Hyper-Masculinity Of Hip-Hop

I can see with 2Pac how he gave off this hard core image just because if his background and where he came from.  The same goes for the other hip hop artist of today they give off this image like I’m so hard core and come from the hood. They make it seem like they are in these dangerous gangs. In reality they really aren’t involved with any of it. Yes most of them did come from hard neighborhoods but what they won’t reveal is that they are actually educated and know how to act. They just sell their music on their image of being hard cored, gangster, and hood.  The thing with that image is that it allows for young intercity teens to think that it’s ok to portray this image, that these young people think I have to be hard and bad ass to show how manly they are. Then with the image comes the thought if I act thug I could get all the girls and have the best reputation. So they give into that type of life style and before you know it these young kids are joining gangs. Once they join these gangs they are considered family and are accepted in that family. When in all reality the reason they joined that gang in the first place is to find a father like figure or a place to feel like they are one and accepted for who they are. Most of these young kids do grow up in broken homes and without a father so they look up to the old people who are mixed up in the wrong crowd and the gang life style. Mostly because of the hip hop artist who give off this hyper masculine image and life style.

It doesn’t only affect the intercity teens it braches out to other places as well. Like in the suburbs when I grew up there would be white kids who would act like they were thug and hard core when they grew up in the nicest houses in our town. I think hip hop masculinity affect s suburban teen as a way to escape how they were brought up and want to be like that thug kid that came from a broken home. I think they just want a taste of that life  and want to feel like they are from that type of background.

Militainment

After reading the article I had a few thoughts regarding Stahls argument.  The first thing that popped into my mind was the thought that I don’t believe that his argument really applies to other cultures nearly as much as it does to the American culture.  That’s obviously not to say that other kids and young adults do not partake in the playing of violent video games or that they do not consume some sort of militainment, but I do believe they consume it in a totally different way. 

America has an unmatched fixation and emphasis on its media, in every form that is presented to us.  When watching the clip in class on militainment it really brought to my attention that even as we as a country were fixated on the initial stages of the conflict in Iraq, the media was simply presenting it in a way that focused more on capturing, or retaining, their audiences (American public) attention as opposed to presenting the facts at hand.  At the time we must have been too entranced by the overall situation, but when looking back at it now it was not only evident, but also unfortunate that the media was more concerned with commercializing the conflict as opposed to covering it.  This leads me right to my main point, which is the American public, adults included, is losing its ability to think about and view war in a critical way and from another’s perspective.  Media skews and puts whatever spin they choose on covering conflicts overseas, so for the majority of the general public who follow these conflicts through the means of national media outlets, their knowledge consists of what the media feeds them.  The scary part is that what the media feeds us is more profit driven than fact driven for the most part.  

Blog Credibility

Today as I was poking around some of the photography blogs I follow, I started thinking about the piece by John W. Jordan and our discussion over it. The article focuses on how blogs were used during the War in Iraq, but in doing this he makes an interesting point about how mainstream media, and people in general, discredit blogs. He wrote this in 2007, and many things have changed since then. From my own experience, I think that the general acceptance of blogs has increased.

There are blogs written about anything from food, to politics, to the grass you walk on. I follow a few, including ones on food, photography, and technology news, and I have since high school. I check these blogs on a daily basis for news, recipes, and camera tips. It is interesting that I started looking at these blogs around the same time the article was written. Granted, the blogs I follow aren’t strictly “news blogs,” but they are used in the same way. I’m not saying that all blogs are one hundred percent true, but many today are more truthful, as bloggers want to establish themselves in the online community. You still have to be mindful, but I think most people can decide for themselves what is and is not true on the Internet. Sure, there are biased blogs, but I could almost guarantee that you could find a blog written with the opposite opinion.

It was said in class that “we have a hierarchy of where we get our news,” but I feel that today blogs are higher up on that chain. From my experiences, people around the age range 18-25 are more accepting of blogs, and reference them often. The argument some bigger news sources make about them lacking journalistic credibility is ridiculous. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines a journalist as “a writer who aims at a mass audience,” and that is just what a blogger is.

Undecided

Undecided

I don't have a television in my room and my roommates constantly watch movies all day on our television in the living room. Recently  the roommate who owns our television in the living has decided to put it in his room. So as you can see, I don't get much exposure to television  Without this exposure, I am missing out on the news a lot.

