In a class discussion today there seemed to be some underlying tension. It seemed that when Professor Akindes asked us to discuss how we felt about the documentary "Color Adjustment (1991)" and thoughts on it. The class is primarily made up of "white" people. I am Hispanic myself and I am almost completely positive I am the only Hispanic there. Still the class literally has only 3 black students. Its interesting that more than thirty years after the Civil Rights movement that a group of college students seem to have some tension about discussing racial progress. After a bit of thought, I am certain that some of the tension lies in economic wealth distribution.
For as far back as historians are able to record, it seems there has been a consistent connection with race and class. These two seem almost one and the same at times. Or at very least I can say that somewhere along the way, I have internalized this message. At a very young age I learned very quickly who I am and what that means about where "my place" is.
Minorities are always very aware of who they are. Being reminded of it on a regular basis: moment by moment, day after day...this is their reality. It is difficult to ignore that we look so different than each other and we learn that somehow based on these looks it makes us different people on the inside. I have wondered why looks seem so very important to us for a very long time...the truth is I think a great part of it is human nature. We have eyes and we biologically know to use our eyes to observe and essentially protect ourselves from harm. Its one of the five senses.
....It seems to me as I continue on my educational journey I continue to come back to the same focal point in my life. Its the Buddhist idea that we are all connected. I do believe that every soul is unified with the collective humanity. In the back of my head I feel as if Buddhism holds all the answers for us. It seems that every problem in life somehow stems from unhealthy ego. This constant idea that we are in competition with one another is ego. It is the exhausting and a battle we will never win. The idea that Martin Luther King Jr. preached supported our human spiritual connectedness. Everyone we pass on a daily basis is our brothers and sisters. We will always be attached to others in the most human ways. I don't believe there is very much that separates any of us from each other beyond our visual looks.
I believe that it is detrimental to our mental well-being to separate ourselves from each other. I believe that by doing so we create a sense of loneliness in our souls that cannot be quenched. This kind of thinking is what can lead to depression: a belief that no one is like you. In these cases people believe that they are only like a certain "breed." They truly believe that somehow the looks on the outside of the body has some kind of effect on the inside of the mind and heart. This kind of delusional thinking leads to hate: prejudice or racism is essentially a deep hate against another group. Hate has physical effects on the body. According to the website "How Stuff Works" hate (as it corresponds to anger) has dramatic effects on the body...
"If you're constantly being activated by triggers, however, then this state of response can start to cause damage. Chronically angry people may not have the mechanism to turn off these effects. They may not produce acetylcholine, a hormone which tempers the more severe effects of adrenaline. Their nervous system is constantly working and can eventually become overexerted, leading to a weakened heart and stiffer arteries [source: Angier]. There's potential for liver and kidney damage, as well as high cholesterol. Anger may bring along some accompanying issues, such as depression or anxiety."
As we know hate and anger can eventually lead to violence if not solved. In a book called Nonviolent Communication by Rosenberg, he states, “Violence comes from the belief that other people cause our pain and therefore deserve punishment.”
In modern day society, the kind of hate or anger towards "different" people is less apparent than it used to be. It shows up in smaller less obvious ways such as oppression of certain groups through Hegemony. Beliefs that people "choose" to be poor and that they bring upon themselves certain lifestyles is more than ignorant. These beliefs have given way to the continuation of race and class oppression.
I still believe education is the first step to any change.
Mi familia bonita
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Violent Masculinity
I remember a conversation I had awhile ago with someone about smiling in pictures. It was a male and he said he preferred not to smile in photos. He felt it made him look weak, geeky, or cheesy. I joked back and forth about how peculiar this concept really was. I commented that I had seen it often though: that men seem to avoid smiling in pictures to appear tough and manly. I wondered where that "rule" came. Somehow though as we chatted I realized in some ways I agreed. Why did it seem that a guy who smiled seemed less manly? It was almost as if by smiling in a picture he would expose all his secrets.What did purposely not smiling in a picture mean? It seemed that smiling showed vulnerability. One of the unwritten "manly man rules."
Masculinity today is very narrow. I have not seen very many examples of men in the media that stray from the narrow definition society supports of what a "real " man is. Media and our society supports the claims that masculine is unemotional, tough, strong, violent, aggressive, womanizing, and robotic....Women and men are seen as polar opposites in our society today. There is no gray in either definition. Qualities are labeled "masculine" or "feminine." Men possessing any qualities in the "gray" or in the "feminine" category are considered unmasculine. What is a man without his masculinity? Gender is such an important part of our identity. From the time we are born and typically before that (when we are in womb and our sex is identified) we are divided by our sex. Our identities begin to become deeply ingrained in our gender. Our parents feel the need to identify us with colors that are "feminine" and "masculine."
