Blog

  • How I Saved Four Thousand Dollars by Skipping a Bowl of Yogurt

    How I Saved Four Thousand Dollars by Skipping a Bowl of Yogurt

    The first title best captures the essay’s central revelation: the story begins as consumer advice but ends as a confession about misplaced hope.

    My Aireloom mattress is thirteen years old. It still looks as though it came off the showroom floor yesterday. I paid about $2,200 for it back in 2013. It’s a medium hybrid, a compromise I made because side sleepers are forever warned against firm mattresses. The compromise never quite worked. The bed always struck me as too soft, too marshmallow-like, lacking the taut resilience I prefer. Still, I gave myself a lecture every time the thought of replacing it surfaced.

    Don’t be the princess forever searching for the pea. Sleep on the bed you have and get on with your life.

    For more than a decade, that pep talk held.

    Then, last week, the fever returned.

    Thirteen years sounded ancient. Surely I had earned a new mattress. After all, I had just paid off my mortgage. If there were ever a time to reward myself, this was it. Before long I had disappeared into the rabbit hole known as mattress technology, where every manufacturer promises salvation through proprietary coils, artisanal horsehair, glacier-infused foam, or some other miracle unavailable to ordinary mortals.

    I quickly dismissed the overstuffed pillow-top monstrosities. They looked less like mattresses than wedding cakes. I wanted something firm, springy, disciplined—a mattress with posture. After hours of research, I proudly narrowed the field to three finalists: Aireloom, Stearns & Foster Estate, and Beautyrest Black.

    Like an explorer hacking through the jungle with a machete, I congratulated myself on having separated civilization from chaos.

    The excitement wasn’t really about the mattress.

    It was about rebirth.

    A new bed would usher in a new chapter. Better sleep. Better mornings. Better health. Better life.

    Then I mentioned all this to my wife.

    “What do you think?” I asked. “Should we replace it?”

    She shrugged.

    “Our bed still looks brand new.”

    She was right.

    Neither of us had noticed any sagging. No body impressions. No mysterious valleys swallowing us during the night. The mattress had aged with remarkable dignity. Throwing it away would feel less like an upgrade than an act of perfectly good consumer vandalism.

    That conversation forced an uncomfortable realization.

    If I was looking for rebirth, I wasn’t going to find it in a mattress showroom.

    I was going to have to earn it.

    The problem wasn’t beneath me.

    The problem was on top of the mattress.

    Me.

    At 231 pounds, my sleep apnea becomes noticeably worse. My hips absorb the punishment every night as I sleep on my side. At 210 pounds, everything changes. My apnea drops to tolerable levels. My hips complain less. I wake with more energy, more discipline, more confidence. I feel like the man I keep trying to become.

    The mattress hasn’t changed.

    My body has.

    This isn’t a bed problem.

    It’s a food problem.

    If I launched into the psychology of my relationship with food, you’d be condemned to yet another memoir about emotional eating. We already own an entire library of those books. They all tell roughly the same story: we soothe ourselves with food, reward ourselves with food, celebrate with food, grieve with food, and occasionally mistake food for unconditional love.

    I have no groundbreaking theory to contribute.

    Here’s my autobiography in three words:

    I overeat.

    That’s it.

    I snack too much.

    I’m carrying twenty unnecessary pounds.

    So my latest campaign is almost embarrassingly modest. I’m eliminating my afternoon yogurt bowl—the one loaded with Greek yogurt, protein powder, and berries. Instead of eating four times a day, I’ll eat three.

    To soften the psychological blow, I’ll add a couple spoonfuls of Greek yogurt to my morning oatmeal. Lunch and dinner remain unchanged: protein, vegetables, and a sensible serving of rice or sweet potatoes.

    By my estimate, that should lower my daily intake from something approaching 2,900 calories to roughly 2,400.

    Whether my body cooperates is another matter.

    My metabolism possesses the cunning of an experienced labor negotiator. It has an extraordinary talent for reclaiming every calorie I attempt to eliminate. My unconscious mind may simply enlarge my lunch and dinner portions until I find myself back at 2,900 calories while congratulating myself on my “three-meal plan.”

    If that happens, I won’t invent excuses.

    I already know many of my vulnerabilities.

    Family vacations to Miami, Maui, or Coronado have an uncanny way of becoming weeklong festivals of excess. Every meal transforms into a celebration. Every dessert becomes mandatory because we’re making memories. Before long, memory has acquired another five pounds.

    If moderating carbohydrates proves impossible, I have another option.

    I’ve watched friends thrive on a meat-heavy diet.

    Breakfast is black coffee and electrolyte water.

    Lunch is ground beef or turkey bacon with eggs.

    Dinner is salmon or sirloin with salad.

    The simplicity has undeniable appeal. Protein suppresses my appetite better than oatmeal ever could.

    The problem is that I don’t particularly enjoy living that way.

    After several days, handling raw meat and smelling rendered fat throughout the house begins to repel me. I admire the diet more than I want to live inside it.

    Then comes the pharmaceutical path.

    For now, I have no interest in GLP-1 drugs.

    Perhaps history will prove them miraculous. Perhaps five years from now I’ll wonder why I resisted them. But at this stage I remain wary. Reports of pancreatitis, muscle loss, gastrointestinal complications, and other side effects make me feel as though we’re still watching the largest medical field trial in history unfold in real time.

    So I choose caution.

    I’ll begin with the oldest technology available.

    Eat a little less.

    See what happens.

    If nothing changes, I’ll reassess.

    And in the meantime, I have postponed spending three or four thousand dollars on a new mattress.

    Perhaps for another three years.

    The irony is difficult to miss. I nearly convinced myself that salvation lay hidden beneath layers of handcrafted latex, luxury coils, and cashmere ticking, when all along it was waiting in the space between lunch and dinner.

    The mattress was never asking to be replaced.

    Only its owner was.

  • Chasing Nirvana on the Misery Machine

    Chasing Nirvana on the Misery Machine

    For the past three years, I have climbed aboard the Schwinn Airdyne AD7—better known in my household as the Misery Machine—two or three times a week for fifty to sixty minutes. It complements my three weekly kettlebell workouts by providing just enough suffering to convince me that my life choices deserve constant reevaluation. On a typical ride I burn between 600 and 750 calories. About once a month I have a monster workout that sails past 800 calories. About once a month I have the opposite experience, when my body feels as though it has been poured full of wet concrete and refuses every command I issue. On those days I wave the white flag around the 500-calorie mark.

    The workouts embody the old saying, “It hurts so good,” though that cliché hardly captures what actually happens. On my best days, the ride unfolds in two distinct psychological stages that I have come to call Nirvana I and Nirvana II.

