Woah…Felicity was 13 years ago


After getting food poisoning from a falafel sandwich (which I will NEVER eat again), I was  in bed rest for the last two days. Watching “The Americans,” on my computer, I randomly remembered Keri Russell from “Felicity”. Well, what I really remembered was her infamous haircut which apparently led to the decline of the show. Then I started to think, was the haircut really the reason why the show went wrong? I mean, I didn’t really think much of it at the time of the initial broadcast (because I was 8). Without much thought, I decided to watch it. Taking place in NY, it tells a story of a long curly blond graduated high school student who changes her college plans because of her graduated high school crush and enrolls into the same college he does. I found myself burning through the first 5 episodes like a crack addict and was instantly hooked!


Yet there is one distraction that really steals my attention which is the time period they lived in. I cannot stop realizing how a time 13 years can make such a big impact on the world.  From the use of pay phones, to the gateway desktops, everything looked and felt old. One of the characters even wore those mini glittered butterfly clips that cluttered the bathroom sink my sisters and I shared. It is just so crazy to watch a show about college students without the internet dictating an ounce of their life. Everything I do on my spare time involves some part of the internet. Even the games on my phone need internet access for them to be played! Here I am talking about games on my phone when Felicity didn’t even have a cell phone! She had a rotary phone with an extended telephone wire. That’s only when she wasn’t busy using a tape recorder to make CASSETTE tapes for her pen pal. That’s right! She used a cassette tape as an audio file and snail mailed it to some french tutor in Santa Fe. I wonder, if Felicity were to exist in the world of technology today, how much money she would save on postage stamps?

What is all the rage about high tolerance?

I just don’t understand. What is it with people and their pride in high tolerance? Why does it matter? It’s not like you don’t party as hard if you have lower tolerance, you just get there faster. Every time I go out, there is always that one person that says something a long the lines of

“I just took 10 shots and I don’t even feel it!”

“Um, cool. Good for you?”

I am not sure how to respond to that. The way that sentence is phrased makes it seem like you wish you were drunk. Yet there is also this underlying envy factor that I am supposed to be in awe of because you have high tolerance. So you want to get drunk, yet you are happy that it is really hard for you because it takes a lot of liquor to hammer you?…awesome! Wouldn’t just be better if you had a lower tolerance? That would get you drunk much faster. Now, I am not saying it is great to be a one shot wonder, but isn’t 10 just a little excessive? I can’t even imagine having to chug down 10 shots of alcohol to even start to feel something.

Living in Manhattan, I would rather have a low tolerance anyway. First, the drinks are always expensive wherever you go. Second, it is better for your health. Obviously, alcohol itself is not a healthy beverage, but it is obviously better having only a handful of drinks rather than having too many to count. Third, it tastes like ass. I rarely believe people who actually love the taste of vodka or tequila. Maybe in a mixed drink, masked with sugar and juice, the taste is acceptable. Any drink straight up is quite honestly, straight up nasty!

In most cases, the point of drinking is to likely get a buzz, tipsy and or/drunk. Why prolong these effects with a want for a higher tolerance? Why not enjoy these feelings with less alcohol consumption? It is cheaper, healthier and less hell for you taste buds.

Is the media right or wrong?

It was not too long ago that the shooting at Sandy Hook occurred. Casualties were high and irrevocable damage was done physically and emotionally. Of course this prompted the federal government to act upon the devastation and bring forth the issue of gun control. The whole nation has been talking about it . From the news, to magazines, to chatting with friends, the issue of guns has become a hot bed issue. Now I don’t know if it is just me, but has this spotlight on gun violence sparked the recent string of gun crimes in school? It seems as if everyday I have been watching the news where one state has had a case of a student bring a gun to school. Kansas, New Jersey and New York are a just a few of many where it has been reported that a student has brought a gun to an educational facility.

The worst part is that this is not the first time this phenomenon has happened. It was only a year ago that a child committed suicide from being bullied his whole life. Of course, the media made it a really big deal and how people need to stop it from happening. After the attention it received, the phenomenon occurred where multiple teen suicides happened nation wide and it seemed endless. It seemed like every few days, a teen committed suicide from bullying.

I have to wonder whether or not the idea of media coverage on such hot bed issues and the prevalence it had on society really led to the continuation of these problems. On one hand, it is great that bullying and gun control have been put in the center of problems to be fixed and traction has been made to mitigate them. It is also great to help the victims and families recuperate through the support of American citizens. Yet, it seems as if this spotlight also creates a chain of problems where these hot topics become ingrained in people’s minds, permeate their thoughts, and eventually acting out on them. Or maybe these crimes happen regardless but are not on the scale of importance until it becomes a hot topic of discussion. Who knows?

Now I know that these are only two issues of the millions we have in the US and society, and the idea of media coverage and continued crime might not even be correlated, but if it is, then is there a possible way the media can take on such high profile subjects without repercussions?