So I hadn't really heard of the Human Rights Campaign and the news surrounding until I logged onto Facebook last week. My feed was covered with the red equal sign and people setting it as their profile picture, sharing it and throwing their opinion out there after posting it on their friends walls. I read up a little about the campaign just to see what it was all about so I could understand the frenzy on Facebook.

I am all for equality in the world especially after taking this class and seeing how much women are at a disadvantage is many parts of our world... but that's another conversation. I am not an activist for either side and if a gay marriage law was passed, I'd be ok with it, and if it wasn't, I would be ok with that. I have thought a lot about taking a side, but have decided that I believe I lay right in the middle. I am fine with either. So while I have no problem with the Human Rights Campaign for equal rights, I do have a problem with the way people are expressing their views over social media.

Although the red equal sign has dominated my news feed, so have many fights. It in incredible to see how much people will say over social media and how nasty they are willing to get for the side they believe in. Since the Human Rights Campaign is going on right now, I have seen more equal signs that pictures opposing gay marriage. As I said before, I am ok if the gay marriage law gets passed and I am ok if it doesn't. But I am NOT ok with how much those who support the Human Rights Campaign are shoving their opinions down the throats of those who opposed gay marriage. Maybe it is just my news feed, but I have seen some horrible, rude and blunt fights going on. If you aren't doing what's "cool" right now, aka having the red equal sign as your profile picture, you are considered "inhumane", "unjust" and "a joke to to the 21st century". I have seen all three of these accusations come from people with the Human Rights logo as their profile picture. I have even seen them attack an 11-year-old girl stating her opinion, just like those supporting gay rights are.

This girl has received death threats, sexual threats and other negative comments towards her since she testified. A few weeks later, a 14-year-old girl similarly spoke out against gay marriage and later received hate mail and death threats, according to www.lifesitenews.com. While I haven't seen anyone on my news feed threatening to kill each other,  I am disgusted by how rude people are about their opinion. If you oppose the popular belief, you better be ready to receive hateful comments, how stupid you are and that you opinion is inhumane written all over you Facebook wall. I have no doubt that those who are for gay marriage rights have also received awful comments such as these, but I draw the line when children are in the line of fire.

I am glad I have stayed out of this Facebook fight. In the argument of Gladwell vs. Stone, I am going to have to go with Gladwell on this one. I wouldn't have to read nasty comments, see horrible fights or how vicious my friends can get when behind their computer screen if these same people were out being involved, engaged physically and participating in a organized cause.

Miss-Representation

Miss-Representation was an eye-opening film as it placed women in a much lower-role in society than what I ever expected.  I knew that for commercials and movies women would wear as much sexual appealing clothing as possible to attract new customers.  Also, that Americans are obsessed with the highly-impossible looks that women try to achieve every day. 

First off the looks are computerized, with much of the women’s physical feature having been changed or re-imaged  Women will not stop at anything as long as they have secured the best human attractiveness possible. This trickles down to the young girls as they realize the only way to be successful and pretty in society today is to look perfect and never stop changing your body. 

The TV show Toddlers and Tiaras is a prime example of how young girls think they should look and see as beautiful.  The problem I see is their moms or coaches in this case are not anywhere as attractive as they want their daughters to become.  I feel like the moms/coaches put these girls through these beauty pageants and try to make them as beautiful, because they never got that as young girls and this is the only way they know how to reach that goal. 

Thus, when these girls grow up they have the idea that the only way to be attractive is to dress in a sexual way to show off their physical attributes, and maintain their physical presence at a high level at all times.  When this happens, we see girls where nothing during commercials or they are perceived as sexual objects in movies as this is the way these individuals were raised and it transfers to show how they need to be successful in society today and live their lives. 

In the end, we realize many women have a great amount of plastic surgeries done to keep changing their body till the women thinks she’s perfect.  Another way women try to become the perfect body image is by going on certain diets in order to maintain their physical character.  What women need to do is to realize that beauty can be found anywhere and does not recite in one form.  

Amanda show

The Amanda show is a great classic show which most of us enjoyed in the late 1990s towards the early 2000s.  The idea behind this show was that Amanda who was a girl was the main character.  She was portrayed as being smart, funny, and most of the time a goofball; however, she was the main character in all of the scenes and acted the best compared to all other actors in the scenes.  This correlates to the article Girls Rule!, as in both circumstances a girl is the lead character and takes the leader role in all or most of all the scenes. 