    Nirvana I usually arrives around the 400-calorie mark, roughly thirty to thirty-three minutes into the workout. By then my shirt has surrendered completely to perspiration. Sweat drips from my elbows, pools beneath the bike, and convinces any reasonable observer that the plumbing has failed. My breathing settles into a steady rhythm, the static disappears from my mind, and I feel as though I have been lowered into a warm bath of endorphins. The outside world recedes. My obligations disappear. There is only the machine and me. About eighty percent of my workouts reach this stage.

    Nirvana II is another matter entirely.

    It cannot be scheduled, negotiated, or bullied into existence. It appears only on those rare mornings when physiology, mood, sleep, and providence decide to cooperate. I continue sweating rivers, but fatigue never quite catches me. My cadence remains smooth. My breathing stays controlled. Instead of counting down the remaining minutes, I begin believing absurd things.

    “I’m unstoppable.”

    The Misery Machine no longer owns me.

    I own it.

    The fan roars. My legs keep driving. Every revolution of the pedals reinforces the illusion that I have temporarily escaped the ordinary laws of aging and entropy. For twenty glorious minutes I become convinced I could ride forever. Nirvana II is the Holy Grail of my fitness life. It is the workout equivalent of pitching a perfect game.

    Unfortunately, every heaven has its corresponding hell.

    I call it Shut Down.

    Unlike Nirvana, Shut Down announces itself almost immediately. Within the first fifteen minutes I can tell something is wrong. My breathing becomes shallow. My legs feel leaden. The usual RPMs suddenly resemble Olympic qualifying standards. Every minute feels borrowed.

    Years of yoga have taught me not to argue with these days.

    When Shut Down arrives, resistance is futile. I simply acknowledge reality.

    “Today is not my day.”

    I lower the intensity, keep pedaling, and allow my body to dictate the terms of surrender. Most Shut Down workouts end around forty minutes and 450 calories. They leave me discouraged, though experience has taught me not to overreact. Ninety-nine percent of the time the next workout restores me to normal, as though my body merely needed to remind me who actually runs the operation.

    Oddly enough, the existence of Nirvana II is what keeps drawing me back.

    Every workout carries the possibility of discovering that elusive state again. It is exercise’s version of Christmas morning. Will today be the day? Will I feel invincible? Will I conquer the Misery Machine instead of merely surviving it?

    I never know.

    That uncertainty is precisely what makes me keep climbing back aboard.

  • The Wrinkled Prune

    The Wrinkled Prune

    In 1989, I became infatuated with a Pennsylvania band called The Ocean Blue, especially their haunting song “Drifting, Falling.” Naturally, I needed the CD. For reasons that now escape me, I decided to buy it at one of the strangest retail establishments I have ever entered: a Northern California gift shop called The Wrinkled Prune.

    How do I describe The Wrinkled Prune?

    It would be easier to describe what it didn’t sell.

    The store trafficked in novelty candies, decorative soaps, greeting cards, party supplies, imported chocolates, whimsical knickknacks, coffee mugs with forgettable slogans, scented candles, stuffed animals, and dozens of miscellaneous objects whose sole purpose seemed to be occupying shelf space until someone bought them out of mild confusion.

    But merchandise wasn’t the real mystery.

    The real mystery was this:

    Why did The Wrinkled Prune exist?

    And why on earth would anyone give a store that name?

    The answer begins with the owner.

    I attended high school with him. I’ll call him T. He drifted around the popular crowd, but never as one of its genuine members. He functioned more like its court jester—the lovable mascot whose chief social responsibility was to laugh at himself before everyone else could. Slightly overweight and perpetually goofy, T possessed a remarkable gift for turning his own awkwardness into entertainment. Whenever something struck him as funny—which was often—he erupted into volcanic laughter. His entire body convulsed. His fists clenched. He bounced on the balls of his feet while his thick black hair flopped wildly in every direction like a malfunctioning wind-up toy.

    Most people recoil from ridicule.

    T converted it into currency.

    After graduation, however, he seemed directionless. His father, a successful businessman, apparently decided that if purpose wouldn’t find his son, perhaps purpose could be purchased. So he bought T a gift shop.

    One afternoon I wandered inside. T stood behind the counter surrounded by several employees—all attractive young women in their late teens. I couldn’t help imagining the father’s reasoning. Maybe ownership would transform his son into a businessman. Maybe responsibility would attract confidence. Maybe confidence would attract a girlfriend. Parents have financed stranger dreams.

    In retrospect, The Wrinkled Prune felt like high school extended by other means.

    The name itself was a form of self-parody. A prune occupies an unfortunate place in the cultural imagination. It conjures wrinkles, old age, constipation, nursing homes, and the slow betrayal of the human body. Throughout adolescence T had made himself the punchline. Why stop now? Why not build an entire business around the joke?

    Unfortunately, self-awareness is not a business model.

    The Wrinkled Prune hemorrhaged money. Within a year it vanished, leaving behind little more than an unforgettable name and my copy of The Ocean Blue. I don’t know what became of T. He always struck me as fundamentally decent—a man less interested in success than in being liked. I hope life eventually showed him more kindness than high school had.

    But I have never forgotten that store.

    In fact, I think nearly all of us carry around some version of The Wrinkled Prune.

    What I’m describing is the vanity project: an enterprise undertaken less because the world needs it than because its creator needs the world to notice it. It is a monument to the self disguised as a public service. In the pre-digital age, vanity projects usually belonged to the wealthy. A millionaire financed an independent film no one watched, published an autobiography no one requested, endowed a museum wing bearing his name, or commissioned an oversized oil portrait in which he appeared to possess the moral gravity of Abraham Lincoln. Vanity required substantial capital.

    Today, vanity has been democratized. For the price of a webcam, microphone, and broadband connection, anyone can launch a podcast, livestream for six hours to an audience of twelve, or begin every video with the solemn declaration, “People have been asking me…” when no such people exist. The internet has transformed vanity from a luxury reserved for aristocrats into a subscription service available to anyone with Wi-Fi. Fortunately, not every podcast, YouTube channel, or livestream is a vanity project. Some genuinely educate, entertain, or enrich public life. The defining question is not whether anyone is watching, but whether the creator would continue producing the work if no one were.

    The desire beneath all this is perfectly human. We want to matter. We want to belong. We want to participate in the conversation instead of watching it through the window. But the digital age has turned belonging into branding. We are encouraged to cultivate audiences instead of friendships, niches instead of curiosities, and identities narrow enough for algorithms to categorize. We are constantly reminded to “find our lane,” as though a human being should resemble a freeway exit.

    I am hardly exempt.

    For fifteen years I maintained a YouTube channel devoted primarily to watches. On its best days, it attracted thousands of viewers. Yet over time I noticed an uncomfortable truth: every new video fueled the very obsession I claimed to be examining. At sixty-four, I have reached the stage of life where accumulation should be giving way to simplification. Instead, the algorithm quietly whispered, “Buy another watch. Make another video.”

