Chapter 14: Hetero Barbie? March 2nd 2015

This chapter was definitely an eye opening one, but it was really great to read. It begins by explaining that as teenagers, girls begin to feel pressure to be popular and feminine to impress the boys. This causes them to pay more attention to the way their bodies look, the shape they have and the size that they are, the way they dress and the clothes they have, and the way they do their hair and makeup. Girls begin to become way too aware of the way they look to other people, especially the boys. Now Barbie, and the Barbie enterprise is thriving off these feelings and encouraging them. When you think of a Barbie doll it is in no way similar to an actual woman. Most obviously is the difference in looks. Barbies are completely disproportionate, from the length and skinniness of their limbs, to the size of their waists, to the proportion of their features. Barbies are marketed to young girls and they are posed as young women (even teenagers). But for a women Barbie's age, she should have a husband and children, which she doesn't, and she is portray as a teenager, but no teenager would be able to live the lifestyle she does (such as the work and travel she is portrayed doing). I love the questions Rogers poses after explaining how outlandish Barbie's features are. Is Barbie heterosexual? Is Barbie a woman? There is a possibility that Barbie is even a drag queen. Rogers states and explains this by saying that the over exaggeration of features is something that drag queens will do. These over exaggerations include her elaborate wardrobe, her high heels, her heavy makeup, and her over the top head pieces. There is no way to be certain of her sexual identity when so much is ambiguous about her. The idea of Drag Barbie represents how femininity is a "manufactured reality" because of all the effort it requires to look the way she does. Another idea Rogers poses is that Barbie is a lesbian, but a more feminine one, a closeted one, or bisexual. Hetero Barbie? really made me think about how this entire enterprise is portraying beauty. A few things can be derived from this thought. One is that they are creating impossible beauty standards that make young girls grow self-conscious of themselves because they can never be what they see. Another thought is kind of opposite that, but that the  way drag queens represent themselves is beautiful as well. Food for thought.

Pictured above is what the RuPaul Barbie looks like. When I read about it I was curious as to what it looked like. Without knowing it was a representation of RuPaul, would you know it was meant to be a drag queen? What does that say about all other Barbies?

Shifting Gender Roles: Sex and The City and Girls

After watching "Boys, Girls, Boys, Girls" (Sex and The City) and "Vagina Panic" (Girls), it is evident that the idea of gender roles has been changing drastically. The episode of Sex and the City was released in 2000, where the Girls episode was released in 2012. The main difference is how much more in control of themselves the women seem. The characters in the show Girls are portrayed as independent women who have no issues making their own decisions about their lives, and love lives in particular. In Sex and The City, it is clear that these ideas of independent women are just starting to be formed. For example, the character Miranda is struggling with the idea of her boyfriend moving into her apartment. It is clear to her that she is not the stereotypical women. She doesn't like to cook, she likes to be able to lounge around and watch TV, and she doesn't like to do the laundry. When the idea of having a man in her house is brought up, she gets defensive about it, because she knows she doesn't fit into that gender role. But he boyfriend doesn't have an issue with it. This goes to show that the idea of women being the homebodies who take care of the house work is a gender role that is changing fast. All of the women in both of these episodes display some kind of personal independence. It seems as though (and I have never really watched Sex and The City), that all the women live alone, and have jobs that help them support their lifestyles. They are breaking out of the gender norm. The character Samantha is her own boss. She runs her own business. She is in charge and she doesn't take any slack from anyone. The characters in Girls mimic this kind of behavior as well. They all seem to be stable on their own, but this is more accepted than it seems in Sex and the City. It is more of a modern show, and it really depicts the way that the gender roles have progressed in 12 years. 

Gendered Slang/Language: March 1st 2015

There are a lot of terms that are thrown around today that can be considered offensive to other people. We have become so accustomed to using them what we don't even realize it.

The first term that is used often is "___ has balls!", or "That was ballsy." This term is referring to when someone, male or female, does something that is daring or audacious. They are doing something impressive that normally wouldn't be done. The most common time I hear this term is when I'm driving around with my friends, especially males ones. When someone cuts them off, or runs a yellow light, etc, they'll say something along the lines of "that guys has huge balls!" Even though a male is commenting with these terms, it doesn't make that term any less sexist. This term is also misconstrued. It may seem like a compliment if it is being applied to a woman, but in reality it is just stating that 'having balls' is a must to be courageous. So a woman isn't normally audacious because she doesn't actually have balls.

