Wednesday, March 31, 2010
10 Things I Hate About You
Today in class as we talked about masculinities on the OC, the role of women on the show came up. In the OC, and many other shows and movies like it, despite the portrayal of a woman being stong and powerful (whether negatively or positvely), they are always dependent on a man. One movie that came to mind immediately was "10 Things I Hate About You" with Julia Stiles and Heath Ledger, based on Shakespeare's "Taming Of The Shrew". In the movie, Julia Stiles' character, Kat, scares away guys. She has strong ideals and morals, and she in the movie she is portrayed in a feminist light; she thinks that women aren't given enough power. But, despite all her self-confidence and life goals, her hard demeanor is softened by the affections of a man. Her whole life, Kat has been about breaking the stereotype. But, her life is incomplete without a man by her side. In the end of the movie, Kat ends up with a guy, and those around her seem to be happy for her. But, has Kat compromised all her values just so she can conform to society's standards for happiness and a complete life? I think that many movies and TV shows with "happy" endings like this can both simultaneously build up the role of women in society, and break it down.
Diet Can Crushing Too "Girly"?
The advertisement pictures a can of soda against a black background. What makes this ad different from most drink ads is that the product has been annihilated, obviously crushed by the fist holding it. Since this is marketed as a “drink for men,” the advertisers thought it would be appropriate to incorporate the ever-present connection of masculinity and violence into the ad. This soda is “for men,” because the person who drank it and crushed the can was obviously a tough, muscular (and therefore masculine) man who doesn’t stand for buying anything “girly,” including his beverages. Even if he enjoys the taste more (this happens oh-so-frequently at bars and restaurants), a man will not buy a drink that society has labeled as “girly” or “feminine.” At bars, the “feminine” drinks are mixed, fruity concoctions, and apparently, in the soda world, all diet sodas (prior to Pepsi Max) carried the same connotations of femininity/emasculation.
Thanks to Pepsi creating a “diet cola for men,” you can rest easy and drink diet freely, men! No one will judge you anymore. We know you are tough enough to drink the diet cola, and then display your manliness by smashing the aluminum can afterwards.
Monday, March 29, 2010
four smart single women taking charge of their own lives!
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Lotus Blossom or Dragon Lady
In class we’ve been discussing the overarching views of African American Women as portrayed by the media. Words like “Wild,” “Untamed,” and “Object” are frequently used to describe the African American women that we see on billboards, in commercials, and on television. To expand on this stereotyping of minority women, scholars have found that Asian American women also suffer from reoccurring generalizations. In the media, Asian American women must fit two differing roles: “Lotus Blossom” and “Dragon Lady”.
“Lotus Blossom” is the perfect Asian American partner, the ideal object of the white-man’s affection. She is quiet, demure, submissive and very agreeable. Her exotic looks provide her with a sense of primitive innocence, and it is the man’s duty to teach her how to think, act, and behave. I’m sure we all remember that clip in “Memoirs of a Geisha,” where one graceful glance from a pair of almond-shaped eyes should be enough to knock a man off his bike.
“Dragon Lady,” on the other hand, is defined by her power. An interesting character, Dragon Lady is characterized by both her hyper-sexual air, and her asexual tendencies. She is fearsome, strong, yet always alone. In this case, her exotic looks provide a sense of ultimate-sexuality, which Dragon Lady will use, to attempt to dominate over the white male (she has no emotions, and this is ultimately her downfall). She is often the villain, perhaps the one who captured innocent Lotus Blossom, and the white man must be careful not to be blinded by her sexuality. When I think of Dragon Lady, I think of Lucy Liu in Kill Bill.
Many modern television shows claim to be diverse, adhering to a projected level of political-correctness. However, Lotus Blossom and Dragon Lady inevitably emerge. Sandra Oh’s character in Grey’s Anatomy is a perfect modern day Dragon Lady, fearful, exotic, asexual, and devoid of emotions which constantly limits her to “side-kick” to main character Meredith Grey. Glee, holds an interesting character, where the only female asian Tina has the appearance of Dragon Lady, yet is internally a Lotus Blossom with her inability to speak and submissiveness to the club (there is never an instance where she is the center of controversy). Even looking at media representations, figure skater Kim Yu-Na was featured as a very Lotus-Blossom-like athlete. Submissive to her coaches, innocent by her lack of opinion on any topic outside the field of ice skating (she is rarely quoted saying anything other than the pressures of her sport), and demure glances and smiles broadcasted by the Media.
