Weddings: A Matter of Days or a Matter of Minutes?

Marriage is considered one of the most important events in an individual’s live. It is a symbol of the close of one chapter the start of an entirely new chapter in the journey of life. It is a signal of immense emotional significance that usually occurs only once in a person’s life. Now you must be thinking about the extensive amount of planning and preparation that ought to take place before anything this grand and monumental. True, marriages take up at least an entire day of not more depending on the religion. For example, a Christian wedding might take one full day while a full blown Hindu wedding might take three to five days. However, as Didion satirically illustrates in Marrying Absurd, these long wedding durations just pale in comparison to the “intensely competitive … better, faster, and more sincere services” offered by Las Vegas “Strip chapels” (Paragraphs 3&4). Las Vegas weddings don’t take a whopping five days. They don’t even take one day. These “Las Vegas weddings” only last a mere “three minutes” (Paragraph 1). “Three minutes” is all it takes for such a monumental event to take place. “Three minutes” is all it takes for a symbol of such immense emotional significance to be complete. “Three minutes” is all it takes to open and close chapters of an individual’s life. Obviously, we all know that “there is no ‘time’ in Las Vegas” and that something that occurs in a matter of minutes certainly will suffice to determine the many years to come in one’s life after marriage.

Non-vegetarianism: Ethical or Immoral?

Non-vegetarianism is nothing new and yet its corresponding debate still rages on like wildfire. It is the question of the century: should it be considered ethically acceptable or morally wrong?

Vegetarians assert that consuming animals is just out right horrible. They cannot fathom the act of mercilessly slaughtering a helpless, innocent animal in order to fill the stomachs of people. They question how non vegetarians don’t seem to find their heinous actions “irksomely PC or sentimental.” They also argue that the animals that people eat are also mammals just like us and that it is completely cruel to subject animals to inhumanity. They promote a vegetarian diet because they believe that plants do not feel pain or suffering and that not eating meat will save many innocent animals from misery. They question, “Is 'all right' to [murder] sentient creature[s] just for our gustatory pleasure?”

On the other hand, non-vegetarians think otherwise. First of all, they argue that plants do in fact feel pain. They mention that it is proven that plants can communicate and also try to defend themselves against being eaten by other species just like any other animal or human. They further go on to claim that there is indeed life in even vegetarian staples like rice, wheat, and fruits just like how there is life in meat like chicken, beef, and pork. They comically ask, “Is not eating the way?” Non-vegetarians also appeal to the scientific fact that there is life in the microbes in the air that die every time you take a breath. Now they challenge the opposing vegetarian party by questioning, “So will you stop breathing now?”

As most of you can probably see, the ethical debate of non-vegetarianism is indeed perplexing. However, this complex debate has a straightforward answer that presents itself within its name. This debate is merely an opposition of two sides that differ in person choices; therefore, this baffling debate of non-vegetarianism is simply “a matter of personal choice.”

Arm Wrestling: An Act of Strength or Love?

Arm wrestling is a match that seems to be the universal test of strength. Whenever I hear the word, I always default to thinking of two extremely muscular guys sitting on opposites ends of a small table where both are grunting loudly trying to force each other’s arm down to the table with brute force in order to prove one is stronger than the other. Now, although this may seem like a contest of pure strength, Brad Manning says otherwise. After reading his essay, Arm Wrestling with My Father, I realized how such an obviously physical act of arm wrestling can really signify strong emotions. Manning argues that the physical act of arm wrestling is also an abstract form of expressing love. In fact the main purpose of his essay is to express his “repressed” love for his father as well as to inform that the emotion of love is fluid and can occur in many different shapes and sizes. For example, Manning’s mother expresses her love in a more traditional fashion by being more expressive and obvious about it. On the other hand, Manning’s father expresses his love in a more subtle way through physical actions of strength. Manning furthers this equalization between the concrete act of arm wrestling and the abstract emotion of love though his juxtaposition of “his [father’s] words” and the action of arm wrestling. Furthermore, he compares the act of “get[ting] down on the floor and grappl[ing], arm against arm” to a more abstract idea of a “conversation” (Manning Paragraph 3). This simile strengthens the comparison between arm wrestling and love by making the physical act more abstract. By transforming arm wrestling into an abstract concept, Manning then shows that arm wrestling is a form of love by demonstrating that it was the “language [him and his father] shared” to express their emotions for each other. After reading this, I realized that this phenomenon is not an abnormality but rather a very common occurrence. In my case, I also share a unique language of love with my father; we communicate through my academic achievement. For example, when I show him my report card with all A’s, he would simply respond with, “Good, but try for A+’s next time.” Although I was initially irritated with my father for not properly acknowledging my achievement, I realized that his constant push for my greater academic achievement is the language of love that we share among ourselves. Now look back to your own life. You may discover many subtle languages of powerful emotion that await you.