and lived a life of simplicity and peace. He was a small man who made a big change in the world. After seeing a life that fulfilled, you can’t help but want to live like that too. Reading about people obsessed with how they look and seeing a little of that in myself, has driven me to change.

“You must be the change you wish to see in the world”
-Gandhi

Try it.

It is Carol Paik’s turn to tell her story. Personally, I struggled to find the message she was trying to promote in her piece. So I decided to answer her question: is she a racist? Maybe she is just distracted, careless, and too old to distinguish one Asian from another as she suggested within her closing lines. It is possible that she just endured so much racial profiling that she has adopted the same outlook.

“I’m Not Who You Think I Am” explores the reality of internalized racism. It is where “we come to mistreat ourselves and other members of our group in the same ways that we have been mistreated as the targets of racism.” Carol mirrors most people who absorb the stereotypes reluctantly and then unconsciously impress the same labels on other people. Because she is typically perceived as her “race and not the individual,” she has done the same to other Asians like herself. I don’t think I can call her racially prejudice, just slightly contradictory.