It seems that in the media, being a woman is second-class and being a minority is ostracism. However, being both meaning limiting yourself to the most narrow categorization presented by the Media.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Deena and "The Dreams" (not Diana and "The Supremes)
Friday, March 26, 2010
Controlling Body Image
Media Warfare
Black Women in Fashion
Not only black women, but also asian and white women are sometimes objectified. For example, on the music video of Benny Benassi, “Satisfaction,” white, black, and asian women emerge and start to dance following the rhythms. However, their movements and actions are more than dancing. Their motions seem to imply something sexual. Men are viewed as powerful, strong figures who can take control over women. These women also wear very gaudy clothes which make them more objectified figures. A more interesting fact in this music video is that women use tools to attract males. It is unusual for women in music videos using utensils to show their sexiness. However, women in this video follow the motion of the tools, and this is very awkwardly sexual. Also, women’s lips, breasts, and hips are nakedly shown, which proves they are absolutely represented as sexual objects. It is true that women occupy a great portion in media these days compared to the past; however, they are still being seen as objectified (usually sexy) figures.
Representation of the Black people
The story about Sara Baartman was quite shocking to me.
Her "abnormal" bodily features fascinate the European viewers. Her difference does not meet their cultural classificatory system so she was excluded from their culture, society. She was treated as other even though she lived there and might think she could be one of their society; she was a "taboo", "forbidden" so she was attractive and interesting to European viewers . Even after her death at the age of 25 years old, she remained an object of the entertainment for the Europeans. She was not even treated as a human in Europe throughout her life and even after her death.
I can not believe one human being was treated like an animal, beast for some people's enjoyment.Hall says, the difference is important because we can think about the meaning depending on the difference between opposites.
Black/White, for example; the "white" is so invisible that we can think about the meaning compared to the opposite black.
But he also says that here, the meaning is oversimplified. We tend to think about each meaning in the reductionist way, and the one of the opposites often has a negative reduced meanings, negative stereotypical features because there is a gap between the power of the opposites such as the white dominant over black.
Many people tend to think that the representations or stereotypes of the black people are modified. But the black people's stereotypical images subordinate to the white people still continue today.
In advertisements especially, even though some advertisements seem to express the diversity of race, the white people are mainly shown to send good images of the brand like high ending, luxurious, leading the edge etc, whereas black people, especially woman (but including men), are portrayed as wild savage and fetishized. There are still on-going image of white people = good, modernized, superior etc while black = bad, evil, wild, primitive, dangerous and so on. Still, how people see black people is sort of similar to how Europeans looked at Sara Baartman. When could black people feel they are part of "Americaness" or "Britishness", when would they be able not to double consciousness as black and American; when could people start not to mark "black" such as "black president"and "black actress"?
The dangerous thing that today's stereotyping of minorities have is how subtle and widespread is. We do not usually see the negative images of the black people that those ads connote if we do not see them critically. People are raised with these stereotypes so they do not question it. But it is not easy to get rid of all these stereotypical images. Probably, what this problem can be done might be that people first acknowledge the problem and moderate the negative with more positive images.
Is it still prevalent?
Not Only..But Also
I love Shakira. Don't get me wrong the belty, pint-size singer is brimming with bubbliness, talent, class(?),culture (speaks 6 languages, travels frequently), beauty, intelligence (140 IQ and spoke at Oxford...acknowledged by the U.N for her organization, Pies Descalzos), humanitarian effort, and her world-reknown dancing (hips).
However....despite her seemingly perfect mirage, take note of Shakira's constant rebirths, renewals, new locks, new music direction, etc. too many metamorphoses !!!
