CollegeCandy » bloggers

Why Meghan McCain is Someone to Watch Out For

Garnet Henderson – Columbia U — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 17:00:26 +0000

Meghan McCain used to really bother me. I thought the only reason she had become a well known political commentator was because her father, John McCain, was a prominent politician. It’s obvious that she’s worked hard to brand herself as a new, young voice of the Republican party. I thought that most of her positions on issues were carefully calculated to help her achieve that image. This interview she just did with Playboy is an example of that – she has some good things to say, but she’s trying hard to seem cool and relatable.

But I’m starting to respect her quite a bit. Being very liberal myself, I disagree with Meghan McCain on many issues. But she supports marriage equality, and although she is anti-abortion, she’s very pro-birth control. Recently, she appeared on the Rachel Maddow show to speak out against the Virginia bill that would have required women seeking abortions to have a transvaginal ultrasound first. That’s an unnecessary and invasive procedure. Luckily, that part of the bill was eventually changed. But here’s what Meghan McCain had to say about it:

“I’m pro-life. I’m not pro-vaginal probing. I feel like I have to go on television and delineate between the two things. I’m horrified by the bill as a woman, as a Republican woman, I’m horrified. It scares me that this can go on, it scares me that a woman can be vaginally probed without consent or a doctor’s consent.”

And she also said this about birth control:

“I always say the best way to prevent abortions is supply birth control. I’m pro-birth control, something that alienated me with pro-lifers, but I’m not an extremist.”

I really respect her for taking that stand on women’s issues. The discussions about women’s health this election season have truly scared me. Seeing as almost every single woman I know is on birth control, I never thought we’d be debating whether or not women should be using it. But we are, and not only is it frustrating and insulting, it’s distracting from issues like the economy. So I’m glad that someone is standing up to the creepy boys’ club that the Republican party has become. And I’m especially glad that someone is a young woman.

Meghan McCain has also faced a lot of criticism about her body. Last year, Glenn Beck mimed vomiting on his TV show after watching a skin cancer PSA that McCain did. She also faced attacks from the Twitterverse after tweeting a picture of herself in a tank top. She’s handled all the controversy with class, and admitted that the criticism led her to see a therapist:

“Now I’m very sensitive to any pictures taken of myself at photoshoots and whatever because the Internet has this very weird … especially people in politics … this very weird reaction to my body because I’m not super skinny, I have large breasts, I know, they’re real, I can’t do anything about it, and like the Internet just has this really weird reaction to my body … I’ve seen a therapist about it.”

I think her openness and honesty about the media’s reaction to her body is important. It’s an unfortunate reality that women are often criticized based on their appearance in situations when it shouldn’t matter. It isn’t fair, and it can be seriously damaging. It’s a brave thing to stand up to that, and at the same time admit that it really hurt.

So I’ll be paying more attention to Meghan McCain. I’d feel a lot more comfortable about the future of our country if the Republican presidential candidates sounded more like her and less like… all of the Republican candidates.

Garnet is a student at Columbia University in New York City. She is “that person” who starts dancing at a party when everyone else is standing around, and if there were a Facebook stalking Olympics, she would be a gold medalist. She also loves cheesy 90s music, and almost died of happiness when Vanilla Ice retweeted her. Once. Follow her on Twitter @garnethenderson.

To Blog or Not To Blog?

Charlsie - Hollins University — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 22:00:03 +0000

We live in a social media obsessed world. There’s Facebook, Myspace, (although I wonder if anyone actually still uses it), Twitter, and many blogging platforms such as Tumblr, WordPress, and Blogger. Although we upload our pictures to Flickr and Facebook all the time or write about our weekend experiences in personal blogs, there could be a possible downside to all of this internet exposure: According to the Wall Street Journal, 85% of hiring managers Google a candidate before or after an interview. This fact, which is becoming more and more well-known, brings up the question: To blog or not to blog?

While I’m not saying that anyone who publicly posts pictures of themselves puking into a fraternity bathroom shouldn’t be a cause for concern, I am posing the question of boundaries and what and when a company should base their decision on hiring someone because of what comes up when they use Google. For example, take all the CollegeCandy contributors. Should our future bosses decline an interview with us, even though our resumes may be well qualified, simply because we once wrote an article that mentions sex or highlights the importance of birth control?