    Occasionally I wandered away from watches and made videos about other subjects that interested me.

    The algorithm responded with majestic indifference.

    Business was slow.

    No one wandered into The Wrinkled Prune.

    That lesson was difficult but valuable. Unless you possess genuine expertise or offer something distinctive, a channel devoted to miscellaneous fascinations resembles a gift shop selling decorative soaps, imported candy, birthday balloons, and novelty coffee mugs under one bewildering roof. You are not building an audience. You are stocking shelves. Your vanity insists that the world needs one more opinion. The world politely walks past your front window.

    Eventually, The Wrinkled Prune closes.

    Does this mean we should silence ourselves? Stop writing? Abandon every attempt to contribute?

    Not at all.

    Life unfolds in seasons. There are years when your voice resonates widely and years when almost no one hears it. Neither condition should define your worth. During quieter seasons, remain curious. Read deeply. Listen carefully. Accumulate wisdom rather than followers. If, in time, you discover something genuinely worth saying that improves another person’s life, speak. If not, there is dignity in remaining silent.

    Just don’t open The Wrinkled Prune.

  • Sleeping with the Enemy: My Twelve-Year War with a Hybrid Mattress

    Sleeping with the Enemy: My Twelve-Year War with a Hybrid Mattress

    Twelve years ago, I spent about $2,500 on a California king hybrid mattress. Choosing the firmness felt less like shopping and more like negotiating a peace treaty between two warring factions of my anatomy. My heart wanted extra firm. My hips, burdened by the indignity of side sleeping, demanded something more forgiving. Conventional wisdom insisted that side sleepers need cushioning, but too much softness has always struck me as a design flaw masquerading as luxury. A plush mattress feels like a bed that has already lived a long, difficult life before arriving in your bedroom. Firmness, by contrast, exudes confidence. It says, “I’ve got you.” Plush whispers, “Good luck.”

    So I compromised and bought a medium-firm hybrid. It was the sensible decision. It was also, I suspect, the wrong one.

    I was never in love with the mattress. It relieved some pressure on my hips, but every night I found myself wishing I had ignored the sleep experts and trusted my instincts. Over the years, the compromise became a nightly ritual. Around one in the morning, I would abandon the bedroom and migrate to the living room.

    There, oddly enough, awaited my favorite bed.

    The couch itself deserves little credit. We bought it online six years ago because it looked handsome, not because it possessed any detectable concern for the human spine. It sits low, feels stiff, and offers about as much cushioning as a church pew. To make it habitable, I purchased a three-inch self-inflating camping mattress—a miraculous piece of engineering that silently inhales air without a pump and transforms an indifferent couch into something approaching civilization.

    My nightly arrangement has become embarrassingly elaborate. One pillow supports my head. Two more live beneath my knees whenever I rotate onto my back. A velvet blanket completes the ensemble. Together they create what I affectionately call my homeless encampment.

    My wife finds the nickname less amusing than I do.

    Whenever guests are coming over, she politely reminds me that respectable families generally do not display camping equipment in their living rooms. So I dismantle the encampment long enough to preserve the illusion that functional adults live here. Once our visitors leave, however, the mattress returns to its rightful place. As an added bonus, it triples the comfort of the couch for watching television.

    Fortunately, my wife doesn’t resent my nightly migration. If anything, it benefits both of us. I wake several times each night to visit the bathroom, while she sleeps lightly enough to awaken if a moth lands too aggressively on the windowsill. Sleeping in the living room allows me to use the guest bathroom and grants her several uninterrupted hours of sleep.

    I’ve discovered I’m hardly alone. My cousin does the same thing. So does my father-in-law.

    This raises an important scientific question.

    Is couch migration a uniquely male phenomenon?

    Perhaps our prehistoric ancestors developed the habit as a survival strategy. Maybe every few hours one caveman would quietly relocate to another corner of the cave to keep saber-toothed tigers from developing predictable dining habits. Somewhere an evolutionary psychologist is no doubt preparing a grant proposal entitled Nocturnal Male Couch Migration: An Adaptive Response to Pleistocene Predation. I wish that scholar the best of luck. I have more pressing concerns.

    Namely, buying another mattress.

    After twelve years, my hybrid has begun exhibiting the subtle symptoms of mattress middle age: faint depressions, a hint of fatigue, and support that now feels more nostalgic than structural.

    Buying a mattress was already maddening twelve years ago. Even then, the process resembled defending a doctoral dissertation in applied sleep science. You had to choose among innersprings, memory foam, latex, hybrids, pillow tops, Euro tops, plush, medium, firm, and the delightfully evasive category known as luxury firm—apparently invented for shoppers unwilling to admit they had absolutely no idea what they wanted.

    Today the situation has descended into magnificent absurdity.

    Modern mattress shopping requires fluency in pressure mapping, copper infusion, graphite cooling, zoned lumbar support, phase-change materials, edge reinforcement, biometric sleep tracking, AI-adjustable firmness, and enough proprietary foam technologies to qualify for military clearance. Every manufacturer assures you that its latest innovation has finally solved humanity’s oldest engineering challenge: lying down.

    By the time you’ve compared enough models, you’ve forgotten what sleep even feels like.

    Buying a bed now resembles selecting a spacecraft for a mission to Mars. All you wanted was eight peaceful hours. Instead, you’ve accidentally enrolled in graduate school.

    My strategy this time is refreshingly simple. I’ll buy a firm hybrid mattress and let a two-inch topper negotiate peace with my hips. The mattress will provide the confidence; the topper can handle diplomacy.

    That leaves only one obstacle: the mattress showroom.

    These retail stores exert a mysterious gravitational pull on commission salespeople whose weekly Costco runs apparently depend upon whether my hips achieve emotional closure on Mattress Number Seven. As I stretch out on one bed after another, I can almost hear them calculating mortgage payments from the angle of my shoulder.

    The alternative, of course, is ordering a mattress online.

    But buying a bed you’ve never tested strikes me as the consumer equivalent of accepting a mail-order bride. More often than not, the relationship ends with both parties discovering the true meaning of the word incompatibility.

    So I’ll brave the showroom.

    I’ll smile politely at the salespeople.

    I’ll pretend not to notice the desperation in their eyes.

    And I’ll wear long pants and socks.

    After watching thousands of strangers climb onto those mattresses in their bare feet, I refuse to expose my own. A man may lose his dignity to age, insomnia, and nocturnal couch migration, but there is no reason to surrender it barefoot in a mattress store.

  • The Blurred Line Between Mental Illness and Evil (college essay prompt)

    The Blurred Line Between Mental Illness and Evil (college essay prompt)

    When people encounter shocking acts of cruelty, manipulation, or obsessive behavior, they often reach for two explanations. One explanation is psychological: the person must be mentally ill. The other explanation is moral: the person is evil. These explanations offer a kind of comfort because they simplify the problem. If destructive behavior is the result of mental illness, it can be understood through psychology and possibly treated. If the behavior is evil, it can be condemned and punished. However, many real-life cases resist these simple categories. Some individuals appear both irrational and calculating at the same time. Their actions may show signs of psychological instability while also involving deliberate choices that harm others.