Particularly, Shakira's videos are notoriously sexualized and the prop of a bed with her barely-clothed body, adorn our television screens. She clearly objectifies herself sexually with lyrics like in the song, "Wherever, Whenever" ("lucky that my breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"), or just the song title as it is, "Underneath Your Clothes." Shakira has no problem baring it all with her costumes (which can be argued are traditional for showing the movement of the body with her belly dancing)and her lyrics, wearing her heart on her sleeve. Is
Shakira giving the false impression that Latinos are sensual, horny creatures?
As quoted in Entertainment Daily, Shakira remarks: “I do think libido is the engine of the world. Forward or backwards. For good or ill. Sometimes when we repress our libido we regress. When we were in the Dark Ages, it was a question of humanity somehow managing to forget about itself. We put God in the centre of society, and people forgot about their own nature and desires. There was a huge deal of repression.”
Is it fair to say she is objectifying herself for publicity by CHOICE or is Shakira just living freely? She was once the little brunette, curly headed yodelling child star with darker, olive skin, and transitioned to THE BLONDE as she came to America and the rest of the world, her skin becoming lighter and her frame becoming less curvy as if to adjust to new standards.
So, here's an assignment: go look at Shakira's music videos and see how many times she is positioned with another man (as her prop, as if the only way to assert her leadership and dominatrix complex), in a bed, dances promiscuously, or uses sexual innuendos in her lyrics.
Just watch her newest video, "Gypsy" and decide for yourself.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/sy-68676375001/shakira_gypsy_official_music_video/
(disclaimer: I LOVEEEE SHAKIRA! DON'T TAKE OFFENSE TO MY CRITICAL ABILITIES TO LOOK INTO HER TRANSFORMATIONS! IT IS NOT PERSONAL!)
Sexy Chicks
Is Big Brother Watching From That Mannequin?
In Practices of Looking, the authors indicate that surveillance cameras constantly track consumers. (Cartwright 108). Cartwright and Struthers discuss the importance of “gaze,” how the public views objects, and the “looks” that emanate from those objects in return. The concept of an object returning a consumer’s gaze becomes very concrete after reading Stephanie Rosenbloom’s article “In Bid to Sway Sales, Cameras Track Shoppers,” because mannequins, ceilings, and department store dressing rooms apparently house cameras that give retailers information about consumer behavior. Companies defend this practice by saying that they are sensitive to privacy issues and that the technology is used to provide consumers with a more enjoyable shopping experience. By studying the photographs taken, retailers can find solutions to problems in their stores; they can install comfortable seating and activity areas to keep children happy while their mothers shop, or lower shelves and merchandise if items are out of reach. More and more companies are employing surveillance technology to see how different people respond to various products. This makes sense, because in a recession, buying practices are important; stores need to know what items will attract attention and sell.
Video analysis companies indicate that nearly every major chain, including Walmart and Best Buy, uses cameras. Cameras enable researchers to draw conclusions about things retailers and manufacturers want to know, like which shopping areas are the most and least popular. After seeing shoppers struggle in specific areas, analysts might suggest that retailers widen certain aisles. Cisco Systems, a supplier of surveillance equipment, said that clients use cameras to see how long it took sale agents to approach customers. Cameras help retailers monitor the number and age of the consumers who pass, and to determine whether a display is more appealing to men or women. Videos inspired malls to create attractive seating areas on the theory that if men are comfortable, women will shop longer. Although retailers may want to know more about people’s shopping behaviors, the issue of invasion of privacy is very troublesome. Cisco is even experimenting with facial recognition technology. Much of the video footage can be intrusive and embarrassing, for example boys were photographed groping mannequins’ breasts. Also, one would obviously prefer having real privacy within a dressing room when undressing to try on clothing. Apparently, the public is unable to protect its privacy anywhere; cameras are pervasive and stores are just the latest frontier (Rosenbloom 5). Panopticism may well govern our behavior in department stores in the future; if a person knows he is being watched, it is possible that shame will discipline his “gaze.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/20/business/20surveillance.html
John McClane Is My Hero
WILD THINGS
Some of the most beautiful and famous models are African American and still with their notorious experience and notorious career success they sometimes are doomed to the habits of the past. A famous spread featuring Naomi Campbell did just that when Harper’s Bazaar released the September 2009 issue. The spread was called Wild Things where Campbell was portrayed as one with the wild outdoors of an African safari landscape. Campbell is dressed in furs and animal prints as she runs with cheetahs and plays around with monkeys; she looks like an untamed animal—a stereotypical representation that has followed the African American woman long throughout history. Representations of African American women have long been categorized by the idea that they are untamed, wild, animal-like people who can be related to that of actual wild animals. The only times where black women are recognized as “white” blacks is when their hair is straight or have thinner features all over their physical anatomy whether it be thinner noses, lips, or body figures.
