REsponse to Jenna Haley: Rumors

In her blog, Rumors, Jenna asked: Do you think people believe a statement to be true solely because of who is saying it? Does their decision making depend on the popularity of the person saying it and/or where the statement derives from?

I think there is some truth to the theory that a person will believe a statement to be true depending on who is saying it. However, I do not think it is based on the popularity of the person who is making the statement. I believe it is based both on how much trust exists between the two people and how knowledgeable the person making the statement is on the matter.

For instance, say somebody you don't get along with tells you a juicy piece of gossip about people you're not very close to. "Andy slept with Kristen," they might share with you. You don't really know Andy or Kristen well enough to know if that's true, but know Kristen has a boyfriend who she is very in love with. "No way," you say to yourself. "That would never happen." You reject the gossip as nothing more that a false rumor and the person who imparted the information as nothing more than a twit.

Later, your best friend comes up to you and delivers the same news. "Did you hear that Andy and Kristen slept together?!" she squeals. This makes you start to question the information. Maybe they did sleep together after all? Your best friend certainly wouldn't lead you astray. However, she really isn't that close to Andy or Kristen either. "How do you know?" you ask her, still unsure what to believe. She tells you that she got the information from Julie, Kristen's best friend. It must be true, then, right?

After dinner you spot Julie outside and go over to her. You ask if the rumor you've heard is true, and she confirms that it is. At this point, you finally believe it. After all, Julie is Kristen's best friend, so she would know.

My question in response to this is, What do you believe is the best course of action if people are spreading a rumor about you that is not true?

First Blog of the Semester!

Are you excited? I know I am. Let's begin!

I've decided to cover some more underground art forms in my first couple of blogs, so on that note...today's topic is: body modifications.

I personally have two tattoos, multiple piercings in my ears, an eyebrow ring, and a nose stud. I view these body modifications as a form of self-expression. I know many people feel the same way and believe that tattoos are also a form of art. On the flip side, there are many people who believe such things are a way of defacing the human body and are not a proper outlet for artistic ability.

Let's look at this from both sides. On the one hand, tattooists are called "artists" for a reason. Being a tattoo artist takes a lot of skill, practice, and focus. They (usually...) create beautiful, intricate images--which are called "flash art." When those images on transferred onto skin, they become "body art." The person being tattooed is a canvas, the tattooist is an artist, and the tattoo gun is the equivalent of a paintbrush (just more painful). Is it not safe to say, then, that tattoos are art?

On the other hand, tattooing is a painful process involving the permanent alteration of a person's body. Unlike a painting or drawing--which can just be torn up or thrown away--there is no easy way to get rid of a tattoo. Many people end up regretting their decision to get one--whether it's years after a rambunctious teenage decision or the day after making a rambunctious drunken decision. Because of these factors, some people insist that tattooing sh0uld not be used as a form of artistic expression.

My question to you all is this: Do you believe that tattoos should be considered art, and would you ever get one?