In a way Amanda in the Amanda show is represented as a total fool, with no knowledge or educated reasoning during the show.  This is completely different than what women are used to in television, as their characters are displayed as nice kind and more mature then men.  Amanda can be seen making jokes, acting rude and impolite, hanging out with the boys, and disrespecting men.  She does this by smacking fishes in their faces, making immature comments to people, and showing off as a loud and un-sanitized character.   The interesting fact about this show was people enjoyed it, and young boys and girls saw it acceptable and funny.  This was pure success for the Amanda show and girls as this were a break-through show, capable of having girls be the stars of a television show.  Also, young boys were acceptance of this show and realized that girls can be funny and the main character of a television show.  

This Is Not Natural

After Caster Semenya  won gold in the 800 meters in the 2009 world chapionship she was in question about her gender just because of how she dominated in that particular race. I think questioning someone’s gender just because they excited expectations and because they may have masculine features is wrong and humiliating to the women athlete. To me if she beat the world record by 2 seconds I would just question if she was using performance enhancing drugs not if she was a man. Semenya is a female because she entered into a female race for the world championship and I think that the world championship committee would know through physical and other types of measures would know if she was a man. Plus if she was a man and got by the worked championship board would fell pretty foolish.  To me she is a woman because she does show female characteristics and she could have developed the body she has just by the way she trains and her diet. For the news to make assumptions about this women being a man was wrong and humiliating to her. They just made an assumption based on looks and not true facts. It’s not like she broke the world record by 2 seconds all she did was beat the fastest time set for that year. The media and the other athletes who ran against her were just looking for a scape goat saying she’s a man just because she dominated the field on that day. They didn’t take in consideration that maybe she just trained hard and work hard every day to get into the best possible shape to compete. I would be embarrassed for calling someone a man when they clearly are women. Just because a woman has a muscular body type doesn’t mean she’s a man, she just has a muscular body type. 

I think that when Semenya after the fact that they proved she was a woman kind of sold out when she went on the cover of  You and received a makeover. I think she should have embraced the way she looked instead of letting people making her look more womanly.  At the same time it showed that she was willing to make a change to show she was a woman  which is fine but she should have said this is the way I look and I’m fine with it.

Princess Culture

     I know we discussed the "princess culture," a long time ago, but this is one topic I cannot seem to get out of my head. We see the princess culture every day in children. The children who are given everything they want by their parents. The children who seem to have never heard the word no in their lives. The children whose parents made them believe that they are in control. I am shocked at the way some of these children behave, but then I think, some of these children are only four or five years old. The real people, in my opinion, we need question is the parents.
     I am fully aware that being a parent is not an easy task. I am sure that some children are more difficult to control than others. However, when parents are giving their children everything they ask for and rarely telling them no, children are going to believe this is how it should always be. Parents like to shower their children with gifts and reward them when they are being good. I agree that we should reward children when they do something good. I do not, however, believe we should reward children for nothing at all. Children are not dogs, you cannot train them with treats forever. Eventually, treats and rewards are what they expect and that will be the only reason they will behave. Along with that, many parents reward their children for misbehaving. Children cry so their parents cave in and give them what they want just to ease their temper. This will in no way teach a child the correct way to act. This will tell the child that she is in control and all she needs to do is cry. With tears, whatever she wants is hers. This is no way to parent a child.
     I realize that I am not a parent so many people may think that I have no idea what I am talking about. Maybe I don't. However, I do have friends with small siblings. Many of them fit the mold of the princess culture. One girl in particular, lives in an extremely nice neighborhood in Indiana. Her father is a doctor and she is five years old. When she got home from school one day, she told her mother that the family needs to move into a larger house because their house does not have an indoor basketball court like her friends at school do. When I heard this statement, I was shocked. How can I five year old child, who receives an immense amount of unnecessary things, be complaining about not having an indoor basketball court? I am not saying this because I am jealous of what some people receive. I was a very lucky child. I was blessed with great parents and a great family. I was always taken care of and never had to worry. To this day, I know that if something goes wrong, my parents will be their to take care of me. However, I was not raised without discipline  which is what is seen out of many children. I know right from wrong and I know that I cannot get whatever I want by complaining or crying. Children need to be taught this message at a young age or they will go through life expecting everything to be handed to them.
     I understand if some people do not agree with what I have said. However, that does not change what I believe. I am in no way saying that children don't deserve to be given gifts. I am not saying that children should get no rewards for anything. Children deserve love and affection at all times. They should always be able to trust their parents with anything and go to their parents when something is wrong. I am only saying that if parents do not discipline their children and always give them everything they want, their child may grow up selfish. Their child may grow up believing that it is her world and the rest of us just happen to be lucky enough to live in it. I do not know what my future holds, but I do know that if I am lucky enough to have a daughter, I will do everything I can to avoid the "princess culture."

