Ok, so I missed class last week courtesy of the cold and flu season. This blog, therefore, is a synopsis of mostly my opinion and some of the other things I’ve looked at in other people’s blogs.
So – we’re discussing the issue of sex and gender. This has always been a sounding point and a matter of debate in American culture. We live in a predominately patriarchal society. Our culture has been dominated by men for as long as we have had our own culture. This goes back to our European roots. Is this the best system though? Of course it is not. Women still receive less compensation than male counterparts doing similar jobs, even if the males have less education and training.
We also began to touch on the adult entertainment industry and how society views its participants. Women are viewed poorly and with reproach, often being called sluts and whores. Men are basically viewed as “getting a piece of ass.” Why should women who participate in the making or directing of pornography be viewed differently than men? They’re in the same industry. It all goes back to the patriarchal views of society. Traditionally, women are viewed as weak and feeble. When they step out of the typical roles set forth by society, they face many more hurdles than their male counterparts. This point goes beyond the adult film industry, however.
My blog is rather broad this week, and my thoughts are mostly fragmented. Stress and sleep deprivation are prevalent once more. Even in spite of all that though, the point I am making is surely clear. Changing this culture is the responsibility of us. Yes, us. The students who seek higher education have a responsibility to try and promote tolerance and understanding. We are the leadership of tomorrow… some of us are even the leadership of today. We cannot fail in our responsibilities to leave the world in a better way than how we found it.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Building up stereotypes or tearing them down?
Building up stereotypes or tearing them down?Building up stereotypes or tearing them down?
Ok, so this week in class I was running on empty. I had worked a very long night shift on Monday and by 6:00 PM I was pretty run down. Despite my sleep deprivation, class proved most interested. We watched another video from the late ‘50s. It was more realistic than the previous one we viewed and it focused on mobility and immobility in the social strata.
We talked about the American social system and structure again, and I’m not going to be as hardcore on it in this blog… for my feelings on it feel free to consult my last one. Nonetheless, we described how the classes view and interact with each other. We also discussed how the government labels and manages poverty.
Before going into each social class and its respective stereotypes, it’s important to note that people are people. No two members of a group are alike. There are members that embody and display many of the traits that our stereotypes reflect, but there are also many that don’t.
We discussed how so many of the lower class seem content to remain in their social setting. It’s a closely knit group and they know that they can rely on each other in times of need. Maggy gave an excellent example. Someone in the community doesn’t have enough for dinner tonight; someone else may have a large pot of spaghetti and will share with those who are less fortunate. This group doesn’t tend to look to the future regarding money simply because its members can’t. Many don’t know if they will have enough money for food today, let alone next week. This leads some members of the upper and middle classes to perceive that the lower class is irresponsible.
The middle class was described as being thrifty, generous when able, and planners of the future. I grew up in a lower-middle class family and we had many struggles. Despite them all, my mother always tried to look to the future and wanted me to have a better life than she did. She made many countless sacrifices for me that often left her with nothing. I know of many middle class families that are like mine was growing up. We all want to achieve something better, not just for ourselves, but for our children as well.
The upper class was described in many ways such as: snooty, rude, arrogant, ostentatious, greedy, et. al. However, we brought up the fact that many members of the upper class are in fact friendly, benevolent, and again, planners for the future. While many rich Americans exemplify what we see on MTV, Bravo, and other networks, many more (such as Bill and Miranda Gates) have pursued philanthropy and have truly dedicated themselves to bettering humanity. Many upper class members don’t associate with members of the other classes, and they feel it is with good reason. There are so many scammers and swindlers out there that surely this new person must be after my money, right?! It is possible, but not always. Climbing is something many in the middle class pursue but admission to this group is difficult.
I feel like I should have more to say about this topic but I think I pretty much covered everything previously in my discussion about what I perceive as immobility in the social strata. In closing, perhaps these three social groups need a better understanding of their own members before they try to understand others.
Ok, so this week in class I was running on empty. I had worked a very long night shift on Monday and by 6:00 PM I was pretty run down. Despite my sleep deprivation, class proved most interested. We watched another video from the late ‘50s. It was more realistic than the previous one we viewed and it focused on mobility and immobility in the social strata.
We talked about the American social system and structure again, and I’m not going to be as hardcore on it in this blog… for my feelings on it feel free to consult my last one. Nonetheless, we described how the classes view and interact with each other. We also discussed how the government labels and manages poverty.