    The documentaries The Perfect Neighbor and High School Catfish explore this unsettling territory. In both films, individuals behave in ways that disturb viewers because their actions seem both obsessive and intentional. Conflicts escalate beyond reason. Deception and manipulation play central roles. At the same time, the people involved often feel deeply wronged, isolated, or misunderstood. Their sense of grievance becomes a powerful narrative that justifies their behavior in their own minds. As the stories unfold, viewers are left asking a difficult question: Are these individuals primarily suffering from mental illness, or are they morally responsible for destructive actions that reveal something darker about human nature?

    These documentaries also highlight the role of loneliness, resentment, and social alienation. Individuals who feel rejected or humiliated may develop a deep sense of grievance toward others. Without meaningful relationships or healthy outlets for frustration, those grievances can intensify over time. Emotional pain can slowly transform into anger, suspicion, and obsession. In some cases, people begin to see themselves as victims of a hostile world. When this happens, harmful behavior may feel justified to them—even when it appears shocking or cruel to outsiders.

    At the same time, manipulation and deception complicate the psychological explanation. In High School Catfish, elaborate lies and fabricated identities are used to control and emotionally manipulate others. In The Perfect Neighbor, conflicts escalate through a pattern of hostility and retaliation. These behaviors often appear strategic rather than purely irrational. This raises an important question: when someone carefully constructs deception or escalates conflict, does that suggest deliberate moral wrongdoing rather than mental illness? Or can manipulation itself be a symptom of deeper psychological disturbance, such as narcissism, obsession, or a need for validation?

    Write a 1,200-word argumentative essay that explores the blurred line between mental illness and evil as it appears in The Perfect Neighbor and High School Catfish. Your essay should develop a clear thesis that explains how these documentaries challenge the simple distinction between psychological disturbance and moral responsibility.

    Your introduction must include a thesis with mapping components. This means your thesis should clearly state your main argument and identify the key reasons that will organize your body paragraphs.

    Example thesis with mapping:

    The disturbing behavior portrayed in The Perfect Neighbor and High School Catfish demonstrates that the boundary between mental illness and evil is often blurred because intense loneliness can distort perception, personal grievances can justify cruelty, and deliberate manipulation allows individuals to transform emotional pain into calculated harm.

    In this example, the mapping components are:

    ● loneliness and social isolation

    ● grievance and resentment

    ● manipulation and deception

    Each of these would become a body paragraph in the essay.

    Your essay should include the following elements:

    • A clear thesis with mapping components
    • Analysis of both documentaries
    • Specific examples from the films that support your argument
    • A counterargument that challenges your thesis
    • A rebuttal defending your position
    • A concluding paragraph that reflects on what these cases reveal about human behavior and modern society

    Possible directions for your argument include:

    • destructive behavior may emerge from both psychological disturbance and moral choice
    • loneliness and grievance can transform emotional pain into cruelty
    • manipulation and deception suggest deliberate moral responsibility
    • society sometimes labels disturbing behavior as mental illness in order to avoid confronting the reality of evil
    • disturbing actions may result from a complex mixture of psychological vulnerability, social isolation, and moral failure

    Your goal is not simply to summarize the documentaries but to analyze what they reveal about the complicated relationship between mental illness, moral responsibility, and destructive human behavior. In your conclusion, reflect on what these stories suggest about how society should understand and respond to actions that appear both psychologically disturbed and morally troubling.

    Helpful Definition: “The Hero Delusion.”

    It’s the phenomenon in which people commit harmful acts while believing they are the protagonist in a moral drama. Both documentaries actually illustrate that pattern remarkably well.

    Personal Engagement Building Block 3

    For your first paragraph, write a 200-300-word profile of someone you know—or a friend of a friend—whose behavior could reasonably be described as morally troubling, destructive, or reprehensible. Begin by vividly describing the person’s actions and their impact on others. While it may be tempting to condemn the behavior outright, the purpose of this paragraph is not simply to judge the individual but to explore the difficulty of explaining why they behave as they do.

    As you develop the profile, consider competing interpretations of the person’s conduct. Some observers might view the individual as fundamentally immoral or “evil,” arguing that their actions reflect selfishness, cruelty, or a conscious disregard for others. Others might suggest that the behavior is rooted in psychological disorders, trauma, personality pathology, or mental illness. Use specific details to illustrate why the person’s actions resist simple explanations and raise difficult questions about moral responsibility, free will, and human behavior.

    Your paragraph should ultimately establish the central tension of your essay: whether certain forms of harmful behavior are better understood as evidence of moral corruption, psychological dysfunction, or some combination of both. The goal is not to resolve the debate but to introduce a complex case that invites further analysis.

    Argumentative Engagement Building Block 3

    Write two paragraphs: a thesis paragraph and a counterargument-rebuttal paragraph.

    Your thesis paragraph should present a clear, arguable, and defensible claim that answers the central question of your essay. The paragraph should not merely announce a topic but establish a position that reasonable people could debate. After stating your thesis, include mapping components that identify the major points your body paragraphs will use to support your argument. These mapping components should provide readers with a clear roadmap of your essay’s structure and reasoning. Your thesis paragraph should be approximately 200 words.

    Your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph should address a legitimate objection to your thesis. Begin by clearly and fairly explaining a viewpoint that challenges your argument. Demonstrate why thoughtful readers might disagree with your position and how their concerns complicate your claim. After presenting the counterargument, write a rebuttal that responds to those objections. A strong rebuttal may concede valid points made by the opposing side while demonstrating that, on balance, your argument remains more persuasive. It may also alleviate concerns by clarifying misconceptions, introducing additional evidence, or identifying important information that the opposing side overlooks. The goal is not to dismiss opposing viewpoints but to engage them thoughtfully and strengthen your overall argument. Your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph should be between 200 and 250 words.

  • The Go-Home Heat of Ordinary Life

    The Go-Home Heat of Ordinary Life

    Around seven this evening, I found myself in Target performing the small rituals of domestic survival. I drifted first to produce, where I stood contemplating six-packs of kiwis—those fuzzy, unglamorous orbs that look like they were designed by a committee that feared both beauty and commitment.

    To my left stood a blonde woman in black athletic tights, late thirties, hair cinched back by a black headband. Her eyes were ringed with the faint bruising of fatigue or life—or both. When she saw me reach for the kiwis, her face brightened with the sudden, evangelical urgency of someone who has found a truth and is no longer capable of keeping it to herself.

    “Have you ever bought the golden ones?”

    I nodded, already sensing the sermon.