The Only Control We Have Is In Ourselves

I really do not think that we have any control on what the media produces about the war, soldiers, and Iraq. I feel like no matter what medium it is coming out of it is always going to be bias. It is just in our nature to be bias. There is always going to be either someone telling someone what to write about or talk about or someone is just going to have his or her own opinion. Either way it is bias.

Also I agree with what the professor had to say about you can't even trust most of the bloggers anymore because you never know who they really are! And that is scary and creepy to me because it's almost like you can't trust a lot of the stuff online because you never know who is putting it up and if it's real or not. It is crazy how you can manipulate images and everything nowadays, it's pretty much to the point that you can't anyone or anything! I do however, go to the news for information and facts, but I even take those with a grain of salt because there is so many things that the government and the media hides from us on a daily basis.

A lot of what was said in class about how we are the ones that consume the junk on TV is 100% true. No reality TV is worth being on TV, what is that doing for us? What is it doing for our country? Not a damn thing. So, I think we will be fine without it. It is 100% our fault why this bull crap still is on TV everywhere we look, it's because WE WATCH IT. So the only control we DO have is controlling what we watch! If you are tired of seeing it then don't watch it, it is as simple as that. As far as the media and news goes we have no control over what is going to be reported. That is what feeds into the civil solider is that those type of people feed into the stuff they see on social media and TV and then think they have the power. No... sorry you don't.

MSM and the War

For some reason, I don't have an emotional connection to this war and everything that goes with it.

I'm very apathetic to comments from people to the media when they report a story from Iraq or Afghanistan or Bagdad. I have that, "so what?" attitude. So many people have invested their lives to patriotism in this war, people have risked their lives fighting and reporting in the desert, and I have no opinion, one way or the other.

However, I did connect with the discussion about mainstream media and their reports on the war. It fascinates me to learn about media reports and agenda setting and framing. I agreed with the comment made in class that people watch what they find fascinating, therefore the media reports on what the people want to hear. It's true. If I were to watch news/media coverage on the war, I want to see stories about soliders coming home to their families and babies and homes. Others want to see gunfire. Some want to hear about our fallen heroes. People like to know about locations and updates on what America is doing in the sandbox. And these are the things we get to see in the media. Why? Because it's interesting! I think the media also likes to "pep" things up and make it seem more than it really is. They like to report stories that really have no depth, but throw a few adjectives in there and you have the attention of war supporters.

Honestly, I'm not even sure what I'm getting at, except that it's interesting that war is so framed by the media and they can actually influence minds of those who support or follow the war. It's fascinating to me.

Also, this.

Caster Semenya Discussion

I can't help but to think of this controversial topic at least once a day since we've had the discussion in class. It's mainly because I'm not sure where I stand.

While I heavily participated on the Twitter-sphere and argued the idea that testing her gender was wrong, I still am not sure how I feel.

First, I support the idea that it's wrong to test someone's gender because they have excelled at something. She did well, big whoop. She didn't even come close to the records held by the men's division. I made the Twitter comment that we wouldn't test the last-place male for being a woman, because that's what this society did. If you are fast and the best, you must be a man. If you are last and not-so-good, you must be a woman. She's tall? So what. My sister-in-law is 6'1". She's muscular? Oh well, so are competing female body builders. She has strong bone structure? And? So does Missi Pyle (look her up, she's gorgeous, but has the "jaw of a man").

Second, I get the stereotype. Yes, her physical feature resemble that of a masculine person. In today's society, it's hard to pick-and-choose who get's by with what. With new technologies, new medicines, new drugs, it's difficult to assume everyone is being truthful. If the argument was that she was a taking performance enhancing drugs or she was using testosterone supplements, and that was it, I could buy it. With athletes being fined and stripped of titles left and right because they've found illegal drugs in their systems, yeah, it's okay to be suspicious of someone who is well-exceeding in a particular sports event.