Before going into each social class and its respective stereotypes, it’s important to note that people are people. No two members of a group are alike. There are members that embody and display many of the traits that our stereotypes reflect, but there are also many that don’t.
We discussed how so many of the lower class seem content to remain in their social setting. It’s a closely knit group and they know that they can rely on each other in times of need. Maggy gave an excellent example. Someone in the community doesn’t have enough for dinner tonight; someone else may have a large pot of spaghetti and will share with those who are less fortunate. This group doesn’t tend to look to the future regarding money simply because its members can’t. Many don’t know if they will have enough money for food today, let alone next week. This leads some members of the upper and middle classes to perceive that the lower class is irresponsible.
The middle class was described as being thrifty, generous when able, and planners of the future. I grew up in a lower-middle class family and we had many struggles. Despite them all, my mother always tried to look to the future and wanted me to have a better life than she did. She made many countless sacrifices for me that often left her with nothing. I know of many middle class families that are like mine was growing up. We all want to achieve something better, not just for ourselves, but for our children as well.
The upper class was described in many ways such as: snooty, rude, arrogant, ostentatious, greedy, et. al. However, we brought up the fact that many members of the upper class are in fact friendly, benevolent, and again, planners for the future. While many rich Americans exemplify what we see on MTV, Bravo, and other networks, many more (such as Bill and Miranda Gates) have pursued philanthropy and have truly dedicated themselves to bettering humanity. Many upper class members don’t associate with members of the other classes, and they feel it is with good reason. There are so many scammers and swindlers out there that surely this new person must be after my money, right?! It is possible, but not always. Climbing is something many in the middle class pursue but admission to this group is difficult.
I feel like I should have more to say about this topic but I think I pretty much covered everything previously in my discussion about what I perceive as immobility in the social strata. In closing, perhaps these three social groups need a better understanding of their own members before they try to understand others.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Immobility in the Social Strata
Immobility in the Social Strata
This week’s class was very informative at large. My blog likely won’t be as long as the previous weeks’ though, mostly because I feel this issue is easily defined. I think the discussion about immobility within the social hierarchy of America was revealing, and sickening to say the least. Many politicians have always preached the message of the ‘American Dream’ and how fluid our social system is to all of our citizenry. What happens though when the dream turns into a nightmare?
I do believe that it is possible to move upward in the social hierarchy because I am a living example of that possibility. However, the pathway to doing this is generally slow and requires much planning, work, and implantation to achieve success. To ascend to higher levels of prestige, power, property, etc. requires vast amounts of time and energy. It is generally not something that can be achieved overnight.
I grew up in a single-parent household without much, if any prestige or power. We had some property, but not enough to amount to any recognition in the social strata. I am the first member of my family to receive a college degree and to work as a professional in the healthcare field. Despite having worked in emergency medical services since I was 18, I have only just now began to reap great rewards from my career. Ascension to higher levels of recognition and success is a long-term investment, but one that will pay off if it is seen through to the finish.
Some people don’t have stories quite like mine. Circumstances that may or may not be as a direct result of their actions have hampered many from achieving success. We discussed four of the theories of social stratification and many had goods points. It’s almost as if our country and social hierarchy is a mixture between two of them in particular. Social Darwinism and the Functional Theory seem to dominate our not just our way of life, but our way of thinking.
In order to achieve maximum potential, we have to rethink our system of education, government, our whole way of life really. I am an optimist, but I am also a realist. I know that the utopia that I have mentioned, is likely not possible or probable. Nevertheless, people that have a true desire and drive to achieve a greater place in life should be given the opportunity to do so when there is none currently present for them.
Shouldn’t we shatter the immobility of our social strata, and make the ‘American Dream’ a reality, not just a vision?
This week’s class was very informative at large. My blog likely won’t be as long as the previous weeks’ though, mostly because I feel this issue is easily defined. I think the discussion about immobility within the social hierarchy of America was revealing, and sickening to say the least. Many politicians have always preached the message of the ‘American Dream’ and how fluid our social system is to all of our citizenry. What happens though when the dream turns into a nightmare?
I do believe that it is possible to move upward in the social hierarchy because I am a living example of that possibility. However, the pathway to doing this is generally slow and requires much planning, work, and implantation to achieve success. To ascend to higher levels of prestige, power, property, etc. requires vast amounts of time and energy. It is generally not something that can be achieved overnight.