Personally, I think keeping a blog of any kind is a worthwhile venture. As a writer, I like to post things I’m interested in, things that drive me crazy, and of course, continuously write about things that matter to me (this includes everything from literary theory criticisms to the correct usage of the Real Housewives of New Jersey’s infamous phrase “prostitution whore”). However, I often worry that if I post liberal-sided articles or a picture of me enjoying a glass of wine that someone may use those things against me and blow them out of proportion one day. Despite more and more social media outlets being introduced to society on a regular basis, it seems like the idea of censorship or hiding oneself (at least the internet brand of oneself) is becoming a constant battle.

But get this – the Wall Street Journal also reports that “Recruiters and employers…routinely do online background searches on their candidates to learn more about them, as well as to filter out candidates with little or negative information about them.” So basically, it seems like our generation is damned if we do, damned if we don’t.

Imagine if you have nothing come up when your future employer Googles you. Instead of them rewarding you for that (something more and more colleges and media-outlets tell us to strive for), they pass on you because you aren’t relevant or important enough. But then, if you have an author’s page or Twitter account, something could be taken out of context or perceived as negative. What about people that disagree with this article? Could my future employer one day decline to hire me because some random commenter disagreed with me – putting me in a negative position?

It sounds crazy, I know, but it’s something that constantly comes up in the world of online writing and social media. While I understand why businesses want to search their job candidates, I think some kind of line in the sand needs to be drawn before too many well-deserving candidates are overlooked simply because they blog about Christian Louboutin’s, OPI nail polish, and Rachel Zoe instead of Wall Street, international trade, and compounding interest.

The issue of ‘to blog or not’ seems to constantly rely on personal judgment. However, personal judgment works both ways. For example, if someone is irresponsible enough to post a picture of themselves humping (see – because I used the word humping in this post, I may possibly never get a real job) a stop sign, they acted in poor judgment. Although they may personally have found it funny and did not make the picture private, their actions overwhelmingly were not in the best of judgment.

But think of it this way – what if your potential employer’s personal judgment doesn’t like your Tweet about his/her favorite restaurant, and decides that you come across as too opinionated because you simply wrote “Will not be eating at Restaurant A again.” Their personal judgment could cost you a good opportunity. The bottom line is that not everyone uses the best personal judgment from time to time (including those in hiring positions), and what one person finds offensive may not be a big deal to someone else. Should our generation have to walk on eggshells so we don’t piss anyone off with our opinions and views on the internet? Is this what it’s coming down to?

Blogger Emily Rose, a recent college graduate wrote a ballsy open post to a potential future employer on her Tumblr, after accidentally sending her blog link in her e-mail signature. Instead of cowering in fear over whether or not her employer would show no interest in her because of her personal interests explored on her blog (such as hung-over day after snap shots and mojito cupcakes), Emily wrote: “You’ll probably learn more about me from this blog than you did from my CV, which is fine. You’ve probably figured out some stuff already: like that I love animals and Africa and my family. But also, you know, sometimes I drink. And I spend a lot of time online….the result of those factors is now what’s on your monitor, and I don’t feel compelled to apologize for any of it.”

While some people may be completely appalled that she would be so open about herself like that, I think Emily is onto something. If we can’t be our true selves or represent things about ourselves in a personal manner, even in a public way such as the internet, then what does that say about society today? In conclusion of her post, Emily hits the nail on the head by writing, “I think I’m a good hire. I think I’m a good person, too. And I don’t think typing bad words or posting a picture of myself with friends at a bar blowing off some steam should affect my chances just because I’m a young person, and the lives of young people are more public and accessible than those of our parents.”

All in all, interviews, resumes, recommendations, and qualifications should remain as the most important factors in getting hired or rejected. But instead of using personal media against this generation, maybe it should be looked at a different way. With our generation riding the first wave of this Google exposure (or shall we call it overexposure?) phenomenon, it will be interesting to see what pans out. Ultimately though, I hope for the sake of our generation – we’re not looked at like this forever. Employers, writers, job applicants, and social media users of all kinds should embrace the more public and accessible use of information today, or at least set some boundaries for the years and technological advancements to come.