Another group of terms that is used a lot are the terms "booty call" and "walk of shame". "Booty call" is understood to be when a male calls up a female late at night for sex. What makes this offensive is that it makes women seem to be objects that men can just summon when they want sex; that they are there for a man's pleasure whenever and wherever he wants. This term is also usually thought of involving men calling women, when it isn't really unlikely for a woman to call up a man. But in our society, something like this makes a woman seem "thirsty". This term is also derogatory because it makes the woman seem too eager and desperate. Finally, the term "walk of shame" is one that we hear a lot, especially on college campuses. a "walk of shame" is when a woman (or man) stays the night in someone else room or home, and walks home in their outfit from last night. It is a very judgmental term because when you see someone walking home in the party outfit from the night before, you can't help but think things like 'they must have drank too much last night', or 'I wonder whose bed they're coming from?'. Terms such as these make men and women judge what they see in a derogatory manner.

There are many other terms that are used in today society, some of which include "hook-up", "friends with benefits", or "sext". All of these terms, and more, have very gender specific meanings, and degrade a certain sex or gender based on the way they are used. Unfortunately, I think these terms are here to stay. People tend to not even realize what these phrases and terms even mean, and how they can be offensive to certain people.

Chapter 26: Image-Based Culture February 23rd 2015

Some of the values and we live by today come from our 'consumer culture'. A consumer culture is defined as "a system in which consumption, a set of behaviors found in all times and places, is dominated by the consumption of commercial products." (UWY) "The institutional structure of the consumer society orients the culture more and more towards the world of commodities" (Jhally 246). What does this mean? Simply, we are being told what we want. Before the industrial society that we live in today, there was an agrarian-based society, meaning the family, community, religion, etc, of the society were the main creators of social norms. This has been lest behind to form our industrial and consumer societies. The public discourse began by transmitting information about products. It began as text-based, and then advanced to vivid color pictures with text along side. As technology progressed, so did this public discourse (or advertising). Naturally, it shifted to radio, and then television as a way of commercial communication. Advertisers used imagistic models of representation. As the consumer society evolved, people began to realize that they could also advertise non-essential goods, and make them seem they are essential to the average person. At this point, advertisers had to educate the public as well as sell their products. "Consumer society was literally being taught how to read commercial messages" (Jhally 247). This is a prime example of the consumers being told what they want. And in today's society, advertising is everywhere. Now, advertisers are trying to show how products are connected to important parts of our lives, and how these products will make us happy. Surveys show that people want things like control over their lives, loving relationships, happy family lives, self esteem, and relaxed leisure time to make them happy. The market society is trying to show that these things can be achieved via institutions and structures that orient such behavior. Advertisers are using this idea to portray "the good life". They are offering visions of what this would look like with use of their products. So because people want to be happy, and advertisers are showing them how to be happy with their products, people feel the need to buy the products. They are trying to sell us back our emotions and dreams through advertising. But this doesn't really work. Advertisers are telling us what you have will make you happy, as opposed to who you are. This is all affecting the way we see ourselves and our lives, making us feel unhappy. It is better to buy than not to buy; happiness lies at the end of a purchase. These are all ways that advertisers are trying to make it seem like we need the products the are selling. They are actually changing out culture, and the way we see the future. We need all these products to be happy. But that really isn't the case. 

YouTube, I Tube, We all tube: February 8th 2015

Luvs Diaper commercial vs. Huggies Diaper commercial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5H8jTT9cyw, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7kX8ZKylD4

I think that this is a very stereotypical diaper commercial. Is shows a mother preparing for an outing in the park with her baby, and then again after she has a second child. The content of the commercial isn't really relevant to this argument, it is the fact that it is a mother and her children. This is typical commercial for baby products, because the mother is often seen with her children. This is where the second video challenges it. It is a stereotypical gender role for a woman to be home with her children, and talking care of them. The second video breaks this gender role by showing fathers taking care of their children. I think that this is kind of a low blow to fathers because it implies that they will struggle with taking care of their babies for 5 days without their wives. The presumed gender role of men is to be at work during the day making money to support their families, and the presumed gender role of women is to be at home taking care of her children. The second commercial breaks this gender role because it shows how men can handle taking care of their children just as well as mothers can. An argument that can be used against men doing these things is not doing them the way their wives want them to. I think that can be valid in some cases, but showing that they can do it only proves that these gender roles are meant to be broken.

The target audience for both of these commercials are mothers. They are both advertising for products that would be useful to them, but also 'easy' enough to use that their husbands can do it. Again I think this is not giving fathers enough credit, but I think that is what the Huggies commercial is trying to show. I also think that they do a good job of reaching out to their target audience. They both make the products seem extremely usable and like every new parent uses them. It makes them marketable to moms, and hopefully dads too.