I grew up in a single-parent household without much, if any prestige or power. We had some property, but not enough to amount to any recognition in the social strata. I am the first member of my family to receive a college degree and to work as a professional in the healthcare field. Despite having worked in emergency medical services since I was 18, I have only just now began to reap great rewards from my career. Ascension to higher levels of recognition and success is a long-term investment, but one that will pay off if it is seen through to the finish.
Some people don’t have stories quite like mine. Circumstances that may or may not be as a direct result of their actions have hampered many from achieving success. We discussed four of the theories of social stratification and many had goods points. It’s almost as if our country and social hierarchy is a mixture between two of them in particular. Social Darwinism and the Functional Theory seem to dominate our not just our way of life, but our way of thinking.
In order to achieve maximum potential, we have to rethink our system of education, government, our whole way of life really. I am an optimist, but I am also a realist. I know that the utopia that I have mentioned, is likely not possible or probable. Nevertheless, people that have a true desire and drive to achieve a greater place in life should be given the opportunity to do so when there is none currently present for them.
Shouldn’t we shatter the immobility of our social strata, and make the ‘American Dream’ a reality, not just a vision?
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Are we really our parents' children?
Are we really our parents’ children?
This week’s discussion in class was highly informative, not to mention entertaining… It was a complex discussion for me because I really couldn’t offer much input. I know that must be a shock to anyone who knows me because I usually always have something to say. Our discussion was on habits, sayings, and beliefs passed down from one generation to the next, particularly from parents but also from the mass media and world around us.
I didn’t have much to offer for the discussion because I grew up quite differently than most ‘traditional’ children. I never knew my father whom my mother had divorced when I was only six months old. My mother was highly protective of me and I was not allowed to mingle with other children outside of the classroom. We didn’t have a lot of financial resources to make extracurricular activities possible regardless. I spent a lot of time around adults and grew up with the saying tattooed to my mind: “As long as you live in my house, you live under my rules.”
Despite all of this, I think I turned out ok. I matured much more quickly than my counterparts in school and adapted quite well to the adult world. The only problem was that I didn’t develop any real social skills or social life until I became a freshman in college at West Virginia University. I quickly learned that I didn’t really identify with others in my age group, not yet anyway. I came from a highly functional dysfunctional family. There are plenty of examples of this in the programs we see in the mass media.
Stewie Griffin comes from a family in which he is well cared for, but is always attempting to find new methods to exterminate his mother: Lois Griffin. He always fails but I think his presence demonstrates a highly disgruntled portion of American society. So many people are displeased with their family lives, among all of the other roles we play. So I must ask the question: Are we really our parents’ children? Does history repeat itself and do we conform to the standards our parents have set for us? Do we embrace nonconformity though, and form our own?
I believe that despite the high influx of information technology into American culture, and the continuing rise of the information superhighway, we are a generation that is a combination of both. We all tend to cling to our upbringing, but society has changed, even though it remains the same. It has changed in the sense that we spend less time with our families as we grow. The economic trend of yesterday and today require both parents to work often times… That’s assuming though that both parents are together and are involved in the family’s life. That’s an assumption we just can’t make. Families tend not to be traditional anymore. There are families with only a single parent, both parents, same-sex parents, or grandparents at the ‘helm’ among many other combinations I’m sure I’ve failed to mention.
We all take these numerous cues differently than those around us. This is what makes us unique. Even though we receive conditioning from our families as we grow, our world around us also gives us clues to draw from about the way life is supposed to be. Children have less time with their families, and more time with high availability of information in its many forms. So, are we truly our parents’ children, or have we evolved into something more complex? Perhaps time will tell as we raise our own children and continue to travel faster on the information superhighway.
This week’s discussion in class was highly informative, not to mention entertaining… It was a complex discussion for me because I really couldn’t offer much input. I know that must be a shock to anyone who knows me because I usually always have something to say. Our discussion was on habits, sayings, and beliefs passed down from one generation to the next, particularly from parents but also from the mass media and world around us.
I didn’t have much to offer for the discussion because I grew up quite differently than most ‘traditional’ children. I never knew my father whom my mother had divorced when I was only six months old. My mother was highly protective of me and I was not allowed to mingle with other children outside of the classroom. We didn’t have a lot of financial resources to make extracurricular activities possible regardless. I spent a lot of time around adults and grew up with the saying tattooed to my mind: “As long as you live in my house, you live under my rules.”