There are many examples of this kind of masculinity in media such as in rap music. Lyrics of these songs degrade women in violent ways and promote violence in general: whether its killing rivalry gangs/rappers or just communicating aggressively with others. This kind of style of communicating as they do in rap videos and as they do verbally is becoming more and more popular among whites as it was previously and still with blacks. It is described at times as "ghetto." Its a guise of acting tough and as if one has no feelings. Its a fear of vulnerability and a fear of looking "weak." According to the documentary we watched in class, "Violence, Media, and the Crisis of Masculinity with Jackson Katz (1999)" these now popular ideas and behaviors about masculinity originated from Italian mafias or gangs. Blacks adapted this and whites seem to be adapting it now from blacks.
The ideas of whats "masculine" in our society has lead to consequences. Men feel the need to use violence to display power. The power issue seems to be a large component of masculine. Large muscular men demonstrate masculinity in their physical power or strength. Those that can not be physically strong resort to using other means to show their dominance or power. These men or boys turn to violence to defend their masculinity. They suddenly can gain respect by using guns, knives, and force. Respect seems to be given to those that are most powerful...or at very least media has convinced men of this. The most robotic man who seems "hard" without feelings is seen as powerful. Non-emotional in conjunction with physical strength equals the most masculine forms of manliness.
As a woman, I am becoming more and more aware of how this masculinity is not appealing to me. I find myself longing more and more for a better communicator in relationships: romantic and platonic. I want to have relationships with people who are not afraid of their feelings and what it means to be vulnerable. There was times in my life where the tough guy seems a bit appealing but within weeks of dating this type I would become frustrated and burned out. Attempting to dig deeper and know the person below the exterior became overwhelming and I would soon find myself avoiding the person. It is my hope that all women can learn to find a man with great communication skills and vulnerability as a turn-on. By having women who desire men who are too tough, men understand that this is desirable and adapt to it. If women demand different qualities in men, this type of behavior will diminish greatly. As women, we need to understand why this is so appealing, if it is to us. They say old habits die hard but I am a firm believer that one can never be too old to grow and change.
Masculinity today is very narrow. I have not seen very many examples of men in the media that stray from the narrow definition society supports of what a "real " man is. Media and our society supports the claims that masculine is unemotional, tough, strong, violent, aggressive, womanizing, and robotic....Women and men are seen as polar opposites in our society today. There is no gray in either definition. Qualities are labeled "masculine" or "feminine." Men possessing any qualities in the "gray" or in the "feminine" category are considered unmasculine. What is a man without his masculinity? Gender is such an important part of our identity. From the time we are born and typically before that (when we are in womb and our sex is identified) we are divided by our sex. Our identities begin to become deeply ingrained in our gender. Our parents feel the need to identify us with colors that are "feminine" and "masculine."
There are many examples of this kind of masculinity in media such as in rap music. Lyrics of these songs degrade women in violent ways and promote violence in general: whether its killing rivalry gangs/rappers or just communicating aggressively with others. This kind of style of communicating as they do in rap videos and as they do verbally is becoming more and more popular among whites as it was previously and still with blacks. It is described at times as "ghetto." Its a guise of acting tough and as if one has no feelings. Its a fear of vulnerability and a fear of looking "weak." According to the documentary we watched in class, "Violence, Media, and the Crisis of Masculinity with Jackson Katz (1999)" these now popular ideas and behaviors about masculinity originated from Italian mafias or gangs. Blacks adapted this and whites seem to be adapting it now from blacks.
The ideas of whats "masculine" in our society has lead to consequences. Men feel the need to use violence to display power. The power issue seems to be a large component of masculine. Large muscular men demonstrate masculinity in their physical power or strength. Those that can not be physically strong resort to using other means to show their dominance or power. These men or boys turn to violence to defend their masculinity. They suddenly can gain respect by using guns, knives, and force. Respect seems to be given to those that are most powerful...or at very least media has convinced men of this. The most robotic man who seems "hard" without feelings is seen as powerful. Non-emotional in conjunction with physical strength equals the most masculine forms of manliness.