Third, it makes me giggle inside that males have dominated society for thousands of years and have been in control, they speak up and say things like, "We're looking too far into this," when it comes to studying feminism. Or they say, "Hey, this just don't happen to female athletes, guys go through this, too," as if we're leaving them out of discrimination. Newsflash, this is a controversial topic because it did happen to a woman, who has been discriminated against since the beginning of gender-time. One tweet suggested that this isn't so bad because little boys get discriminated against in peewee sports because if they look too old then they get put into question. Here's the thing, when is the last time you heard of a guy in the media being tested for his gender because he did too well or not well-enough at something? When is the last time a little boy was showcased in the local newspaper because he looked too old to play t-ball? You don't. Why? Because most males aren't being questioned, that's why. Even if that little boy looks too old to play, once they confirm he's the right age, they then use his size to their advantage and in a positive way. Semenya won't take a positive experience away from this.

Fourth, I want to express my anger that when a certain magazine claimed Caster Semenya was now "wow-ed" because she's wearing make-up and jewelry. What exactly made her so "gorgeous" now? She's not "wow-ed" because she highly excelled in the Olympics? She's not "wow-ed" because she has an amazing talent and ability to run faster than most biological females? She's "wow-ed" because the magazine slapped paint on her face and called her a girl. And that's sad to me. Her looks have overcome her abilities.

So, where do I stand? I think it was wrong to test for her gender, but I get it. But it makes me more angry that there was the thought in someone's mind that a person's talents and abilities aren't credible because they don't "look" the part. I see too much of that already.

Ellen Lee- A Dangerous Game Ellen Lee 003

-->

While in class on Tuesday I was amazed at the impact of war on our daily lives even though we may not feel like we are apart of it. I have never been a firm believer in the idea that violent video games cause violent citizens. I think it does contribute to aggressive behavior, but I think it can be controlled just as all other behaviors are conditioned. I know a few people who are in the armed forces and I would never compare myself to the work they do. I honestly kind of find it a bit insulting to create games based on killing people for entertainment and some people have to endure that everyday.

            I enjoy video games; do not get me wrong, but my favorite games are Mario kart and Donkey Kong. Both games share their own violent silver lining but the games are based on fictional characters that fight mythical creatures. I do not think one game is picked over the other because both games can be argued as violent and inappropriate for kids. I just think it is more fun to beat Bowser than caring around a machine gun and killing my fellow mates.

            Not to mention has anyone seen people play Halo, Call of Duty, or Modern Warfare? It is scary. If there are headsets involved than pretty much expect to not speak to that person for a few hours, or at least until the match is over. A couple of my friends like to play the war games and I enjoy nothing more than to hold a conversation while they are playing. They get so mad, and I can understand a little better now why that would happen. The guys are in their own world and do not need to be disturbed. It is a very strange experience to witness because we are humans who are being absorbed in a virtual world, and it is kind of sad.

            It is even sadder to see these battles being glorified and held up to higher standards. I wish our country would tell us the truth about what is going on. I don’t care if people don’t like it, I feel like we have an obligation to know the truth about what is going on. I understand that there is no such thing as black and white and I am not in the middle of the action so I cannot intelligently speak on the topic but I feel that all news is news and it should not be based on what people want to hear.

Kate Giglio 6

In Tuesdays lecture I could not help but be filled with many emotions.  I have a number of friends and friend's relatives who are currently serving the country and both of my Grandfathers have been in the service. As we were talking about the virtual citizen soldier I was thinking, why do people feel the need to be a "virtual citizen soldier?" There are amazing and brave men and women who fight day in and day out for our country, so why would we mimic that? Soldiers are heroes and I do not think that playing some war video game could possibly give any "real" indication to being a solder. There are so many aspects to being in the military that are left out of the picture. Soldiers go through weeks of intense training, they are hundreds of thousands of miles away from their family, they come home with post traumatic stress disorder, they revolve their life around protecting America and it's people and some of those people want to consider themselves a "virtual citizen solder" because they are really good at sitting in front of a television playing Call of Duty? I think that is horrible! What "insight" does shooting some virtual people give to the real depths of war? War should not be used as a tool of entertainment. The media is referring to the bombs as a "tremendous light show..." Are they being serious. People are losing their lives and we are going to sit here is "shock and awe" that those are bombs taking the life of human beings? There is a clip in the movie, Black Hawk Down, that I will include the link to and I think that what the man says sums it up perfectly... Americans will never understand what it is like to be fighting for our country. So why do we try to make it entertaining?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsyVRpW4xNk

This clip takes place after an attack that lasted hours longer than expected and many many many American soldiers lost their lives.