In this ad, Beyonce looks white. Her hair is straight with a blonde tint and her skin tone has been altered to look paler. Her behavior seems serene and poised as oppose to other advertisement that show African Americans as more “black” with untamed hair, sweat, and a more “savage look.”
The Token Black Friend
The only african american in a group of friends.
This relates to this week's discussion of the cultural representations of blacks in the media. While not completely exclusive to black women, several black female characters often fall into the category of the "token black friend." This post expands upon this and explores the role of the TBF as portrayed by both males and females. It should also be noted that TBF does not necessarily have to be black, the more general token (any) minority character is also a familiar character role in the media as well.
We've also discussed in class that placing minorities within television shows or films with primarily white actors highlights their distinctive "otherness." Last semester in Intro to Media Studies, we dedicated an entire section of the course to examining the portrayals of blacks in the media and the evolution of on-screen racism (that is, racist messages present in the kinds of roles given to black actors as well as in the general portrayal of blacks in the media.) Since the overtly racist days of Amos 'n' Andy, "modern racism" has become the form in which blacks and other minorities are subjugated in the media. The TBF is a kind of modern racism, a kind of distinction made between races that is implied through the character presence, but not explicitly stated or mentioned. It appears natural that the protagonist of any given television show or film has only one black friend, and we as viewers internalize such a "fact" and take it to be true.
Famous examples of the token black friend include:
Dee from the Clueless series and film
Chad (as Troy's BFF) and Taylor (as Gabriella's) from the High School Musical movies
War Machine in the Iron Man comics
And my all time favorite: Brenda from the Scary Movie films. Obviously a parody of the TBF phenomenon, but too funny not to include.
"Ohhh!!! She about to get it aaawwwnnn with Shake-eh-speare!"
Oops, almost forgot: Beyoncé from Lady Gaga's "Telephone" music video
Thursday, March 25, 2010
A Step Forward or Backward for Black Females?
In class, we discussed the issue of Italian Vogue that featured all black models. The magazine’s editors were clearly not filling the pages with black women because of their beauty. Rather, for the purpose of political correctness that was discussed in bell hooks’ chapter from her book, Black Looks, black woman are represented so that “readers will notice that the magazine is racially inclusive” (71). This desire for Vogue to appear politically correct was evidenced by the fact that the first half of the magazine was filled with ads featuring all white models. If the magazine was actually trying to glorify the beauty of the black female, chances are she would have appeared in at least some of the advertisements.
Here is one of the images from the “All Black” issue of Italian Vogue.
This photo was taken by Dusan Reljin and is one of a series that he shot.
What is so interesting about this image is the fact that it melds perfectly with hooks’ assertions about black female sexuality and about black women in contrast with white women. hooks says that black female bodies and “features are often distorted, their bodies contorted into strange and bizarre postures that make the images appear monstrous or grotesque”, that black women “seem to represent an anti-aesthetic, one that mocks the very notion of beauty” (71). In this picture, the model looks hardly human. She is filthy and looks like she is covered in some sort of paint or oil, making her body look positively deformed. Her hair stands straight on end, making her appear to be almost some kind of futuristic woman, perhaps a robot, an automaton with no feelings or expression, which certainly meshes with hooks’ assertions about black women as objects, void of feelings or thoughts or personhood. Yet while appearing futuristic, she has the savagery and the wild look that hooks also cites as conventions of black female sexuality. The look in her distorted, almost frightening, eyes is fairly blank, yet still communicates some kind of sexuality. Her eyes, combined with one hand delicately clutching a lit cigarette and her other resting upon her half bare, dirty torso communicate a sense of savagery, freedom, and sexuality. Also, over her jumpsuit she is wearing some sort of shiny, plastic-looking overlay. My first reaction to this was that she looks like she is in a plastic bag, like something you would purchase, an object, a thing, not a person.
