Class and Virtue

I also found this article extremely interesting. It taught me something that I had not noticed previously to reading this. In many movies and TV shows, people who are transformed in their lives from "bad" to "good" move up in class status. They all dress a similar way, have a higher education, speak in a specific manner, and behave in a certain manner. As a society, we generally associate the rich with being "good". In many court cases across the country, the more wealthy you are and the better lawyer you can afford, the easier it is to be found innocent. The wealthy have privileges that the rest of us do not have. Since most people so badly want to be a part of this elite group, we put them on a pedestal and see them in a holier light. So in a way, they can do no wrong. This essay was short and to the point. I agree with everything Michael Parenti (author) wrote and do not have much else to say about this subject.

TV Shows Supporting Sexism

I really liked this essay because it talks about a huge role of gender stereotypes that most people overlook. Most popular TV shows have a huge, random audience. That means people of all ages, race, religion and gender watch them. These TV shows make a huge impact on our society by constantly giving subtle messages as to gender roles and racial roles. African Americans and Latinos are rarely seen in these shows, showing their insignificance and how they are lower than Caucasians. African Americans are only shown as on welfare or prostitutes in a very negative light. This does not just effect children, but everybody. Its another piece of our society that is reinforcing negative and false attitudes. These TV shows air for years at a time. People watch them weekly. So this sexism and racism that are subtly built in have a long time to create a change in someone.

The women in most TV shows are portrayed as dumb to be funny. Men are not dumb to be funny, they are witty. Many young girls I grew up with honestly believed they had to pretend to be stupid for people to like them or find them funny. Many TV shows reinforce this self-limiting belief. Many women in these shows give off the illusion of strength, but in most episodes, they are talked down to by men or overpowered by them. Many women are shown as scared to speak their full minds or give their opinion, but the women who do are bitches. So you are labeled as a push over or a bitch. It seems that no matter what women do, either choice is made into an extreme and labeled with a negative characteristic.

Batman

This essay basically summed up another authors beliefs. It was full of assumptions and projected Batman in a homosexual light to serve his own means. I didn't read this entire essay because it was way too long and I have other things to do. However, I did read the first section and was slightly annoyed. I believe Wertham is homophobic. He claims that because two men live together, sit on a couch next to each other and have a butler named Alfred, that they are living the gay mans dream. Seriously? If the two fictional characters were women, they would be labeled as best friends. We are socialized to believe men should be rough, emotionless, strong and independent. When men are portrayed bonding with each other or being close with another man, they are assumed to be homosexual. Men and women both share emotions on an equal level. Yet, because of our societies gender roles, we are taught to show and express them in entirely different ways. Batman and Robin can share a very close relationship without being homosexual.

Batman and Robin are bonded through their secret identities. This may subconciously remind people of many homosexual couples who keep their sexuality hidden from public. Just like batman and Robin keep their super hero identity hidden from public and only shared between themselves. But this still does not make them a gay couple.

Batman and Robin also fight villains. The author made a point of noting how the women are evil and the men bond together in their disgust of women and their gay connections with each other. That is so sexist. There are many evil men villains as well. Women can be villains too. It shows they are just as capable of power as men. If we are using this same logic, Batman should be asexual since he fights both sexes in disgust. Even if Batman was homosexual, I would be down with it. But if he was, the creators of Batman would probably make it a bit more evident and actually give clear reasoning and examples of this claim.

Marriage Inequality

Reading this last essay brought upon feelings of extreme anger. I think it is absolute bullshit that Robert Knight states that gay couples are, "trying to hijack the moral capital of marriage and apply it to their own relationships." Marriage is a legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of two people to live as a married couple. The dictionary's first definition specifies a man and a woman. It goes on in further definitions to make a point about gay marriage and the definition changes. I believe the definition of a gay marriage should be applied for all marriage.

I think religion fuels the unchanging legal requirements of marriage. If our governments does not have the right to have a say in what we choose to wear, listen to, eat, learn, work...etc, why would it suddenly have the right to say who we can marry? There is supposed to be an acute distinction between church and state.