    “I love those because you can eat the skin.”

    “I can do without the skin,” I said, hoping to signal that my relationship with fruit had boundaries.

    She leaned in, undeterred. “Don’t skip that part. That’s where you’re getting all your antioxidants, folate, vitamin E, and fiber.”

    She delivered this litany with the confidence of someone who had recently completed a deep dive into the internet’s temple of wellness influencers and emerged fluent in their catechism.

    “I’m a true believer in the kiwi,” I said, offering a diplomatic half-truth in the hopes of ending the exchange.

    It did not end the exchange.

    She urged me to seek out the golden kiwis and to consume them whole, skin and all, as though salvation itself depended on my willingness to chew through fuzz. I smiled, nodded, and executed a tactical retreat.

    She struck me as a fundamentally decent person, but I recognized the type. I’ve met her before in various incarnations: the recently converted, the self-reinvented, the earnest disciple of a new regimen. Somewhere in her recent past, there had likely been a fracture—addiction, heartbreak, loneliness—and now she clung to nutrition and fitness as both shield and scripture. Her enthusiasm, admirable in theory, had exceeded her social boundaries. 

    Five minutes later, we encountered each other again in the granola aisle, approaching from opposite directions like two diplomats from uneasy nations. Our carts collided in that narrow space, and she immediately yielded.

    “You can go first.”

    The earlier fervor had drained from her. In its place was a kind of tentative humility, as though she had replayed the kiwi lecture in her mind and found it excessive. She seemed smaller now, slightly folded into herself, her previous confidence replaced by a quiet, almost visible self-consciousness.

    I sensed embarrassment, perhaps even shame—not because she had said anything offensive, but because she had revealed too much of herself too quickly. Now she was attempting restraint, but the adjustment hadn’t taken. The performance read not as composed but as deflated.

    The poor woman was unraveling in real time, her emotional weather shifting faster than she could dress for it.

    “No worries,” I said, and moved past her.

    Later, at home, I found myself thinking about the kiwi evangelist with more sympathy than irritation. I recognized the impulse. I know what it feels like to become intoxicated by an idea and immediately want to share it with anyone within earshot. I have been that person—too eager, too talkative, too quick to mistake oversharing for connection. Only later does the embarrassment arrive, that slow realization that enthusiasm, when stripped of self-awareness, can become its own form of social aggression.

    People rarely reward that kind of personality. In professional wrestling, every story revolves around two archetypes: the Babyface, the hero who earns the audience’s affection, and the Heel, the villain who earns its contempt. Some Heels possess charisma so magnetic that people love hating them. They generate what wrestling insiders call real heat. Their arrogance, cruelty, and swagger become irresistible entertainment. In sports broadcasting, Howard Cosell was the apotheosis of this phenomenon. He irritated millions with such magnificent consistency that irritation itself became addictive. America tuned in partly to watch the games and partly to watch Cosell be Cosell.

    But there is a far more unfortunate kind of Heel. He isn’t fascinating enough to hate. He merely occupies oxygen. His habits are tedious, his mannerisms grating, his conversation a slow-acting sedative. Wrestling has a name for this, too: go-home heat. The audience doesn’t boo because the villain has done his job brilliantly. They boo because they want him off the screen. They aren’t emotionally invested. They’re simply exhausted.

    Sometimes I wonder whether our brains instinctively divide humanity into Babyfaces and Heels. If so, most of us who become Heels don’t achieve the glamorous status of generating real heat. We generate go-home heat. We become the person whose presence subtly shortens conversations, whose invitations quietly stop arriving, whose absence is greeted not with grief but with relief.

    I’ve felt that kind of heat more than once. The cruelest version isn’t public humiliation; it’s private disappearance. A friend stops calling. Invitations evaporate. Conversations become obligations. You realize you’ve crossed an invisible line from Babyface to Heel, not because anyone announced it, but because the emotional temperature in the room has changed. You can feel the polite distance settling in like cold fog. At that point, dignity requires only one response. You respect the boundary. You gather your things. You go home.

    Marriage provides one of the purest laboratories for go-home heat. I’ve known more than a few husbands whose wives finally reached the end of their patience and, with varying degrees of diplomacy, informed them that the show had been canceled. The message was always some variation of the same theme: I’ve grown up. You haven’t. Life with you has become lonelier than life without you. In the early days of courtship, these men were Babyfaces. They possessed charm, humor, ambition, and just enough mystery to generate what wrestling fans call pop—the roar of approval when the hero bursts through the curtain. But pop has a shelf life. If the hero never develops beyond his opening act, applause curdles into indifference. The jokes become stale. The promises expire. Eventually the audience stops cheering and starts looking toward the exit. Divorce, in many cases, is simply the marriage announcing that the Babyface has become the Heel.

    I recently watched a far less consequential but equally revealing Heel performance at Trader Joe’s.

    It was a quiet Saturday morning. About fifteen minutes into my shopping, I was comparing pasta sauces beside two sisters in their sixties, both sporting jet-black hair and the alert posture of women who had spent decades detecting trouble before it fully arrived. Then trouble arrived.

    A disturbance erupted in the frozen-food aisle.

    At first I assumed it was the familiar soundtrack of retail life—employees exchanging sarcastic insults, one playing the Babyface, the other the Heel, everyone secretly enjoying the performance. That illusion lasted perhaps three seconds. The voices hardened. The volume climbed. This wasn’t banter. This was a genuine kerfuffle, the kind baseball announcers once used to describe a bench-clearing brawl after someone wore a ninety-five-mile-per-hour fastball in the ribs.

    The dialogue quickly settled into the hypnotic repetition of an absurdist play.

    “Stop coughing on the food.”

    “Mind your own business.”

    Again.

    “Stop coughing on the food.”

    “Mind your own business.”

    The sisters and I exchanged the universal glance of strangers silently agreeing that civilization had taken an unexpected coffee break. Around us, employees gathered in nervous little clusters like prairie dogs emerging from their burrows to determine whether the predator had moved on.

    I never saw the alleged cougher. He remained an unseen villain, a phantom whose crimes could no longer be verified. But I did meet his prosecutor.

    He stormed into our aisle still simmering with indignation, muttering fragments of his closing argument to no one in particular. He was a bodybuilder in his late twenties with the unmistakable lat-spread gait of a man who had spent so much time widening his back that walking normally had become optional. He carried a grocery bag in each hand as though they were ceremonial dumbbells. Gray sweatpants. Turquoise T-shirt bearing the single word STRONG, just in case anyone had mistaken him for an accountant.

    The shirt was drenched with sweat, suggesting he’d recently emerged from the nearby UFC gym and hadn’t yet made the psychological transition from gladiator to grocery shopper.

    His expression attempted righteous indignation, but something betrayed him.

    He looked around.

    No one was applauding.

    No one admired his courage.

