My Response to Daniel Akst's America: Land of Loners?

Responding to the Writer

America: Land of Loners? By Daniel Akst

To disagree but to agree is what I would have to do with Mr. Daniel Akst's theory of the male relationship.  Men can have best friendships just as well as women can with no problems.  Now, if they do have a problem with it or they are in fear of being viewed as being a homosexual just because they are best friends with other male genders then, it only goes to show that they have insecurity issues within themselves that need to be addressed.

Having a best friend as a man has absolutely nothing to do with being a homosexual or much less capable of holding that type of relationship than a woman.  Everyone has friends. There are  many men in general that want a hunting, fishing, or sporting buddy that do less talking because, let's face it, a lot of women are talkers by nature. Men are just built that way and this Mr. Daniel Akst needs to address this.  It does not mean they are less capable of having a close relationship nor does it means they think people will think weird of them.  Men are logical, thinkers, and leaders.  Their makeup is geared that way on purpose.  It is not to say that women are not logical, thinkers or leaders because they are all that.  But keep in mind, that most women are designed to be more sympathetic, more mothering, more charismatic more understanding and possibly even more reasonable in their thinking than what many men are.

For men to hold close friendship’s like women do is very possible but, the down fall of it is that most men are not (until once they pass over the age of 40) because they are not even as emotional as women are.  Women on the other hand, yes, are emotional creatures that are also naturally creative which brings in the beauty of organization. It’s natural for them.  Do you ever see a man rearranging the furniture in a house as often as a women does? My point exactly. Men bring the order in while women get it organized.

Men do the high five hooping thing, and do what men do to congratulate one another.  Women like pretties and nice party gatherings to dress up, to be pretty and talk about things.  While on the other hand, men are just as content in a bar or the garage of their home.  They celebrate, get loud, talk about guns, cars, sports and the crap that is going on in the world for example: “Kill the enemy, yeah!” Most women want to fix the problem without the bloodshed and would like to talk things out or just have their best friends over to talk about a solution in how to fix the problem in a peaceful manner.  Men are action creatures and gather together with friends of action. Women are the caretakers. They want to fix it, mend it, help it, nurture it, make it blossom into something good and upright (remember now, most women that is.).
Most women know their boundaries as well as men do when it comes to relationships with their friends.  Women are more able to adapt to change, when it comes to being independent.  For most women (and this includes the married and unmarried) they are basically the ones that run the household and hold the fort down in an organized, fashionable and acceptable manner. And also for the most part, are the ones to keep up with the cleaning of the home, the kids, the dogs, the bills, the laundry etcetera, more so than what a man is willing and or wanting to do. It just comes naturally for the women. Many men are slobs by nature and many are not.  So does a woman forming a close relationship with another woman mean more than that? No.  So let’s just stop stereo typing the male gender and take it for what it is. Men have close friends and they are allowed to.

Men do not have to be gay to have a close and best friend type of relationship with another guy.  That is just some ding-dongs' messed up notion that was spread around and somehow ridiculously accepted.  The reality of it is, men are just as capable as women are of forming strictly platonic relationships, as best friends, with other men and it not mean anything more than that. So I disagree and agree with Mr. Daniel Akst on his theories of men forming close friendships with other men.

Response to Andrew Lam's Globalization vs America

Responding to the Topic 

Globalization vs. America

Writing Prompt Essay 

            I do not consider myself a citizen of the world because then I would have to identify myself with some morbid, hateful and evil individuals or groups.  I am an individual citizen of a section of the United States of America called Texas.  Although I could call myself a Texan because I have lived, the vast majority of my life, in the state of Texas and also am familiar with the sections of Texas I have lived in but, that does not constitute me as a true dip spitting, gun-shooting, boot-scooting Texan.  I just migrated here with my parents, who migrated here, whom their parents migrated here and so on up to my great-great grandparents. I am an individual who resides in Texas, which is in the United States, which happens to be a section of the world. 

My culture is what I have made it.  It is a mixture of a background and a backdrop of different cities and different states. I have grew up with mostly three major races in my life along with a few other races.  We were not taught on the different cultures or races.  My generation does not look at the color of a person’s skin.We had always treated each other equal. We founded our own culture that was basically a mix of those few races.  It is not like it is today, out of control. We learned to respect others regardless of where they came from as long as they lived peaceable and respectable lifestyles.  We minded our own business and did not meddle in the affairs of others.  There was always this boundary line of privacy we dared not cross.  It was called mutual respect.  What went on in someone else’s home was their own business but on the same token, we all looked out for one another too.

The culture today is basically no culture.  It’s a ‘do as you please, whatever makes you happy’ kind of culture.  Tradition has, for the most part, been flushed down the toilet along with morals and values.  There possibly are more loafers than there are social barriers. It’s just not the same now.