I found this article to bring up a very important controversial issue and was well written as to evoke emotion in the reader. It made many important points of how gay couples suffer legal consequences of not being recognized at a marital status. I completely agree with everything the author wrote. I think our country and government is in need of a massive reform. As a society, we are moving farther from organized religion and more into individual spirituality. Yet religion from previous generations still seems to dictate many of the decisions and laws still in use today. Change needs to happen as we continue to evolve as a society.

Unmaked Women

I agree with the author that women are constantly marked by our society and marked more than men are. However, I do not believe that every woman is marked. We are socialized to notice good looking people and place them on a pedestal based on their physical appearance. Many women who are not trying to stand out, but are what we would label as "ugly" go unnoticed.

Women perpetuate this cycle. Men do not judge women the same way women judge each other. Men do not even use most of the vocabulary women have created to describe each other. Even if another woman is more attractive, they are slandered with negative terms. Women mark each other much more than men do. If women ceased to mark each other, our culture could change.

I believe women do have a need to stand out in the workforce. Women are judged extremely harshly in contrast to men. The workplace is an environment of inequality. Women who succeed tend to stand out. Men stand out with the quality and efficiency of their work. Women need to accomplish this as well as their physical appearance. While this is extremely unjustified, it is the reality today. We have been taught from an early age at a micro-level to have a negative attitude towards women and their abilities. Whether or not our family gives us the message directly, it is there.

Barbie

Barbie is a social icon of the 90's whose impact on our generation cannot be ignored. Barbie is a tool for socializing young girls to perceive our cultures standards of beauty in a specific light. I agree with the author that Barbie was designed during the height of the feminist movement becoming more accepted and popular. A man designing Barbie is a clear reflection of what our society desires a woman to look like; women should achieve the impossible. This standard sets women up to fail, since as the author noted, it is literally impossible to look like Barbie. She would fall flat on her face.

Young girls who grow up playing with Barbie are socialized to believe that is what a woman should look like. It is extremely detrimental to show our kids that women are that thin and flawless looking. Why not make a doll with a realistic body type as to not promote pressure on women to attempt mimicking such an unattainable body. I have heard the argument that when you're young and playing with Barbie, you do not realize the impact of this doll nor do you directly think, "this is what I should look like." I partially agree, only on the fact that Barbie is not solely responsible for the ideal body type that imprisons and de-powers women. This argument is not valid because it is claiming you have to be aware of messages to be influenced by them. Yet it is undeniable that Barbie plays a part in fueling this destructive body ideal.

Sex, Lies and Advertising

I did not like how long this essay was. It covered so much material that it was at times hard to summarize now, looking back. Many valid points were made. A lot of this I have heard before. Again, not many potential solutions were mentioned. We focus a lot of our energy on our societies problems, which keeps them going. Whether or not we are stating saying positive or negative messages surrounding the problem, our focus is still on the problem. That is where all our attention and energy is going towards. We are thinking, feeling and putting our energy out onto said problem. This only makes it bigger. Where is the focus on the solution? We always research halfway. We are culturally taught to seek out problems. Why not research fixing them?

What I found to be the most interesting part of this essay was the products that are advertised directly towards women. That technology and cars are only understood by men. This is extremely demeaning. I had never thought about it before. Advertisements encourage our gender role stereotypes and keeping our characteristics boxed in. Men are not smarter than women. They may take more of an interest in technology but that does not mean women cannot understand it. As far as cars go, when I think of all adults I know, whether they are man or woman, they all own a car. So why advertise directly towards men? Wouldn't companies want to make the most money they can? So is this advertising strategy something consciously decided or is it an actual strategy?

I think if all women magazines followed suit to what the editors of Ms. magazine did, the world of advertising could change. By not voicing our problems with how magazines are ran, we are giving away our power to those who make the most money off of women, mainly men. If most women have a problem with magazines, why do we continue to buy them? This article mainly brought up a plethora of questions for me.

Child Advertisements

I enjoyed this essay, since I have read Schlosser's Fast Food Nation and heavily agree with his research and opinions. What I found the most interesting in this essay is a theme i see in our country frequently. There is a problem addressed and backed up with thorough evidence. But there is nothing presented of how to resolve the issue. The FTC tried to ban advertisements directed at children under the age of seven in the late seventies. They failed. So if this is such an epidemic problem, where is the national awareness?

