Hi, there. I'm Dani. And this is why I'm biased.

Why, hello there. First of all, I'm going to gush about how excited I am to blog about rhetoric. I've been a serious rhetoric student for going on three years, and am about to write my thesis in a couple of months. So, I'm brimming with ideas and thoughts on rhetoric, and can't wait to share them with you all.

However, before I even start posting, I should probably introduce myself and explain what sort of background I come from. I'm Dani, and I'm a senior at Willamette University. My degree is in Rhetoric & Media Studies (surprise?), and my minor is in Economics.

This post is mainly going to be about why I talk about the things I talk about, and why they might be occasionally skewed, biased, or (even more infrequently, I hope) incorrect. So, I'mma lay down a beat for you. Or a list of potential biases that could appear in my writing. Probably a list:

1) For the most part, I am a social determinist (of technology). This boils down to meaning that I tend to think that society determines how technology is used, NOT that technology determines it's own use. This is a little awkward to explain here--I'll probably end up doing a related post about it.

2) I am relatively uninformed about scripture and religion. I was raised without any strong religious push in my household, and eventually decided to label myself as an apathetic atheist. I will admit that I'm fairly biased against organized religion, and tend to rant about it when I feel like religion gets in the way of rational thought.

3) I'm an awkward mix of political views. I am liberal on many social issues, but have a couple of sticking points that make hardcore liberals look at me a little weird. I tend to view political polarization as a bad thing, and (like the Portland hipster I unavoidably have to be) tend to think twice about a view if "everyone is doing/thinking it." For example, I love the idea of socialism in healthcare, but am a loose advocate of the death penalty. See? Kind of weird.

4) I tend to take on big projects, which leads me to over-generalize at times. I try to compensate for this as much as I can, but I get really excited about some subjects and want to analyze it all. It sucks, because I can't do that. But if you can tell me an efficient yet complete way of analyzing apocalypse rhetoric in pop culture, PLEASE let me know. I would pay you back in amusing pterodactyl noises.