As a woman, I am becoming more and more aware of how this masculinity is not appealing to me. I find myself longing more and more for a better communicator in relationships: romantic and platonic. I want to have relationships with people who are not afraid of their feelings and what it means to be vulnerable. There was times in my life where the tough guy seems a bit appealing but within weeks of dating this type I would become frustrated and burned out. Attempting to dig deeper and know the person below the exterior became overwhelming and I would soon find myself avoiding the person. It is my hope that all women can learn to find a man with great communication skills and vulnerability as a turn-on. By having women who desire men who are too tough, men understand that this is desirable and adapt to it. If women demand different qualities in men, this type of behavior will diminish greatly. As women, we need to understand why this is so appealing, if it is to us. They say old habits die hard but I am a firm believer that one can never be too old to grow and change.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
'S&M' Is 'Not About Sex'
'S&M' Is 'Not About Sex': "The video will have lots of colors, you'll see," Rihanna says.
A Closer Look At Rihanna's 'S&M' Video
I always remember the first time I hear Rhianna's song "Sand M"on the radio. I was appalled by the lyrics in the song. I immediately thought that the lyrics were going to encourage her fans to become increasingly sexualized. The chorus line says,"Sticks and stones may hurt me but chains and whips excite me." I have seen several clips of the music video but I was not able to find the video in its entirety. It was banned from youtube for indecent material. In the clips that I have seen she is in bondage struggling to get out. The scene is colorfully designed. In another scene a group of men in suits pin her to the wall. She is wearing a dress made of newspaper. The men put a piece of plastic over her and tape it down, as to suffocate her under it. In another portion she is in a short of white spandex bandage outfit and she is whipping some tied up people.
In an interview she stated that this song and video, however have nothing to do with the highly sexualized theme, title, and lyrics. The song, she seems to imply in this interview, is a form of rebellion. In a following video I found a clip of some MTV representative discussing the video and analyzing it. He seemed to be saying that the video was a sort of way for her to express the way media has "pinned her as the scapegoat." She seems to be saying that she wants to be "bad" but doesn't want to be punished and looked down upon by others for it. In the clip he mentions the video seems symbolic of her relationship with media. She is sometimes victimized and at other times she is the one calling the shots. She seems to be taking back her power in this way. He also mentions that many artist have had "this type" of rebellion in their careers. Madonna did it with her eroticism era and Britney spears has done this several times with the video circus, womanizer, and others.
It is completely ignorant to deny the impact that media has, had, and continues to have on us as a people. I am going back to the idea of Hegemony. Hegemony, from my last blog, mentions that our senses of self as a society come from a collection of ideas that are strategically placed in media, schools, central religions, government or public settings. These ideas are seeped and leaked into our beings by repetitive messages that are normalized as natural and acceptable. These ideas are at the expense of certain groups: races, genders, classes ect. so that another group benefits and continues to benefit. I am reminded of the idea that I heard once said about black people. Someone had once said that, "White people no longer need to suppress us as they once did in slavery. We as a people (black communities) do it to ourselves." In other words the speaker was saying that as a people (a community) has come so accustomed to being the "underdog" that they have internalized that and live into that repressed position: all the while believing it is natural and normal.
Knowing what we know about Hegemony, lets take another look at Rihanna's S and M video. If the video is really meant to send the message she claims (of rebellion and not of sexuality) then one must ask...
Why does she feel the need to "rebel" using her sexuality?
The irony here is that she again uses her sexuality to get her point across: that she is tired of being judged for being sexual. "Rebellion" implies that the person taking on this action is doing something different than whats "normal" or "acceptable." But in fact Rhianna is not "rebelling" at all but living into the role that media and society have given and developed for women. She is not be any "different" than anyone else in mainstream media: she has simply made it more "colorful." It would seem that the once "rebellious mold for women" is now everyday. Women are expected to be sexual objects for men: this is what media dictates for the role of women.
These ideas are very vivid in pornography. According to the documentary we watched in class, typically any genre of porn contains 80 to 90% of violence and degradation. Of that percentage 94% of the violence is directed at women. These women are exploited as sexual objects for only the man's pleasure. They are not viewed or treated humanely and they do not receive any more respect than an animal. There is no question that porn is directed at a male audience. There is also no question that the goal of this degradation is to keep women in their place.