It is parents choice to put televisions in their children's rooms. It is parents choice to allow their children to watch as much television as they do. It is parents choice to choose what programs their kids watch and how much advertisements they watch. I think advertisers have free choice to target whichever demographic they choose. They are not making children watch their advertisements against their will. That is like saying if a group of people feel strongly against homosexuals that they want to ban from having any homosexuals on TV. That is not okay. Our country is built upon accepting or at least being open to all different types of people and ideas. We have free will.

I find it extremely immature to put the blame on advertisers. They are putting out their product, not making anyone buy it. If you feel strongly against that, than stop watching television. Or get a Tivo so you can fast forward through the commercials while still watching your favorite programs.

Metrosexual

This essay was boring to me since it brought no new information to my attention. I am quite aware that metrosexuals are becoming far more common and socially accepted than in the 90's. I admire these men for being brave enough to accept their feminine sides and take criticism by homophobes who are intimidated by the concept of straight men acting out of the box. Technically, straight men should have an infinite range of behaviors more commonly associated with females, but we are socialized since birth to act in a very narrowed and specific way.

It is interesting to me how words come about as well. Words become part of the English language when the general population accepts them, understands the meaning and symbolism of the word and commonly uses it. New words are made when new concepts and ideas come about that we have never seen before and a need arises. Before, metrosexuals were labeled as "gay" which was offensive to them. They think straight men should be able to groom themselves without changing their sexual orientation. There has been a huge increase in the number of men coming out as metrosexuals and even previously straight men beginning to adopt this new life style. "Metrosexual" is now a common term that almost all people know and use. In the past decade, this new way of being has become extremely popular.

I wonder if metrosexualism will continue to grow and if one day all men will take more care with their appearance and break the social stereotype in the ways men should behave.

Buttons for Buying

Researchers can monitor brain scans to see specific parts of the brain, such as the brain's reward system, light up when the people were shown certain products or advertisements. This mechanism of studying is extremely controversial, which is what makes this essay so interesting.

Many are scared that corporate marketers and political consultants could manipulate the population through our brains in certain areas, such as voting, and trigger neural activities to modify our behavior to meet their needs. Doing research on specific topics, such as advertising, and brain washing people are two very different things. I do not think we are even technologically advanced enough for scientists to perform said manipulation. Researchers have been studying the brain using the same equipment but for different intentions for years now. Suddenly because we are in the field of advertising are arguments being posed.

The counter argument to this is that the machines are being used to shed light on brain mechanisms that play a central role in consumer behavior. Producers requesting feedback on their product does not result in consistent or truthful evidence. I think we have the right to explore the brain as much as we can. If we achieve negative results, that is a risk we are willing to take to attain knowledge and to move forward. Operating out of fear was not the attitude held when famous and important discoveries were made.

I found this quote quite funny. "At its best, neuromarketing would make advertising more effective, potentially leading to new totalitarian regimes, civil strife, wars, genocide and countless deaths." ....really? We could discover more about how the brain operates, how humans think and how we are effected by advertisements. They aren't changing our reactions, just putting the information out about how and why. I do not wish to live in a world run by people who are scared of the possibilities scientific advancement can bring. Stop fearing change, for it will happen wether you think you are allowing it or not.

Why does the media not focus on these fascinating scientific studies that are constantly happening?

The Parable of the Democracy of Goods

This article covers a very specific, but important concept in our culture today. The media sets the standard for current society. A specific outlet the media uses is advertisements and the mechanism they use is called the parable of the democracy of goods. Advertisers started out by selling high-end products to an elite group of wealthy citizens. If the good was only affordable to the rich, they would be more likely to buy it since it sets them apart from the rest of American citizens. But than advertisers realized to sell a good at a low price, but with a high quantity of consumption, could make them more money.

The media started showing images and selling messages to the middle and lower class citizens that they could have the same products as the wealthy, but for a very low price. With in this, they are also stating that by attaining the same goods, you could be on the same level as the rich. This takes advantage of the average blue-collared worker's mind set, which is to provide for his family to the best of his ability. The media drives that these goods are the best and the best for your family.