Jezebel Writers Too Smart To Be Raped

CC Staff — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:15:29 +0000

We talk about sex a lot on this site. That is pretty obvious to anyone who reads it. We like sex. We like being free to make our own choices about who to have sex with, how soon, how many partners and which way we are going to do it. We like to share our stories. We like to hear yours.

But what we absolutely do not want to do is send the message that sexual freedom and inhibition is a risk free lifestyle.

Recently, two writers from Jezebel – a website for women aged 25-35 – were invited onto Lizz Winstead’s show, Thinking and Drinking, to discuss their decisions to blog quite openly about their sexcapades and the message they send by writing about them (graphically) on the internet. Winstead, a former writer for The Daily Show, is a strong advocate of sexual empowerment and freedom, but argues it “can only be called a freedom if you protect yourself from rape, disease and pregnancy.”

Tracie Egan and Moe Tkacik, the Jezebel bloggers – who we have quoted and referenced many times before – showed up to the interview drunk and what they said caused quite a stir in the CollegeCandy office.

You can see the clip here:


We have no problem with the choices these women make in their personal lives, but we do have a problem with the fact that they take an issue like rape and make light of it. Pass it off like it’s funny, impossible, fictional and that they are too smart to let it happen to them.
No one is too “smart” to be raped. My friends are very smart people; some of the most intelligent, worldly and street smart people I know (Yes, I am bragging). But that didn’t mean anything when one of them went home with someone – a funny, attractive boy we knew through some friends – and found herself in an unsafe situation that she could not stop.
He was not some shady dude in the bar; she was “smart” enough to avoid that one.
It wasn’t the muscley guy buying rounds for every girl he saw; she knew not to go near that one.
It was a safe guy that she trusted and that did not make a difference.
Just as Winstead mentioned in the clip, the ladies of Jezebel have remained safe, not because they have made good choices, but because they are lucky. The same goes for me, and for a lot of the bloggers on this site. We are not doing anything different than the women who find themselves in danger; we are just really f-ing lucky.
Though we may not want to be role models, blogging comes with that responsibility. We would be jobless if it weren’t for the people who read and emulate us, so it is disgusting for these two ladies of Jezebel to ignore their responsibilities and make light of such a serious situation.
It may have been the wine talking, but what they said is embarrassing and just plain wrong. Women today are very lucky to live in a society that allows us the freedom to choose our lifestyle; we cannot take it for granted.
[Photo courtesy of Jezebel]



Candy Dish: TMI, Amy Winehouse
CC Staff — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:30:09 +0000

 Dear God, I wish I didn’t see this. Can someone please get this woman into rehab? (Or my bikini waxer?)
With airline ticket costs soaring, some people are coming up with more creative ways to travel.
Thank God for United States Postal Workers; delivering our mail…and finding old ladies trapped under cars.
Mini Me isn’t so mini…if you know what I’m sayin’.
Women aren’t the only ones with a biological clock.
Everyone loves bacon!

Retro Sexy: Dita Von Teese does it best
Corey Haim just can’t win.
John McCain hates bloggers. Well, Mr. McCain: we hate you too.

         


Technological Ruminations: Webular Etiquette
CC Staff — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:00:06 +0000