In fact, the only facet of this image that strays from hooks’ theory is the fact that the woman is painted darker than her actual skin tone, as can be seen from the few exposed patches of skin that are not covered in black paint. hooks says that black women are constantly portrayed so as to appear to be as close to “whiteness” as possible, that “darker-skinned models are most likely to appear in photographs where their features are distorted.” However, this model has lighter skin that is being made darker instead of being characterized as lighter and whiter. However, the fact that she is made to look a hue darker than her actual skin still proves hooks’ points, as the model is being presented as dirty, savage, and objectified.
What is really important here is that it seems much easier for an editor or publisher to use a beautiful black model and make her look like a dark, dirty mess than it would be for such a person to similarly use a white model. It seems much easier to mask the features of the black model so that image becomes about everything but who she is. If society had really overcome these racist notions of black female identity, then a specifically black issue of a fashion magazine would not need to published; black women would be displayed just as prominently, favorably, and frequently and considered as high-fashion and beautiful as most white models are. There would be no reason to specify that this issue is compiled of specifically black images, for specifying this only causes the women to have a greater chance of being subjected to the stilted and racist gaze and “myth of black female sexuality created by men in a white supremacist patriarchy” (69). Clearly, the undesirable conventions and stereotypes have not been overcome if we can not even recognize black as beautiful and fashionable unless it is labeled and sold to us by a big-name magazine.
Fight the Power
And the male gaze made people wonder: If there is a male gaze, why can't there be other perspectives? And this wonderment led to other gazes being created and integrated into society as well.
The Transverse Glance is one of them.
It means being constantly aware of the global dimensions to the work one is doing. It's not necessarily a gaze because it tries to resist the imperial domain of gendered sexuality.
In simpler terms, the subject turns him/herself into a visual subject so it is not a male gaze.
This is really interesting and seen in our progressive society today. It has actually been happening.
You can see it in Spike Lee's powerful opening scene of "Do the Right Thing."
Rosie Perez, a powerful expressionist, uses her body as a way of expression. She dances to "Fight the Power" by hip hop group Public Enemy. This song has largely served as the political statement of purpose for the group and other people. Perez is shown dancing for about 4 minutes to this one song, thrusting her body, shaking wildly, jumping up and down, gyrating her hips, and seeming untamed and wild. The dance is actually sexual; all of the outfits that she wears are tight fitting and most are cleavage bearing. The dance moves themselves are sexual as well.
However, Rosie uses her sexuality as a symbol of strength and endurance. She objectifies herself in order to serve a greater purpose. Because she uses sexuality as expression, it is not the male gaze rather a transverse glance that promotes power.
It's awesome to see a woman shaking what she's got in order to empower herself and other women.
Beyonce
In the video, Beyonce and her dancers present themselves as sexual objects. They wear black leotards that show off their long legs, mullet-esque hairdos that accentuate their heads, and stiletto heels that call attention to their legs and further the idea that they are objects to be observed rather than people. Throughout the course of the video they also spank themselves several times, giving off the impression that they want men to treat them like the objects that they are presenting themselves as.
Don't get the impression that I don't like Beyonce or this video. On the contrary, I enjoy both very much. I just find it worthwhile to examine these kinds of things in an analytical context that we probably don't do every time we type in "single ladies beyonce" on YouTube.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Wild Women
White is the New Yellow
Before the start of Hollywood, white pale skin was considered beautiful because it meant that you were not a laborer working out in the sun all day. When Hollywood came around and everyone saw the tan the actors and actresses had due to filming in the Californian sunshine all day, they thought tanned skin was beautiful and this notion is still widely held today. Every spring, there are millions of women running out to the tanning salon, buying bronzers and self-tanners in hope of getting that gorgeous bronze skin before swimsuit season hits. Who knew that across the Pacific Ocean though, in countries like Korea and China, that women are not running to get dark, but are instead running to get white...