This new tactic in the media brought upon negative results that were not directly intentional. It taught Americans to look to similarities in consumption style rather than to political power or control of wealth for evidence of significant equality. We became a consumer nation. Our focus went to what we had instead of what we can do. This puts even more strain and focus on money, rather than personal power. We are caught up in a lie.

America is Now BA

I did not enjoy reading this essay in the slightest. Frank used as many big and confusing words as possible to get across his point. Granted, he sounds intelligent, but it made me not want to listen to what he had to say.

So basically, America has now adopted the image of a "bad ass" when marketing to just about anyone. Brands such as Burger King, Dodge, Levi, Arby's, Special Export Beer and Hugo Boss all have slogans surrounding this idea of cheating, breaking rules, being different and special. This is a 180 degrees switch from the old image presented back in the 50's. Cigarette marketers have been using this image and tactic for years now. Its seemed to work for them. Maybe everyone else is now catching on.

I think people look at manikins or ads and think if they have said product, they will also be purchasing the attitude and the identity. It is a useless way of thinking. That guy who smokes cigarettes is so cool, meaning if I smoke cigarettes, I'll be cool. No. No you wont. But thats how advertisements work. The new "bad" attitude is also idealized with arrogance (mistaken for confidence) and this idea that they can behave however they want and people will still find them cool. Again, this only happens in reality shows, books and movies. In real life, people just find you an asshole.

I believe our country needs this because of the low self confidence everyone has from the economy and their thoughts about their future. The common attitude of the average american is anxious, worried, stressed, hopeless and depressed. I think ads are using this as a "pick-me-up". They are selling their products in a way they want people to feel. Like they are on top of the world and invincible.

Oh My God, Harry Potter

I thoroughly agree with this piece and its views. I think it was very well written and enjoyed learning the specific's of Harry Potter mania. Galligan addresses key points to how marketing works and how Harry Potter has managed to become such a world wide phenomenon. One thing that struck me as extremely interesting was all of the criticism conservative groups, nutritional groups and feminists gave to the approach of this marketing campaign.

First off, there was the complaint about supporting witchcraft and satanism. Seriously? Its Harry Potter. He is a wizard. I think even children know not to expect Harry Potter to read the bible or go to temple. I also think most people who read this book honestly believe, deep down, that they themselves are not wizards. Thus, through common sense, know that practicing wizardry is not for them. The book is made of fiction, Rowling can write about whatever she wants.

Second, feminists provided feedback about how the male characters are portrayed as leaders in this story. I have a problem with this complaint. If women were the main hero's in this novel, feminists would not notice or say anything negative about it. That is sexism. It's annoying. And everyone is an individual. By making this complaint, you are classifying people by their gender. Stating that girls should not be shy or that this is a bad quality. How does that make naturally shy people feel? Yeah, it's a dick comment. I'm sure there are many girls and boys who are shy and many who are not. Sorry Harry Potter didn't happen to be one of them.

Last, the health group. They are upset that Coke is sponsoring Harry Potter and are stating that Rowling is thus promoting poor health. Really? I have never once heard from any child, ever, "I love coke because Harry Potter is endorsed by it." They don't even show Harry Potter or any cast member drinking it! What is this. You are allowed to have your views and coca-cola is allowed theirs. You are marketing for a certain nutritional diet and Coke is marketing for theirs. They don't tell you what to do, so you should show them the same respect. Both groups have had your fair chances to market to kids, sorry Health group, that you are not winning. That you have not been chosen as a preferable life style. That is not Harry Potter's fault. Kids drank Coke before Harry Potter was around and they will continue long after he is gone.

"Frumpy or Chic" Reflection

I really enjoyed reading this piece. It brought out a private dilemma that is only well known to those in the academic workforce. Fashion can be a make-or-break deal when interviewing for a job or can influence the energy of a classroom. Many professors feel conflicted between two main theories; to dress frumpy or chic. There is evidence concluding that when you dress down, you are perceived to be giving more attention to your intellect. Yet there is an extreme of dressing so poorly that you end up being a distraction to your students. For professors of a different race, it is a high risk to display your culture or background through your outfits. This could result in making others too uncomfortable, although sadly, there is no problem with being too "WASPish". As a society, we all judge one another based on how we dress. First impressions are extremely important. It is our first, and at the time, only insight we have of an individual.