Masculinity

Masculinity is seen in a lot of places and in many different situations.  If you are not fast enough or strong enough in sports, you will not make the team. If men are not masculine enough then they are probably going to be considered homosexual. I do not feel like men need to be masculine but it is what the media portrays as being normal for men. On the other side, if women are to masculine then the media will look at them as being too manly like the track star that we discussed in class.  I wish that everyone was looked at the same and not have so many people judging each other just for how we look.   Nobody knows how masculine you will be when you are just a little kid. Sometimes, depending on where you grow up can determine how masculine you can be.

I truly believe that people can benefit from growing up in a masculine or hyper-masculine city like Chicago. Some people will say that they would not be intimidated going into a city like that, but until you experience it I do not think you should say that you would not be intimidated.  Just hearing stories from other classmates about how they grew up having to be masculine in order to "fit in" no matter what gender you are. I think the people that grew up in this lifestyle are better fit to handle some of the physical challenges in life because of having to teach yourself to be stronger when it comes to certain situations.

The Subtweet

Looking at the article by Ashley Parker, Twitter’s Secret Handshake, everyone can see that the ability to launch yourself socially into the midst of public controversy is easier than purchasing a hamburger from McDonald’s. With the simple typing of a hashtag the entire world has a certain topic centralized for its viewing. What I have noticed in the four years I have been on twitter are two things that a lot of users do not care for one bit, the overuse of the hashtag and sub-tweeting about someone. When I say the overuse of a hashtag I mean that a tweet has very little content and is almost completely constructed with hashtag phrases. This comes to irritate people I think because of the unsuccessful attempt to get their point across in an actual sentence and making the reader rely completely on single words to understand the message. The subtweet is an issue that I have noticed extremely more bitterness towards! Urban dictionary defines the subtweet as: “A tweet that mentions a Twitter member without using their actual username. Usually employed for negative or insulting tweets; the person you're mentioning won't see the subtweet in their Twitter timeline as it doesn't contain the @ symbol that every Twitter username has”. This is a contradiction in my book due to the idea of talking behind someone’s back but also making it social. The only result in this method of communication is absolute drama. The reason I chose this topic is because the generation of kids in middle school and high school currently wield smartphones that are capable of creating a dramatic scene like never before that could even result in school policies being remanded or new ones enacted. 

good 'ol Militainment

I am, have always been, and will always be a very devout country music fan. Due to my history as a country music fan, one of the first thoughts that crossed my mind in the discussion of the “shock and awe” labeling of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was Toby Keith’s album “Shock ‘n Y’all” that came out later that year. This is the album that includes the infamous song “Angry American” which also included the controversial line “We’ll put a boot in your ass it’s the American way”. Although there were those who disapproved of this song, especially because of that last line, it was and is still loved by millions of Americans. This song is loaded with lines and phrases that portray the beating America was going to put on the Taliban. The support of this song came from those desensitized to the actual lives being lost and the gruesome effects of war. It’s easy for Americans to picture the U.S. putting a boot in the ass of the Taliban but what if it said, “We are going to drop a bomb that will blow real people to pieces and most likely kill hundreds, if not thousands of innocent women and children.” If this is what the song said would Americans still shout this song with patriotic pride? This is just another example of the desensitization of war alongside realistic war simulation videogames. I found this to be another example of how military is promoted through popular culture, or according to the text from class “militainment”.  

Misgendering Culture

We live in a culture where being a female athlete and being feminine do not coexist in the eyes of society.  As a female athlete myself I find this extremely disrespectful and demeaning.  Like any other female athlete, I have gotten my fair share of people trying to get into my head by making personal attacks at you, or other people say rude things for no reason.  I was reminded of these emotions after reading the Caster Semenya article.  After blowing out her competition, and having “masculine” features, questions were raised about her gender.  I find this absolutely awful that the media treated her as an object to be tested and talked about, rather than the stellar female athlete she was.  It made me angry for many reasons; one being this is not the first time the media has done this to a female athlete.  On top of that, you never hear the media discussing a male athlete who did not do well, and accuse them of being a girl?  It does not seem fair.  Another incident that pertains to current events is the NCAA Women’s Basketball Tournament. Brittney Griner is a phenomenal basketball player at Baylor.  She is 6’8, can dunk, and has been noted for her “androgynous” looks and happens to have a deep voice.  For the past couple of years, she has received a lot of media attention for this and it is absolutely terrible.  Not only do I feel bad for this girl and the amount of awful things being said about her, but also it draws attention to how we as a society sexualize female athletes.  And we are continuously pressuring female athletes to somehow find be able to be sexy and feminine, but also successful and athletic.  And we look down upon flaunting any sort of “masculinity.”  I think that slowly the times are changing, but calling media attention to things like these examples are not only unnecessary but also deflating to these girls’ self esteem. 