Growing up, I always though all Asian people have yellow skin, it’s what I saw on television, and it’s what my friends told me and it never seemed odd to me because I did see a golden tint to my skin while growing up. It was not until I took my first trip to Hong Kong and began exposing myself to East Asian culture that I realized all the girls there are pale white. Everywhere I looked, there were these pale sick-looking girls walking around the streets and in print ads all over the city that I realized: Asians aren’t yellow, they’re white.
Whitening/bleaching cosmetic products have been flying off the shelves in countries such as China, Korea, and Japan. Women are striving for the Michael Jackson effect as they walk down the streets with their wide-brimmed hats and parasols, shielding themselves from any potential sunrays. I think this definitely has to do with the “whiteness” Hook was describing in “Selling Hot ________.” Being white seems like a powerful beautiful thing to these women and that is why they are striving to get as close to that as possible. That is probably also why getting the eye-lid surgery is also a trendy thing to do in East Asia. Losing the infamous “chinky” eyes will make them “more” white.
Subtleties
In this United Colors of Benetton ad (that was originally meant to break down racial barriers) we see a pair of naked black breasts—take note that her entire body is not shown— nursing a white baby. This campaign was an interesting way to attempt to dissolve racial separation, but the viewer should step away from the image and wonder: Why isn’t it a white woman bearing her nude body to nurse a black baby? The answer is this: black women have always been overly sexualized and objectified in the media for ages, whereas objectification of white women is relatively new; the separation of decency and indecency is different for women of different races. If it were a white woman nursing a black child, [I imagine] her breasts would be covered by a towel or blanket or by an obstructed angle, whereas, we don’t think twice about seeing a black woman’s body completely vulnerable and exploited in an ad.
On a side note, this ad recalls the days of slavery when black women took care of their white masters’ children. Would it be too ‘cutting edge’ to picture a white woman caring for a black child in an ad? The standards for representing white women and black women in the media are certainly not equal, but we are conditioned to not question the subtle racism in ads. We see it, but apparently, we do not mind it and do not challenge it.
Objectify or Empower?
"My butt is big" is part of one of Nike's new ad campaigns. They also have thunder thighs, chicken legs, hips, and scabby knees. Not only is this ad campaign geared to the new "feel good about yourself" trend going around (dove ads), but it also questions whether or not pointing out a woman's society-constructed imperfections is empowering or objectifying.
The ad reads, "My butt is big and round like the letter C and ten thousand lunges have made it rounder but not smaller and that’s just fine. It’s a space heater for my side of the bed. It’s my ambassador to those who walk behind me. It’s a border collie that herds skinny women away from the best deals at clothing sales. My butt is big and that’s just fine and those who might scorn it are invited to kiss it."
The ad could be read that the woman, although in black or white her race is indistinguishable, has a darker color than the white booty shorts she is wearing. This allows the viewer to think that the woman is black, especially since the stereotyped association of black women having big butts is present. I know I first thought that it was a black woman's butt. As discussed in class the white shorts were probably strategically chosen because they imply that white is pure and good. This could be taken as nike trying to take the black woman's large butt and making it more "white." This makes it a white trend and therefore more socially acceptable.
Also, if one reads into the ad she refers to her butt as her ambassador, or representative to those who walk behind her. This objectifies her butt to be looked at alone as an object and objectifies herself. The nike ad is playing into the fetishism of a black woman's behind by pointing out its beneficial factors. I think the message is good and empowering, but at the same time I am not sure if it sends the right message because in the wording she still mentions the herd of skinny women which shows the "norm." The stereotype of black women having large butts is being perpetuated still today, even years after the KhoiKhoi woman. When will be learn our lesson?
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Opposites Attract, Especially on TV
However, we now have a much more diverse and more closely integrated array of characters. Take Grey’s Anatomy for instance. Some critics might applaud ABC for producing such an ethnically diverse show, where race is simply an objective factor and episode encourage problem-solving teamwork versus culture classes. However, are these characters truly a representation of diversity? Or are the ethnic minorities simply defined as their otherness to other characters.