    No one seemed grateful that justice had been served in aisle seven.

    Instead, every face wore the same expression: Please remove this man from the premises.

    The go-home heat was overwhelming.

    He had mistaken confrontation for leadership, volume for authority, and muscles for moral credibility. Whatever point he believed he was making had been eclipsed by the spectacle of his performance. The entire store had unconsciously promoted him from self-appointed hero to official nuisance.

    For just a second, I caught something almost touching flicker across his face. It was the expression of a balloon discovering a pin. His certainty leaked away. Chagrin briefly appeared before pride hurried back to cover it.

    As for me, I reverted to one of humanity’s oldest survival instincts.

    I became wallpaper.

    I examined jars of marinara with scholarly intensity, refusing to make eye contact. The last thing I wanted was to be drafted into another man’s private morality play.

    A few minutes later, I spotted him again while checking out.

    He stood two lanes away.

    The entire store seemed aware of him.

    People stole glances over shopping carts. Conversations paused. The emotional climate had shifted. If Trader Joe’s had permitted audience participation, I suspect candy-bar wrappers, reusable shopping bags, and overripe bananas might have sailed gracefully through the air.

    He knew.

    His eyes darted around the room. He tucked his chin toward his chest, rounded his shoulders, and attempted the oldest disappearing act known to embarrassed human beings: becoming physically smaller. Unfortunately, shame rarely makes anyone less conspicuous. It merely signals to the audience that the verdict has already been rendered.

    The whispers began.

    “What a jerk.”

    “One guy can ruin the whole atmosphere.”

    “He really overplayed his hand.”

    “That guy watches way too many Bro videos.”

    He hurried out of the store with the defeated posture of a politician leaving the courthouse after an indictment, squeezed his improbable physique into a modest Honda Civic, and disappeared into traffic.

    Go-home heat is a cruel force, but perhaps it serves an evolutionary purpose. Every society needs mechanisms for enforcing its unwritten rules. Sometimes applause rewards admirable behavior. Sometimes boos remind us where the boundaries lie. Like every weapon, however, go-home heat demands restraint. Used wisely, it protects a community’s moral norms. Used recklessly, it becomes little more than collective bullying disguised as virtue.

  • The Performance Trap: Online Identity, Narcissism, and the Collapse of the Real Self (college essay prompt)

    The Performance Trap: Online Identity, Narcissism, and the Collapse of the Real Self (college essay prompt)

    In the Netflix documentary The Crash and the Black Mirror episode “Joan Is Awful,” audiences witness characters whose lives become consumed by spectacle, performance, surveillance, and the relentless pressure of online visibility. While the two works differ in genre—one a real-life tragedy and the other a satirical dystopian drama—both raise disturbing questions about how modern digital culture reshapes identity, distorts reality, and erodes the boundary between authentic selfhood and online performance.

    In The Crash, the documentary suggests that Mackenzie Shirilla’s compulsive online self-curation reflected a deeper psychological unraveling in which image management, attention-seeking, and social media validation became inseparable from her sense of identity. Meanwhile, in “Joan Is Awful,” Joan discovers that her life has been transformed into a grotesque entertainment product streamed to millions of viewers, forcing her to confront the horrifying possibility that her real self has become secondary to a digitally manufactured persona designed for mass consumption. In both works, online visibility functions less as a tool for communication and more as a vortex that pulls individuals toward narcissism, performative behavior, emotional instability, and estrangement from reality itself.

    Write a 1,200-word argumentative essay in which you compare The Crash and “Joan Is Awful” to examine the claim that maintaining a constant online presence can suck people into a vortex of unhinged narcissism and madness that makes them unrecognizable from their authentic selves.

    Your essay should analyze how both works depict:

    ● the transformation of identity into performance;

    ● the addictive pursuit of attention, relevance, and validation;

    ● the psychological consequences of constant self-curation and surveillance;

    ● the collapse of the boundary between private life and public spectacle;

    ● and the dangers of confusing online visibility with genuine human worth.

    You should also address the broader cultural implications of these works. What do these texts suggest about the modern relationship between technology and identity? Do social media platforms merely reveal narcissism already present in human nature, or do they actively manufacture and intensify it? At what point does self-expression become self-erasure?

    A strong essay will move beyond summary and develop a clear argumentative thesis that makes an original claim about the psychological and cultural dangers presented in both works. Your thesis should be supported by detailed analysis of scenes, dialogue, imagery, characterization, and thematic parallels between the documentary and the episode.

    You must include:

    ● a clear and debatable thesis;

    ● detailed comparison of both works;

    ● at least one counterargument and rebuttal;

    ● analysis of specific scenes and examples;

    ● and thoughtful commentary about the relationship between technology, identity, and modern culture.

    Possible directions for argument include:

    ● Social media transforms ordinary narcissism into pathological self-obsession.

    ● Constant online performance erodes authentic identity and emotional stability.

    ● Digital culture rewards outrage, exhibitionism, and emotional extremity.

    ● Online validation creates a dopamine-driven cycle that destabilizes mental health.

    ● Surveillance culture turns human beings into entertainment products.

    ● The internet encourages people to construct marketable personas rather than genuine selves.

    You may agree, disagree, or complicate the prompt’s central argument, but your essay must directly engage the idea that online self-curation can psychologically deform individuals and distance them from reality.

    Requirements:

    ● Approximately 1,200 words

    ● MLA format

    ● Clear introduction, body paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal section, and conclusion

    ● Use evidence from both The Crash and “Joan Is Awful”

    ● Include a Works Cited page

    The strongest essays will avoid simplistic “technology bad” arguments and instead explore the more unsettling possibility that modern digital culture rewards the most performative, narcissistic, and emotionally unstable versions of ourselves until the performance eventually consumes the person behind it.

    Personal Building Block 2

    For your first body paragraph, write a vivid profile of someone you know—or a friend of a friend—whose constant online presence has placed significant strain on their mental and emotional well-being. Describe how this person became absorbed in documenting, sharing, and curating nearly every aspect of their life for an online audience. How much time do they spend on social media? What kinds of content do they post, and what motivates them to seek attention, approval, or validation online?

    Analyze how this behavior has affected other areas of their life, including school, work, family relationships, friendships, or romantic relationships. Have they experienced anxiety, insecurity, loneliness, or an unhealthy dependence on likes, comments, and online engagement? Did they eventually recognize the negative effects of their behavior and take steps to change, or do they remain trapped in the cycle of constant self-presentation and digital validation?

    Your profile should include vivid details that capture the person’s personality, habits, and social environment. More importantly, it should illustrate how algorithm-driven platforms can influence behavior by rewarding attention-seeking, emotional intensity, and perpetual self-disclosure. Use the individual’s experience to show how a life increasingly organized around online performance can distort identity, damage relationships, and contribute to feelings of unhappiness, alienation, or loss of self. Your paragraph should be between 200 and 300 words.