One of my esteemed colleagues wrote a great piece on texting etiquette. I recently wrote a biting piece about Papa Joe. This piece is about etiquette, too. After reading my Papa Joe piece (hopefully they read it in its entirety), a commentator, named ‘Haha,’ quipped, “you’re just a jealous peon,” to which I replied (in two posts) “nope, Haha, sure ain’t . . . I’m glad [the Simpsons are] rich. That’s great for them. But their father is a tool. Oh, one other thing . . . I LOVE the word peon. It’s great fun, conjures up great images . . . thanks!”
First, I do love the word peon. It’s nasty. It’s blunt. It’s cutting. People don’t use the word peon a lot, so I liked the reminder that the word peon exists. Reminds me of my old father (he’s a judge). He calls people peons and ninnies all the time – those words are funny, and I always chuckle when he coughs them up. BUT I digress (you’re probably getting used to that).
Now some of my fellow bloggers might wonder why I waste my time responding to remarks, whether good or bad, and why I’m even bothering to write this piece. Well, first off, I wish to thank Haha for inspiring me to do so. Because I’ve spent a lot of time (yes, it’s true) thinking about internet etiquette, how people are quick to insult (yes, I’m just as guilty, stirrin’ up crap, criticizing Mr. Simpson, etc.), name-calling, and even verbally terrorizing others on web posts.
As far as webular insults go, I’ll be the first (or the zillionth, haven’t checked all blogging sites to confirm this claim) to admit it bothers me when people insult me via websites. And you guessed it, I don’t have thick skin. Like I said, I’d be a hypocrite to bemoan their webular rudeness. Although I’ve done similar things, and said far meaner things than Haha said to me, I decided long ago that I would stop berating people on websites.
A few years ago, I got into a heavy Internet debate with a bunch of joggers about consuming alcohol vis-à-vis running. I was pro-consumption, while the rest of them were anti-consumption. It got pretty ugly, and what had been a jovial webular conversation about our mileage, our cross-training, and so forth, soon gave way to a whole lot of intra-webular mud-slingin’ – it was dirty and cheap. I mean, who knows if the other mudslingers felt dirty and cheap, but I sure did. That’s when I swore off the trolls as well as the nasty responses that they tried to beat out of me.
It’s not easy. And many trolling types think it’s harmless. I mean, I suppose it is, but I find it disturbing. When I think about the person I am, I generally consider myself to be nice, kind, an overly-compassionate human being, almost to a fault. So, if that’s true, if I am a nice person, as I claim to be, why would I sit down at a computer and start shootin’ off insults? Haha (et al.) could totally attack me for my pieces about Papa Joe, arguing that that’s exactly what I did.  But let me highlight the difference between hurlin’ insults at nobodies (like me, you, etc.) and criticizing a person like Papa Simpson.
There’s a HUGE difference between the two things. Namely, Papa Joe, along with his ilk, chose to become celebrities. Of course, that’s not to say that it’s fine and dandy to say libelously things about them (mind you, my pieces are based upon surmising – that’s it). But there’s a cost when you become a “public figure.” You are (freely) entering a sphere in which you’re persona will be scrutinized under a microscope. You accept those terms. You are not just some peon – as Haha called me – but instead an INDUSTRY with a face. You make money as a result of your celebrity, and therefore you offer yourself up to various forms of public criticism. Hell, I’d take that any day if I could vacay in Italy, hang out at the hippest bars in Hollywood, and drop thousands of beans at designer stores. But let’s not delve into my vanity.
BACK to webular insults on websites. Look people, it’s all too easy to forget that human beings are busily typing off responses to this subject or that topic. And maybe what they have to say is vapid, incoherent, or lame. I’ll be the first to admit that I’m guilty of being all three of those things at the same time. But before you shoot off some nasty reply, call somebody fat or ugly (bloggers who diss on celebs are ALWAYS excused of being fat slobs – can’t figure that one out, cuz most of them are anything but fat or slovenly. So before you shoot of an insult like that, think about your next door neighbor, you know one . . . the hottie; they might just be a blogger too, who “hides” behind a computer). I mean, you wouldn’t dare call a classmate an idiot or a fat ass to their face, so why do it via websites?
Just remember, play nice. Who knows, you might, just might, come face-to-face with that blogger you lambasted. Weird sh*t happens, so you just never know . . .

         