Chapter 40: There Are Bitches and Hoes February 10th 2015

This chapter of our text puts the terms “bitches and hoes” into perspective. There are two sides to this argument. “Pimp culture has saturated commercial hip hop” (Rose 386). This quote has a lot more depth that it may seem. When we think of pimps we think of these rich men throwing money at prostitutes. The idea of a pimp is extremely exploitative to women, as well as physically and emotionally controlling to women. These ‘pimps’ are single handedly creating what they talk about. They considers bitches and hoes all women, therefore women are bitches and hoes. When confronted about lyrics and words they use to describe women, their defense is simple “I’m not talking about all women.” But there is absolutely no specification of that. They are encouraging their fans to mimic the behavior they display, both male and female fans. Women participation is music videos that display this behavior is misconstrued as women not minding that they are portrayed in this way. And this idea points women to participate in the ‘system’ of prostitution. Hip hop is influencing young black women’s understanding of black women. They think that they need to act in that way to be accepted. I think that this idea is epitomized in Lupe Fiasco’s song and music video “Bitch Bad”. 

            Now is a black women were to speak about this sexism that is affecting their culture, there is a chance that she will be alienated for not conforming to the way women are supposed to act. The word ‘bitch’ also has different connotations based on who is using the word. If a woman were to use the word ‘bitch’ she would be attempting to challenge the language of sexism, but when a male uses the word ‘bitch’ he is just supporting it. The pimp/gangster image needs these “bitches and hoes” to maintain itself, so they invent them in the way discussed before. Hip hop is encouraging women to act in the way it describes. This is unfair because women should be free to express their sexuality in a way that is equal to men, not in a male dominated way. Hip hop has evolved to create either one of two things for an individual, a player, or a person being played. The women in this situation are almost always being played. Hip hop can be considered the most visible representation of sexism in black popular culture, and this is unfair because women should be able to express themselves freely, in any way they choose to.

“We have to work hard against what destroys who we are” (Rose 390). This is the most important thing to take away from this chapter, because the inequalities of sexism presented in hip hop and pimp culture is only getting worse.

All in the Family February 23rd 2015

The Oxford Dictionary definition of a nuclear family is “a couple and their dependent children, regarded as a basic social unit.” Many modern families can fall under this broad definition. My family would be an example of a nuclear family: my mom, my dad, my brother and me. But there are also modern families that do not fall under this definition. Examples of this would be a single parent family, or families without children. How do gender roles differ in different types of families? In a nuclear family, it is typical that the male is the breadwinner so to speak; he goes to work everyday and is the major supporter of the family. The female may stay home to take care of the children and the household, or could possibly work part time. The children are completely dependent on their parents. Lets take a look at modern families that may not fall under the definition of nuclear family. In a single parent home for example, the one parent must complete both roles of breadwinner and housekeeper. They much support their children on their own. They are in the same roles as those in a nuclear family, but there is only one parent to do those things compared to two. In a home that has no children, there is no one to be dependent on the parents; therefore the adults have more liberty. How do families that “look” different compare to nuclear families? Is a gay couple with children a nuclear family? I would say absolutely! There is a couple, and their children are dependent on them. They are a social unit. Therefore, they are a nuclear family. The definition of nuclear family is so broad that I believe there are few exceptions to this definition. The definition also does not include specific gender role, therefore if a female is the breadwinner and the male takes care of the children and the home, they are still considered a nuclear family. This idea is something is the theme of the article Dad-Mom Role Reversal by Sarah Eckel. This article presented a very interesting look on the reversed roles of males and females in a family unit. The article goes on to explain how transitioning from a working father to a stay at home dad is a difficult one for most fathers. Men with traditional views of gender role will find it very hard to take on the brunt of the housework. It is something that they aren’t used to, and often need praise when completing. So you see how this can be unfair. When a female takes care of all the housework, she usually receives no praise, because it is something her husband believes she is responsible for. But when it comes down to a man completing this work praise is almost necessary for them to be motivated to continue. They also tend to spend less time completing the same tasks women do. But all is not lost. When men accept that this is what they have to be doing to keep the family unit moving forward, they will step up and do the things they need to do. (Hopefully!!) 