Let’s compare and contrast a few pairs of characters:
First, Meredith and Christina. Meredith is 100% female. She’s a woman, she has vulnerabilities (one most notably being men), she wears her heart on her sleeve although it may be hidden by a rather transparent cocoon, and she’s a fair-skinned dirty-blonde even-tempered doctor. She’s the main character, after all. Let’s contrast her to Christina Yang. Christina Yang is perhaps more masculine than a few male characters. She explicitly has no emotions, few weaknesses, practically asexual, and all her sharp edges make her last-runner up for a beauty pageant. This plays directly into the dragon-lady stereotype, a man-eating asian with a savage-like inability to emote. Now, I wonder whether or not Christina would look nearly as emotionless if she weren’t directly contrasted with her overly-emotional unstable counterpart. I wonder if Yang’s wavy long hair would mark her as a beauty, and I wonder if her emotionless would be revered rather than critiqued if her direct contrast, her foil, weren’t so explicitly presented to us as “correct.” Meredeth is the main character, therefore we are supposed to like her the most, therefore anything opposite we dislike the most.
Let’s take another example. Dr. Shepherd vs. Dr. Burke. Shepherd is known as McDreamy, he has luscious locks that seem to be the center of hospital conversation and he is as close to the Statue of David as Seattle Grace Hospital could hope to get. Talented but not stubborn, confident but still modest, and once again, fair-skinned. Now we have his supposed “best friend” in the early years before the Grey’s Character Fiasco (another blog for another time). Burke is stubborn, he blindly regards himself as the best. Yet he is soft-spoken, reveals quickly his vulnerabilities. He is one of the more effeminate characters on the show, quickly getting caught up in the hospital drama. Burke is much darker, much more internal, and much less intimidating than Dr. Shepherd. Oh yeah, and Burke’s Black.
It’s funny how opposites tend to attract each other on TV. Unless it’s the case of relationships. In that case, the two golden characters, the two icons of majority perfection become involved, while their two counterparts also get involved. I could’ve guessed it. However, I don’t remember the last time I had a best friend who was my direct opposite, or the last time I was attracted to a person who was exactly like me. If opposites really do attract, it seems like these allegedly diverse Prime Time TV shows are very strong, very widely broadcasted magnets.
Friday, March 12, 2010
women's power
http://www.popeater.com/2009/12/30/women-movies-chick-flicks/
Homosexuality and Double Consciousness
Part of the reason why homosexuality is an example of double consciousness is because sometimes it feels as though once a person is gay, that is all they are. What I mean by that is that if a public figure comes out, be they a politician, a movie star, or an athlete, they are usually known as gay first and politician, movie star, or athlete second. Being gay is the first thing that everyone thinks when they think of that person. It's as if sexual orientation suddenly becomes a defining factor of their person, even though for straight people being straight only comes up if you're talking about things like weddings and having kids. For a famous gay person, they could be going to the bank and they're still thought of as that gay celebrity going to the bank.
The double consciousness of homosexuality made headlines this week in Mississippi. Constance McMillen, an 18 year old high school senior, wanted to take her girlfriend to the prom this spring. When she asked the school for permission to take her girlfriend, the school reacted in a pretty amazing way, in my opinion. Rather than let Ms McMillen take her girlfriend to the prom, the school cancelled the entire event. That's right, the school CANCELLED PROM rather than letting a girl take her girlfriend as her date. Ms McMillen was not trying to make a statement here. All she wanted to do was enjoy her prom, the quintessential high school ending event, with her girlfriend and have a good time. She never intended for this to happen. Now she, with the help of the ACLU, is suing the school. As she says, "this isn't just about me and my rights anymore -- now I'm fighting for the right of all the students at my school to have our prom."
According to Constance McMillen's high school, she is gay first and high school student second. Her school's decision is wrong on many levels, but I feel like this is the worst one. Because now, if her prom stays cancelled and doesn't happen, the entire senior class will look at her as that gay kid who got our prom cancelled because she wanted to take her girlfriend with her. People look forward to prom throughout high school and to take that away from them, especially for something like this, is outrageous. I only hope that the school realizes its mistake and reneges on its decision.
The CNN and Huffington Post articles on this story can be read here:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/11/mississippi.prom.suit/index.html?iref=allsearch
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/11/mississippi-prom-canceled_n_494555.html