Death By Blogging?
Sues- Univ. of New Hampshire — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:30:12 +0000
I’m risking my life to get this out to you. Seriously. According to a recent New York Times article, blogging can cause death. Don’t believe me? Well, here’s the evidence:
Two weeks ago, 60-year-old technology blogger, Richard Shaw, died of a heart attack. Only a few months earlier, in December, another tech blogger, 50-year-old Marc Orchant, died of a massive coronary. Also in December, the well-known blogger, Om Malik, 41, survived a heart attack.
I told ya. Of course, there is no official diagnosis that blogging caused these incidents, but I honestly wouldn’t be surprised. Blogging can be majorly stressful. According to the article, “bloggers complain of weight loss or gain, sleep disorders, exhaustion and other maladies born of the nonstop strain of producing for a news and information cycle that is as always-on as the Internet.”
Michael Arrington, the founder of the popular TechCrunch, is still alive, but claims that since he started his blog 3 years ago, he has gained 30 lbs, developed a severe sleeping disorder, and turned his home into an office for him and 4 employees. He says, “At some point, I’ll have a nervous breakdown and be admitted to the hospital…” Then again, TechCrunch has brought Arrington millions in advertising revenue. Sometimes you need to take risks to make revenues.
The article makes lots of good points about the stresses of blogging. The constant need to be the first to cover a story. The fact that news is always happening, whether it’s 3:00 in the afternoon or 3:00 in the morning. Most non-bloggers wouldn’t consider the life of a blogger to be overly stressful, but in many cases, it is. Of course it doesn’t help that many bloggers sit in front of their computers for hours on end, not getting enough exercise, not sleeping, and eating whatever can be shoveled into their mouths while typing (or just forgetting to eat altogether). Blogging can easily turn into an unhealthy lifestyle if you let it.
Blogging. It’s a dangerous job, but it has to be done. Who needs sleep anyway? I just take naps between posts.

         


I Have Your Next Two Hours Planned…
CC Staff — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:00:59 +0000

Because I just spent two of mine reading this blog .You read that link right. It’s a chapstick blog, offering comprehensive reviews of every single chapstick that ever existed, with frequent updates.
This blog, my friends, is not just a blog. It is a public service, because there is nothing worse than a bad chapstick (and nothing better than a good one). The government should give these bloggers honors. Enjoy.
And remember, life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but the number of moments that take our breath away by reading critical, unbiased reviews of chapsticks.

         


Do As I Say Not As I Do: Mom’s Guide to Internet Dating
Jill - University of Wisconsin — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:31:56 +0000

My brother met his wife on an internet dating site (and I heart her). I have countless family friends that have met their spouses on the internet. I have several close friends who are currently dating someone who they met online (and they are C.U.T.E.).
And I have a fellow blogger friend who openly discusses her trials and tribulations of the online-dating world.
From the outside, I am a huge proponent of internet dating. The reason some of my ex-single friends found boy toys online? MY urging for them try it out!
“It’s really hard to meet people these days” I tell them.
“You know you aren’t going to meet the man/woman of your dreams at the bar”
“It is so not a loser thing to do anymore- soo many people I know met their boyfriend/girlfriend/husband/wife online”
“Just TRY it”
And on and on I go.
Oh. My. God. I sound JUST like my mother!
For the past few months, my mom has been urging me on a bi-weekly basis about internet dating. Each time, citing new friends of hers who agree that “it’s the thing to do”
Since when do 50 year old women know more about the “it things” than me?! Last time I checked the “it” thing to do was layer different patterns for a more textured look. But then again, what do I know?
Each time she brings it up, “Sarah’s son met the cutest girl online- just go on, just try it out!”  I immediately cut her off with “I know, I know. Mom. I knooooow”
I pass this info on to my friends, convincing them it’s a good idea, cheering them on in their success. Rubbing it in when they meet someone date-worthy with “See I told you so!” (The phrase everyone loooves to hear) Yet I can’t bring myself to sign up.
Usually, I’m a huge advocate of the whole “practice what you preach” but for some reason, my mantra on this is “do as I say, not as I do”
What gives? Why can’t I follow my own advice? Maybe a part of me deep down is not satisfied with meeting someone this way, perhaps I’m still hoping for my very own prince charming on his white horse (or in his Converse sneaks- either one) to come whisk me away to Never-Never Land (wrong fairy-tale I know).
Maybe it’s because I get legitimately creeped out every time a rando pokes me on Facebook that I can’t imagine that something along this line is how I could meet a future boyfriend?
I have never been one to be desperate to meet a man (I have other things on my mind besides the white picket fence house in the suburbs thing, thank-you-very-much) and maybe a part of me feels this is an act of desperation?
Or maybe It’s just that I don’t want to admit that my mother is right?
So dear readers- I’m turning to you- not to get all psychoanalytical- but, I’m getting psychoanalytical.  Am I looney? Should I try it? What have your experiences been? What are your best places to meet the men? Any secrets to let out of the bag?
Should I just agree that mother knows best (again) and sign up?