    Argumentative Building Block 2

    You will turn in two paragraphs, your thesis and conclusion. 

    Your thesis paragraph should present a clear, arguable, and defensible claim that answers the central question of your essay. The paragraph should not merely announce a topic but establish a position that reasonable people could debate. After stating your thesis, include mapping components that identify the major points your body paragraphs will use to support your argument. These mapping components should provide readers with a clear roadmap of your essay’s structure and reasoning. Your thesis paragraph should be approximately 200 words.

    Your conclusion paragraph should move beyond the specific events of The Crash and “Joan Is Awful” to explore the broader cultural significance of your comparison. What do these texts reveal about the relationship between technology, identity, and human behavior in the digital age? Do social media platforms merely expose narcissistic tendencies that have always existed, or do they actively encourage and amplify them? At what point does self-expression cease to be authentic and become a performance shaped by algorithms, audiences, and the pursuit of attention? Consider whether modern technology has blurred the distinction between reality and representation to such an extent that people increasingly struggle to distinguish genuine experiences from curated personas. A strong conclusion should not simply summarize your argument but explain why it matters. Ultimately, your paragraph should demonstrate how The Crash and “Joan Is Awful” illuminate larger concerns about identity, authenticity, technology, and the future of human relationships in a world increasingly shaped by digital platforms. Your conclusion should be approximately 150 words.

  • The Addictive Power of Sports Betting (college essay prompt)

    The Addictive Power of Sports Betting (college essay prompt)

    Length

    1,200 words minimum

    Sources

    At least 4 credible sources

    Assignment

    Sports betting has become one of the fastest-growing industries in American culture. Once confined largely to casinos and illegal bookmakers, gambling is now integrated into professional sports broadcasts, podcasts, social media feeds, smartphone apps, and influencer culture. Millions of young men can place bets within seconds while receiving a constant stream of betting advice, predictions, and promotional offers.

    Many defenders argue that sports betting is simply another form of entertainment. Most participants gamble casually without developing serious problems. However, critics argue that the current sports-betting ecosystem possesses an unprecedented ability to exploit psychological vulnerabilities, especially among young men struggling with loneliness, identity, status anxiety, and the search for belonging.

    For this essay, analyze the causes of sports betting’s addictive power. Your goal is not merely to describe gambling addiction but to explain why sports betting has become so psychologically compelling in contemporary culture.

    In your analysis, consider some of the following questions:

    • How do sports-betting apps use psychological rewards, dopamine stimulation, and intermittent reinforcement to encourage repeated gambling?
    • Why might young men be particularly susceptible to sports-betting culture?
    • How does sports betting appeal to desires for competition, mastery, expertise, status, and recognition?
    • What role do loneliness and declining social connection play in the appeal of betting communities, podcasts, influencers, and online group chats?
    • How do social media algorithms amplify gambling content and normalize sports betting?
    • In what ways has sports betting become intertwined with broader forms of masculine performance and identity?
    • How do sports leagues, media companies, influencers, and betting companies contribute to the normalization of gambling?
    • To what extent does sports betting function as a substitute for older sources of meaning, community, achievement, and belonging?

    Your paper should move beyond the simplistic claim that gambling is addictive because people want money. Instead, investigate the deeper psychological, social, technological, and cultural forces that make sports betting attractive to millions of people.

    Counterargument Requirement

    Address the argument that sports betting is merely a harmless form of entertainment and that most participants gamble responsibly without developing addictive behaviors.

    After presenting this counterargument, explain why critics remain concerned about the current sports-betting ecosystem. Consider whether the scale, accessibility, sophistication, and constant availability of modern betting platforms create risks that differ from traditional forms of gambling.

    Suggested Organizational Structure

    Introduction

    • Introduce the rise of sports betting.
    • Present your thesis explaining why sports betting has become so addictive.

    Body Section 1: Psychological Factors

    • Dopamine, reward systems, risk-taking, intermittent reinforcement, and behavioral psychology.

    Body Section 2: Social and Cultural Factors

    • Loneliness, declining community, online identity, status-seeking, and belonging.

    Body Section 3: Technology and Media

    • Smartphones, social media algorithms, influencer culture, betting apps, and sports broadcasting.

    Body Section 4: Counterargument and Rebuttal

    • Address the claim that sports betting is harmless entertainment.
    • Explain why critics believe modern sports betting presents unique dangers.

    Conclusion

    • Evaluate whether the addictive power of sports betting is primarily financial, psychological, cultural, technological, or some combination of these factors.

    Sample Thesis Statements

    Thesis 1
    Sports betting has become highly addictive because it combines powerful psychological reward mechanisms with social media algorithms, digital convenience, and young men’s desire for status, belonging, and identity.

    Thesis 2
    While sports betting appears to be a harmless form of entertainment, its addictive power stems from its ability to transform loneliness, masculine insecurity, and risk-taking impulses into a profitable digital marketplace.

    Thesis 3
    The rapid growth of sports betting reflects more than a desire for money; it reveals how technology, social isolation, and modern identity formation have created ideal conditions for gambling addiction among young men.

    ***

    Personal Engagement Building Block 1

    For your first body paragraph, present a personal account that explores the psychological appeal of sports betting, including its attractions, risks, and financial consequences. Interview someone who regularly engages in sports betting and use the interview as the foundation of your paragraph. How did this person first become interested in sports betting? How much time and attention does it consume? How has it affected their finances, productivity, relationships, or emotional well-being? Do they have regrets about their gambling habits, or do they view sports betting as harmless entertainment? Have they ever worried that it was becoming addictive or taking control of their behavior? Do they hope to continue betting indefinitely, cut back, or quit altogether?

    Your paragraph should move beyond simple description and provide insight into the person’s motivations, habits, and mindset. Include vivid details that help readers understand the individual’s personality, social environment, and relationship with sports betting. The goal is to humanize the issue by showing how sports betting functions in the life of a real person. Your paragraph should be between 200 and 300 words.

    Argumentative Engagement Building Block 1

    Write two paragraphs: a thesis paragraph and a counterargument-rebuttal paragraph.

    Your thesis paragraph should present a clear, arguable, and defensible claim that answers the central question of your essay. The paragraph should not merely announce a topic but establish a position that reasonable people could debate. After stating your thesis, include mapping components that identify the major points your body paragraphs will use to support your argument. These mapping components should provide readers with a clear roadmap of your essay’s structure and reasoning. Your thesis paragraph should be approximately 200 words.

    Your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph should address a legitimate objection to your thesis. Begin by clearly and fairly explaining a viewpoint that challenges your argument. Demonstrate why thoughtful readers might disagree with your position and how their concerns complicate your claim. After presenting the counterargument, write a rebuttal that responds to those objections. A strong rebuttal may concede valid points made by the opposing side while demonstrating that, on balance, your argument remains more persuasive. It may also alleviate concerns by clarifying misconceptions, introducing additional evidence, or identifying important information that the opposing side overlooks. The goal is not to dismiss opposing viewpoints but to engage them thoughtfully and strengthen your overall argument. Your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph should be between 200 and 250 words.