This essay enlightened me with information I was oblivious too. I have my own personal beliefs about dressing well and the appropriate attire based on the context of the situation. Though I never knew fashion to produce so much anxiety among professors. I disagree with specific quotes from different professors across the county. I believe you should not dress to a mold or standard that will make others perceive you as intelligent. This only reinforces the stereotype that intellectuals dress a certain way. It is a very ignorant assumption. I think it is important to dress professionally. You are a role model teaching our generation. Learning does not just happen within the course curriculum. We are learning all the time.

By social standards, you do not arrive to a dinner party dressing in jeans and a t-shirt. It is rude. I am paying a high amount of money to come to a class to learn. I feel respected when the professor dresses in a more professional manner. It shows me this individual cares about their appearance and is a symbol for respect. That they take their work seriously. I think this debate is not too confusing. Being a professor is still a job that makes a respectable income. Just because you teach does not mean you can dress however you want. I would hope you would go to class to teach as you would go to any office to work. Scholars are not excused or have special privileges that other professions don't have.

"The More Factor" Analysis

After reading "The More Factor" (p.89), I was thoroughly disappointed with the authors commentary. I am not excited for this blog entry since this information seems quite obvious to me. Shames writing comes down to a basic theory. That the economy of the United States is progressively reducing in productivity growth resulting in American citizens feeling a loss of identity to what our country once symbolized. Shames supports his theory with statistical evidence from economists regarding wealth changes over multiple decades ranging from the late 40's to the early 80's. The rest of his claims are opinion based and taken from observation. Shames writes about Americans values being forced to change as our wealth continually changes.

This essay contributes to broaden our innate belief's about our current economic situation and to expand our thoughts to how we thoughtlessly identify ourselves through our country on a hierarchy, being above the rest of the world.

I agree with the writer to an extent. Many people migrated to America to achieve a better life, make a higher income and possibly pursuit their idea of happiness. We carry this message through out generations by raising our children with this attitude and belief. As our economy is declining and our debt is increasing, many Americans feel insecure about their high status in the world and their purpose. America's economic and political system has supported personal growth based on what each individual can achieve. I think many American's lived, until recently, in a bubble, believing that America is all powerful and will always be the leading force in the world. As we have seen many times through out history, empires, rulers or countries who hold supreme power, eventually fall. Is this decline something we will bounce back from? Or is it the beginning to the end of the "American dream"?

Always the Hard Way

Ever since I have been a child, I have always had to do everything on my own. Some may call me stubborn, but I persist to identify myself as independent. This personality trait has its benefits, but usually I suffer heavier consequences from learning things the hard way. I have always had a hard time trusting other people. This began when I was around six years old and my mother left. I always wanted to find out everything for myself.

A very common conversation in my household usually consisted of someone telling me that by doing something, I would attain a negative outcome. And than onto me telling them they were wrong, doing whatever it was and learning they were actually right.

A very distinct memory I still hold onto today occurred roughly 13 years ago. I was in the kitchen with my father who was making dinner. He had just bought new knives that I had never seen before. They had a deep red handle and the blade was a creamy white color. I asked him why he had bought plastic knives. He laughed and said they were normal knives. He told me they were extremely sharp and to be careful. I peered closer and examined the knife, certain it was made of plastic. Everyone knew sharp knives were shiny and metal. I touched the blade lightly and nothing happened. At this point I was one hundred percent certain my father was wrong. I knew that real knives could cut people. So I took this knife and put it up to my hand. I turned and looked at him dead in the eye as I announced that I was going to prove to him it was made of plastic. He just stared and so i went on to rub the blade against my palm hard. Blood started to appear and trickle down my hand. It dripped on the floor. I stood there stunned and embarrassed. He had been right.

With each experience, I gain more trust in what other people tell me. I learned things are not always as they appear, not to play with knives and that maybe my father has more wisdom than I had collected within my six years of life.