Despite all of this, I think I turned out ok. I matured much more quickly than my counterparts in school and adapted quite well to the adult world. The only problem was that I didn’t develop any real social skills or social life until I became a freshman in college at West Virginia University. I quickly learned that I didn’t really identify with others in my age group, not yet anyway. I came from a highly functional dysfunctional family. There are plenty of examples of this in the programs we see in the mass media.
Stewie Griffin comes from a family in which he is well cared for, but is always attempting to find new methods to exterminate his mother: Lois Griffin. He always fails but I think his presence demonstrates a highly disgruntled portion of American society. So many people are displeased with their family lives, among all of the other roles we play. So I must ask the question: Are we really our parents’ children? Does history repeat itself and do we conform to the standards our parents have set for us? Do we embrace nonconformity though, and form our own?
I believe that despite the high influx of information technology into American culture, and the continuing rise of the information superhighway, we are a generation that is a combination of both. We all tend to cling to our upbringing, but society has changed, even though it remains the same. It has changed in the sense that we spend less time with our families as we grow. The economic trend of yesterday and today require both parents to work often times… That’s assuming though that both parents are together and are involved in the family’s life. That’s an assumption we just can’t make. Families tend not to be traditional anymore. There are families with only a single parent, both parents, same-sex parents, or grandparents at the ‘helm’ among many other combinations I’m sure I’ve failed to mention.
We all take these numerous cues differently than those around us. This is what makes us unique. Even though we receive conditioning from our families as we grow, our world around us also gives us clues to draw from about the way life is supposed to be. Children have less time with their families, and more time with high availability of information in its many forms. So, are we truly our parents’ children, or have we evolved into something more complex? Perhaps time will tell as we raise our own children and continue to travel faster on the information superhighway.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
The Mass Media Frenzy
When I first came into this class, I knew it would complement the way I look at society. I like to think I’m a pretty liberal individual and am far from judgmental. After our discussion in class I started to look for the ways that the mass media affects our receipt of information as well as our world views.
We discussed the TV show Family Guy in class on Tuesday and I think it’s an excellent example of the views and thought processes of ‘mainstream’ Americans. Peter is a Eurocentric, highly sexist male that feels his patriarchal control of his family should not be questioned, despite his bumbling. The show itself shows his feelings that he is superior to other ethnic and cultural groups, but he’s not afraid to mingle with them. The series does incorporate minority groups in its programming, including the handicapped, homosexual, and racial minorities, albeit at their expense. The show uses these groups for humor, and despite Peter’s attitude to these groups, his lack of understanding usually ends up undermining him in the end.
Bravo was mentioned as being a center for dissemination of counterculture. I have the channel so I thought I’d check it out. It gives minority groups attention and specialized programming that other networks would not. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy demonstrates the network’s commitment to the promotion of this counterculture. It prescribes to the bias that gay men are superior to their straight counterparts on issues such as fashion sense and taste for example. It also fuels the stereotype that straight men cannot be classy and need guidance on how to maintain a nice self image and the maintenance of relationships.
These are only a few ways in which the mass media effects and affects our perceptions of the world around us. Information technology is an excellent source of data on the world around us, but we must always be careful to review that data critically and not forget to explore the world around us. We need to form our own opinions and ideas and not allow others to manipulate our thought processes.
We discussed the TV show Family Guy in class on Tuesday and I think it’s an excellent example of the views and thought processes of ‘mainstream’ Americans. Peter is a Eurocentric, highly sexist male that feels his patriarchal control of his family should not be questioned, despite his bumbling. The show itself shows his feelings that he is superior to other ethnic and cultural groups, but he’s not afraid to mingle with them. The series does incorporate minority groups in its programming, including the handicapped, homosexual, and racial minorities, albeit at their expense. The show uses these groups for humor, and despite Peter’s attitude to these groups, his lack of understanding usually ends up undermining him in the end.
Bravo was mentioned as being a center for dissemination of counterculture. I have the channel so I thought I’d check it out. It gives minority groups attention and specialized programming that other networks would not. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy demonstrates the network’s commitment to the promotion of this counterculture. It prescribes to the bias that gay men are superior to their straight counterparts on issues such as fashion sense and taste for example. It also fuels the stereotype that straight men cannot be classy and need guidance on how to maintain a nice self image and the maintenance of relationships.
These are only a few ways in which the mass media effects and affects our perceptions of the world around us. Information technology is an excellent source of data on the world around us, but we must always be careful to review that data critically and not forget to explore the world around us. We need to form our own opinions and ideas and not allow others to manipulate our thought processes.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)