#slacktivism

As many of you may know, Proposition 8, or the law banning same-sex marriage in California, was finally brought before the Supreme Court today. Regardless of your stance on the issue, I’m sure many of you also noticed the flood of people on Facebook changing their profile picture to the equality sign in front of a red background. As I was scrolling through Twitter, a tweet of friend caught my eye. It read “I know, I'll change my profile picture. Then the government is sure to listen! #slacktivism.” This reminded me of the article “Small Change” by Malcolm Gladwell, that we had read earlier this semester, and made me think.

In case you don’t remember, his subtitle for the article read “why the revolution will not be tweeted” and he was arguing that if you want something to change, you must have a strong tie to it. The first time I read through the article, I thought he was being too harsh and that showing support for a cause online could do some good. Today, however, made me rethink my views. As I continued to log on to social media sites throughout the day, each newsfeed was flooded with the same picture. I’m not criticizing those who did this, but I think it is absurd to think that changing a picture is going to be a catalyst for reform.

I now have a better understanding for what Gladwell was saying, and really see what he meant by “a strong tie.” Many of the people that did post the photo today do have reason to, as they know someone that Proposition 8 effects directly. I wonder though, if as the day went on people were just following a new trend. Marriage equality is a great topic, but if people really want to see the laws change, they need to call their representatives. Facebook and Twitter are great tools for spreading the word about something and raising awareness, but that alone won’t change things.

Even though I think changing a profile picture will not lead to the change people want, I am left with some hope as my generation is passionate about something. There are many other injustices happening today, and I hope awareness of those spreads as well.

Militainment

To be perfectly honest, I didn't care too much about this lecture. War will always be apart of our culture as long as there are guns and religion. Period.

With that being said, I do believe that it is the parents' responsibility to filter what their kids watch, buy, and play. Personally, my brother was not allowed any games that were rated MA until he entered high school. (I have never been an avid video gamer.) In high school he played those games ALL THE FREAKING TIME. In a dark room, for hours, yelling at kids who were 12 and he had never met before. I found this all ridiculous. However, I would probably look up to him in the case of a zombie apocalypse or something ridiculous like that.

However, he isn't like that anymore; it was just a phase. It does not rule his life nor does he have any interest in joining the military nor does he think war is "cool." This is because my parents actually did a really good job at raising us. (Even though I hate to admit it.) They made sure to instill morals and values to know what is just a game and what is fantasy.

Also, media and our culture have pushed war on us for years. Who could forget Uncle Sam? (I want YOU!) Or even Keep Calm and Carry On is a WAR PROPAGANDA!!! A lot of us seem to forget about this and yet none of us that like Keep Calm are glorifying war.

In conclusion, it is up to you to realize that Call of Duty is just a video game. War is awful and shouldn't be done...but it happens.

Things to think about...

Last week, when we discussed if women are humorous and the story of the woman runner that the media deemed to be a man, I believe several of my colleagues’ opinions were slightly misguided. Below are some points that should be considered.

1.     First, there is a difference between gender and sex. Gender is how someone identifies themself, and sex is what someone scientifically is. When Semenya allegedly had elevated testosterone levels, I believe it was okay for the Olympics committee to investigate the sex of the runner. When you enter the Olympics, you need to be comfortable with the harshest scrutiny from your peers and the Olympics committee. However, I believe the unfair scrutiny that the media put on Semenya is the true crime. The individual should be the one that decides his or her own gender – not other people.

2.     Second, when the children were being interviewed about Semenya on the Tonight Show, many people were shaming the children’s opinion. However, if you look at their comments in a developmental perspective, their opinions were rational for their age. From 3-12 years old, children are developing schemas that shape the world around them. Analytical thinking is minimal at these ages, and many children apply their schemas with a narrow mindset. Although parents partially help mold schemas, most gender-based schemas come from observations within their environment. Most women do not have muscles like Semenya, and it is quite possible that some of the children on the video had never seen a women built like Semenya.