Chapter 4: Hegemony February 8th 2015

“Hegemony is the power or dominance that one social group holds over others” (Lull 39).  The idea of hegemony has to do with social power, and the way social group interact. But is also shows groups gaining and maintain the power they have. Hegemony was adapted from Marxist theories by Antonio Gramsci. His ideas about mass media included thoughts about the most elite social groups using it to their advantage. The media can much more easily put out their content and ideas compared to other social groups. The media uses tools such as TV commercials to make their consumers see themselves as consumers rather than the public. Hegemony also has a connection to culture; therefore it depends on what is dubbed the culture’s norms. But because of this, it can go undetected. This social consent that is presented because of hegemony can be much more effective that force when it comes to the media. TV media is taking advantage of this idea by basing TV shows on popular children’s toys. This is expanding the dominance of that social group. TV absorbs other social groups, and is even connected to government institutions. There are ways that people resist ideas of hegemony. Media consumers often resist these ideas, but that is not the only way. The way people interpret and use the media affect it. “Hegemony fails when dominant ideology is weaker than social resistance” (Lull 41). I think that hegemony is an idea that we as a society cannot necessarily get away from, but we can allow it to affect us or not to affect us. The media poses the biggest influence in our lives today, therefore the companies and social groups that are utilizing social dominance are doing what they have set out to do.

Music Videos Imagery and Lyrics February 16th 2015

Shura - Touch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2AOjb9HW2E
This video contains more visual then lyrical methods to challenge gender norms. It begins showing a heterosexual relationship, which in our culture is a gender norm. It quickly shifts to show people of the same sex kissing. This is a large breech in our culture's gender norm. It shows how every person is different, therefore every relationship is going to be different. When looking at the lyrics of this song prior to watching the video, it is unclear that the video may challenge gender norms. It is simply one person singing about there relationship with another. The lyrics can be ambiguous about sex and gender norms, but can carry the same strong message. This video is simply powerful. I think it makes big strides when it comes to acceptance of others. 

Macklemore - Same Love
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlVBg7_08n0
Macklemore uses both visual and lyrical methods to challenge gender norms. The lyrics of this song are centered around the fact that anyone should be able to love anyone. Similar to the first video, it is accepted and understood that a relationship should be heterosexual, but every person is different, therefore there should be visually different relationships. He even says,
"It's the same hate that's caused wars from religion, 
Gender to skin color, the complexion of your pigment
The same fight that led people to walk outs and sit ins
It's human rights for everybody, there is no difference!"

This just goes to show that the break in our gender norms is just another prejudice that takes some time to get over. Macklemore is showing his acceptance to represent those in our society who accepted the difference in gender norms. Soon enough this 'break in gender norm' will be a gender norm. Macklemore's video for this song just exemplifies his lyrics. In contrast to the previous video, these lyrics are much more powerful. They can prove the point they are trying to make without the video. I think that Macklemore really took a risk with this song, but it payed off.

Chapter 52 Summary February 2nd 2015

Chapter 52: “You Play Like a Girl!” Cross-Gender Competition and Uneven Playing Field

            The idea of females competing at the same level as males is a controversial topic according to the text. This chapter discusses two situations in which males compete against females. One situation is and online game play situation. In certain games, the sex of the avatar has nothing to do with the skills and abilities, but it may illicit different responses from other gamers. A female avatar that is acting coy or confused may receive more help than a male avatar. This reflects the way a female may be treated when physically competing with a male. One question that comes to mind is ‘should female be treated the same as men?’ In many cultures, aggression towards females in socially unacceptable therefore there is a moral dilemma of women competing with men. Some people believe the females shouldn’t be subject to male contact sports. This thought is confusing because when girls are competing with boys, it is often a choice they are making, and they are not forced into it. Others believe that female presence in male sports begins to question masculinity. Male characteristics are often regarded as higher than females, and when they can be considered at the same level are often insulted with words such as “gay”. When men compete against women, when they win, it doesn’t feel as good because women are perceived as weak, but if they are defeated, it is humiliating for the male. This is considered emasculating males, and bringing them social harm.  This also can put males off, if a female can beat them. It is my personal belief that women and men should be measured on their ability to perform, so it is fair. The other issue with women physically competing is the idea of body image. There are two opposite thoughts, one being women being physically fit to maintain a powerful self image, and the other showing pressure to women to over obsess about their bodies. This is considered achievement for females, along with beauty and thinness. When females compete with other females with these things, the consequences could be social shunning and harassment. When these ideas are related back to online game play, you can see physical attributes disappear and females should be progressing the same way males do, because the only difference is visual. There are a number of things that can be done to assure fair treatment of females in online game play as well, such as not attributing stereotypical ideas to female avatars, and increasing the number of female players. Overall it is evident that there is not fair treatment of males and females when it comes to competition involving both genders. There are often stereotypes and moral ideas that influence the way people are treated. It is hard to say what is considered fair and unfair based on some arguments, but I think it comes down to personal belief and preference.