Then media does its best to make the roles in porn look natural. Advertisements and media create images mirroring that of porn: images that defile the woman and her body. Often times the woman is depicted in sections: making only parts of her body seem valuable. Women are posed in ads as vulnerable, young, ready for sex and only there to be used as a sex object. Our "roles and identities" as women have been laid out very nicely before us, thanks to the use of porn and media.
Rhianna has done a fine job of incorporating porn into mainstream media. It was always there subtly and sometimes not so subtly. Yet now if we have any question to its existence, her song cleared that up.
I consider myself a pretty smart person but when I heard her song "S and M" I didn't hear any kind of "rebellion." I immediately felt how sexual the song was and felt there was a sexual message behind it.
...so lets think about this logically, how many people would actually understand that this video is "not about sex?!" Rhianna must be misinformed herself if she truly believes the song has absolutely nothing to do with sex.
A Closer Look At Rihanna's 'S&M' Video: MTV News' James Montgomery breaks down Rihanna's new video.
In an interview she stated that this song and video, however have nothing to do with the highly sexualized theme, title, and lyrics. The song, she seems to imply in this interview, is a form of rebellion. In a following video I found a clip of some MTV representative discussing the video and analyzing it. He seemed to be saying that the video was a sort of way for her to express the way media has "pinned her as the scapegoat." She seems to be saying that she wants to be "bad" but doesn't want to be punished and looked down upon by others for it. In the clip he mentions the video seems symbolic of her relationship with media. She is sometimes victimized and at other times she is the one calling the shots. She seems to be taking back her power in this way. He also mentions that many artist have had "this type" of rebellion in their careers. Madonna did it with her eroticism era and Britney spears has done this several times with the video circus, womanizer, and others.
It is completely ignorant to deny the impact that media has, had, and continues to have on us as a people. I am going back to the idea of Hegemony. Hegemony, from my last blog, mentions that our senses of self as a society come from a collection of ideas that are strategically placed in media, schools, central religions, government or public settings. These ideas are seeped and leaked into our beings by repetitive messages that are normalized as natural and acceptable. These ideas are at the expense of certain groups: races, genders, classes ect. so that another group benefits and continues to benefit. I am reminded of the idea that I heard once said about black people. Someone had once said that, "White people no longer need to suppress us as they once did in slavery. We as a people (black communities) do it to ourselves." In other words the speaker was saying that as a people (a community) has come so accustomed to being the "underdog" that they have internalized that and live into that repressed position: all the while believing it is natural and normal.
Knowing what we know about Hegemony, lets take another look at Rihanna's S and M video. If the video is really meant to send the message she claims (of rebellion and not of sexuality) then one must ask...
Why does she feel the need to "rebel" using her sexuality?
The irony here is that she again uses her sexuality to get her point across: that she is tired of being judged for being sexual. "Rebellion" implies that the person taking on this action is doing something different than whats "normal" or "acceptable." But in fact Rhianna is not "rebelling" at all but living into the role that media and society have given and developed for women. She is not be any "different" than anyone else in mainstream media: she has simply made it more "colorful." It would seem that the once "rebellious mold for women" is now everyday. Women are expected to be sexual objects for men: this is what media dictates for the role of women.
These ideas are very vivid in pornography. According to the documentary we watched in class, typically any genre of porn contains 80 to 90% of violence and degradation. Of that percentage 94% of the violence is directed at women. These women are exploited as sexual objects for only the man's pleasure. They are not viewed or treated humanely and they do not receive any more respect than an animal. There is no question that porn is directed at a male audience. There is also no question that the goal of this degradation is to keep women in their place.
Then media does its best to make the roles in porn look natural. Advertisements and media create images mirroring that of porn: images that defile the woman and her body. Often times the woman is depicted in sections: making only parts of her body seem valuable. Women are posed in ads as vulnerable, young, ready for sex and only there to be used as a sex object. Our "roles and identities" as women have been laid out very nicely before us, thanks to the use of porn and media.
Rhianna has done a fine job of incorporating porn into mainstream media. It was always there subtly and sometimes not so subtly. Yet now if we have any question to its existence, her song cleared that up.
I consider myself a pretty smart person but when I heard her song "S and M" I didn't hear any kind of "rebellion." I immediately felt how sexual the song was and felt there was a sexual message behind it.
...so lets think about this logically, how many people would actually understand that this video is "not about sex?!" Rhianna must be misinformed herself if she truly believes the song has absolutely nothing to do with sex.
A Closer Look At Rihanna's 'S&M' Video: MTV News' James Montgomery breaks down Rihanna's new video.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)