  • Why Communities Prefer Scapegoats to Self-Examination (college essay prompt)

    Why Communities Prefer Scapegoats to Self-Examination (college essay prompt)

    Sources

    Use Weapons, Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery,” and at least two outside sources.

    Length

    1,200 words minimum

    Assignment

    Both Weapons and Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery” depict communities confronted by fear, uncertainty, and social dysfunction. In both works, people search for explanations when confronted with suffering. Yet rather than critically examine themselves, their values, or the systems they inhabit, they often seek simpler solutions: preserving familiar assumptions, defending established customs, and identifying convenient targets for blame.

    As a result, innocent individuals become scapegoats while deeper problems remain unresolved.

    At the center of both works are characters who appear to reinforce the beliefs and behaviors of their communities. Old Man Warner in “The Lottery” fiercely defends tradition, while Aunt Gladys in Weapons exercises influence through manipulation, vanity, and control. However, neither character acts alone. Their power depends upon a community willing to accept their assumptions and participate in harmful social rituals.

    In a well-developed essay, analyze how Weapons and “The Lottery” explore the relationship between conformity, scapegoating, and self-deception. Consider whether both works suggest that communities often prefer familiar lies to uncomfortable truths. Ultimately, evaluate what these works reveal about the human tendency to preserve harmful systems rather than confront the deeper causes of social problems.

    Questions for Consideration

    You do not need to answer every question, but they may help guide your analysis:

    • Why do communities often seek scapegoats during periods of fear or uncertainty?
    • What psychological comfort do traditions and social rituals provide?
    • When does tradition become an obstacle to justice or truth?
    • How do ordinary people become complicit in harmful systems?
    • What roles do Old Man Warner and Aunt Gladys play in sustaining the beliefs of their communities?
    • How do fear, tribal loyalty, and groupthink influence decision-making?
    • What do both works suggest about the dangers of refusing self-examination?
    • Why are innocent people often sacrificed to preserve social stability?

    Counterargument Requirement

    Some readers might argue that traditions, social norms, and communal rituals are necessary because they provide stability, identity, and social cohesion. Without shared customs, communities can become fragmented and directionless.

    Address this argument.

    Then evaluate how Weapons and “The Lottery” distinguish between traditions that strengthen communities and traditions that perpetuate injustice, cruelty, or self-deception.

    Sample Thesis Statements

    Thesis 1
    Although Weapons and “The Lottery” take place in very different settings, both argue that communities often protect familiar beliefs and social rituals even when those practices produce injustice and suffering.

    Thesis 2
    Both works suggest that scapegoating is attractive because it allows communities to avoid confronting deeper problems within themselves.

    Thesis 3
    Through their portrayals of conformity, fear, and collective self-deception, Weapons and “The Lottery” reveal that the greatest threat to a community is often its unwillingness to examine its own assumptions.

    Thesis 4
    Old Man Warner and Aunt Gladys are influential not because they possess 

    Why Weapons and “The Lottery” Work So Well

    Both works are fundamentally about:

    • Collective guilt
    • Scapegoating
    • Social conformity
    • Moral cowardice
    • Communities protecting themselves from self-examination
    • The weaponization of consensus

    In both stories, the community desperately wants an explanation for its suffering.

    The explanation must:

    • Be simple.
    • Be emotionally satisfying.
    • Preserve the group’s self-image.

    The real enemy is not a monster.

    The real enemy is a community’s refusal to confront itself.

    That is exactly why Old Man Warner and Aunt Gladys feel comparable. Both are defenders of a diseased social order. They differ in personality, but they perform similar functions.

    What Makes the Comparison Rich

    One of the most interesting comparisons is that both works ask:

    What happens when a community becomes more invested in maintaining a narrative than discovering the truth?

    That question can sustain an entire essay.

    In fact, I think the strongest thesis isn’t about tradition.

    It’s about narrative preservation.

    Both communities preserve comforting narratives even when those narratives require innocent people to suffer.

  • From Family Table to Food Lab: Competing Visions of Eating: Example of an AI-Resistant Writing Prompt

    From Family Table to Food Lab: Competing Visions of Eating: Example of an AI-Resistant Writing Prompt

    As more students turn to AI to generate research papers, I have begun requiring what I call a Personal Engagement Building Block at the beginning of every major assignment. This opening section consists of one or two paragraphs in which students draw upon a personal experience—or the experience of someone they know—to frame the issue they will later investigate. The purpose is not merely autobiographical. It is to create a sample of the student’s authentic voice and thinking before they begin working with outside sources.

    These assignments are designed to be resistant to AI-generated responses because they require specific observations, concrete details, and personal knowledge that cannot easily be outsourced. At the same time, they must remain intellectually rigorous and directly connected to the larger argument of the essay. The challenge is to create prompts that move beyond simple storytelling and instead use personal experience as a lens through which students can examine complex social, cultural, or ethical questions.

    For example, in a research paper exploring how ultra-processed foods, food technology, and GLP-1 drugs may transform our relationship with eating, students begin by writing two contrasting personal-experience paragraphs. These paragraphs are intended to illuminate competing ways of thinking about food, pleasure, convenience, family, technology, and consumption before students engage with the broader research and debate surrounding the topic. The assignment begins with the following AI-resistant prompt:

    For the opening of your essay, write two contrasting personal-experience paragraphs that explore different relationships to food.

    In the first paragraph, describe yourself—or someone you know—sharing a memorable meal in a family setting. Focus on food as an expression of love, tradition, connection, and celebration. Use vivid details to capture the atmosphere, the people gathered around the table, the preparation of the food, and the emotions associated with the experience. Show how the meal becomes more than nourishment; it serves as a vehicle for family identity, cultural heritage, memory, and human connection. The food should be savored not only for its taste but also for what it represents.

    In the second paragraph, create a sharp contrast by describing an experience centered on hyperpalatable processed foods. You may focus on the compulsive nature of eating foods engineered to maximize cravings, appetite, and consumption. Describe the anxiety of never quite feeling satisfied, the urge to keep eating despite fullness, and the sense of helplessness that can accompany such behavior. Alternatively, if that experience does not apply to you, describe eating as an act of convenience and optimization rather than pleasure. Perhaps meals consist of protein bars, shakes, or packaged snacks consumed not because they are enjoyable but because they help you “hit your macros” or meet a nutritional goal.

    The purpose of these two paragraphs is to explore how modern technology is transforming both food and our relationship to food. Together, they should frame your essay’s argument about the cultural, psychological, and social consequences of ultra-processed foods.