3.     As I mentioned in class, when it comes to humor, I don’t believe women need to be masculine to be funny, but I would argue that they would need to be androgynous in this day and age. Androgyny is not a masculine or feminine trait, but is rather gender neutral. As proof, every female comedian discussed in class had androgynous traits.

    -Derek Miller

-

Media and the endless search for more money

As we all know nature is a thing of pure beauty, and there have been many advances by exploring the beautiful excluded places of this planet. Although, there must be a line at which we cross at some point in time where we simply cannot leave this planet alone and we must exploit it for every dollar that we can squeeze out of it. One of the easiest and oldest ways to make money of something unknown is to simply make it public or to advertise it on all the available social networks. Let everyone know of this great place that you “must see”, unfortunately by buying into this message and going on this amazing vacation you are inadvertently ruining the beauty of said vacation spot by bringing more and more tourist to this spot.  As Americans we already have a bad rap of being loud, annoying, and disrespectful.  Now wouldn’t you be angry is a massive pack of these “Americans” come to your home to visit the beauty of your home but then they never leave. Just more flocks of Americans, one right after another constantly disrespecting your home until it is no longer the same as it used to be before the rest of the world found out about it.

Recently, we had our schools annual spring break and like most college students I decided to go on a trip that took me far away from the gloom of Muncie. This year I was able to swing a five day cruise to the Bahamas. Even though going on this cruise is pretty much word for word what I was talking about in the previous paragraph above. So in a way I was contributing to cause of ruing these places with presence. This being said, the Bahamas was hands down the most beautiful place I have ever visited with its gorgeous beaches and its clear blue water. Unfortunately, the only way I was able to afford this was to go through a major corporation that has already sunk its roots in the Bahamas and has made a lot of money by bringing people like me to visit. I feel like this is simply just a part of our lives and is a continuous circle. We all want to save the beauty of nature but no one wants to be the first to step up and really do anything about it. We all want to wear nice clothes, drive cars and visit exotic places. Although when some of us “think” we are helping out we must boast all about via our social networks. People that truly think you are making a difference because you drive an electric car, well I hate to break it to you but you are not helping the earth. I say this for the reason being that coal must be burned to generate electric, so once again we are stuck in this continuous circle of trying to help but we end in the same place we were before just a different method of getting there. In conclusion, our earth is a truly beautiful place and I am very blessed to be able to visit these exotic places, but at the very same time we ruin these places simply with our presence there. In conclusion,  I believe the media has a tight grip on our society and is not planning to let go anytime soon. I say this for the reason being that when it comes down to it, it’s all about money and what to exploit next once the current idea is all used up. At the end of the day how do we find out about these trips to other countries, electric cars or the next way we can help some poor kid in Africa (Since helping one hungry child will cancel out everything bad we do and make you a good person) is simply through our media… but they have to make money too right?

Military Sponsorships of Movies and Sports

After today's discussion, I began questioning whether or not it was ethical for the military to sponsor movies and promote them. I really do not see the problem with it. The movies, such as Pearl Harbor, Act of Valor, and Zero Dark Thirty, are all about the lives of soldiers serving in different combat situations. Act of Valor even casted Navy Seals as the lead roles in their movie. If anyone should be able to promote and sponsor the movies, it should be the military. The lives that these actors and actresses portary believed in the military's cause enough that they were willing to give up at least four years of their lives and possibly even their lives. The military is the only thing that really makes sense to be promoting these movies. If a cosmetics or jewelry company were the ones promoting these movies, I would laugh at the possiblity of the movie being realistic or true to what happened. The military should be allowed to promote movies and promote their ideas in these kind of movies, as well as in sports.
About a year ago, there were attempts to take away military sponsors from various sporting events, such as NASCAR. However, when debates came up in Congress, I think Representative Bill Posey said it best. "We have a volunteer military and they have to advertise for recruits somewhere. ...Do you think they should advertise at the philharmonic? Or maybe you think they should advertise at the ballet. We could surely get some burly, mean paratroopers if we advertised at the ballet." While his sarcastic tone can be offensive, he has a point. Companies and employers advertise in places where they think that they will have the best outcome and have the best options as employees. If the military thinks that they will have the best recruits from advertising in movies about military life and war, as well as at specific sporting events, what is the real harm?

Quote from article "Pressure grows on military to end sports sponsorships" at http://kdhnews.com/military/pressure-grows-on-military-to-end-sports-sponsorships/article_c8346416-e8ee-11e1-9d35-001a4bcf6878.html