Until then, I’ll continue waiting twiddling my thumbs (all while standing up straight of course! Confidence is key after-all).

         


Allison Stokke, Sex Symbol and Incoming Freshman
CC Staff — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 15:23:49 +0000
Allison Stokke‘s dream of becoming the world’s best pole vaulter seems to have been replaced by another dream: to be removed from the sexual spotlight that Internet bloggers have brightly shined on her over the course of the past few weeks.
As we’ve all probably seen by now, the second With Leather introduced Allison to the non-athletic world, the media has stuck to her like glue, painting her the picture of a young, adolescent sex symbol, barely out of high school. Her and her family have grown more and more uneasy with the unwanted attention, and her boyfriend’s douchebagginess has even come into question, thanks to all of her jealous male fans, who wish she’d do something with their poles instead. Ohhh, snap!
This summer is big for Allison, as she is preparing to compete in the Nike Nationals. There are rumors that Nike itself wants to sign her up for an actual marketing deal, although nothing at all has been confirmed.
Even if Nike did come to her, I don’t think she would accept, being that she hates the fact she’s more famous for being hot than an athlete at this point, and the company would more than likely try to bank on her looks and all of the media hubbub than anything else. She definitely does not seem to want any more attention – especially in print ads and on TV – for now at least, and I don’t blame her. (more pics after the jump)
Allison is also getting ready this summer to become an official college student at the University of California. HOLY HELL. That is going to be B-A-N-A-N-A-S for her and everyone who has a class with her, or shares a dorm with her, or sees her at a keg party. If there’s any way for her to get even more publicity, it’s through college. The drinking, the sex, the mixing and mingling with fellow classmates – so many people will undoubtedly try and befriend her, take advantage of her and snap pictures of her (which will show up on the Internet within minutes). Her college experience should be very interesting to say the least, and we’ll be sure to keep you nice and updated with every piece of juicy gossip.
As for the gross, pervy, fratty college guys at the University of California, they should be prepping their pick-up lines to use on her right about….now.
I see many, many more pole references in Allison Stokke’s future.
UPDATE 4.15.08 – Check out Allison’s new Cal Pole Vauting Pics
[album=52]

         


The Bloggers’ New Obsession: Allison Stokke
CC Staff — Thu, 31 May 2007 21:00:15 +0000

If you need proof of just how much media, and, more specifically, Internet blogs, now have complete control over our culture in a way that seems to hypnotize us all, look no further than Allison Stokke.
Who the hell is Allison Stokke, you might ask?
Allison Stokke is an 18-year-old California high school student, winner of the 2004 California state pole vaulting competition and University of California scholarship earner. It also just so happens that Allison Stokke is what males would refer to as “totally smoking.”
It all started with the simple snap of this picture. Now, Allison Stokke is one of the most popular searches on the Internet and has been absolutely bombarded by Myspacers, sports bloggers, journalists and creepy men alike.
The only problem is, Allison and her family hate all of this newfound attention – especially the blog on With Leather that turned her into a sex symbol literally, overnight. Soon after, Stokke and an entire article written about her made the front page of the Washington Post – a place usually reserved for actual current events, like….um….yea, that little war that’s been going on.
Stokke speaks out about her unwanted fame in this clip.
While I feel bad for this girl, (it’s not like she’s Lohan, who keeps going out at night, asking for it) she never asked for this and seems genuine in simply wanting to be an athlete and nothing more) I don’t think she should keep putting herself in the public eye. (see more photos after the jump)
It’s only going to make men look at her more and say gross things, just like one of the guys who blogged:
  1. I’d hit it.

2. I would like to hit it.
3. I certainly would like to partake in some Stokkey Pokey (and turn myself around/THAT’S WHAT IT’S ALL ABOUT!)
4. No, I mean it. I would break it off in that and never look back.
5. What’s a pole vault?
I’m sure all the buzz surrounding her won’t die down anytime soon, being that our society eats up modest, pretty girls who photograph well and speak their minds. And this posting here on College Candy certainly won’t make Allison Stokke’s problems any better.
Sorry, Allison! I guess the only real solution here would be for you to stop pole vaulting and start eating a LOT of cake.  Click here for more photos.


Allison Stokke