Judging the Internet

Klosterman discussed that its okay to hate the media as long as its for the right reasons and as long as you know what you're hating in his article All I Know Is What I Read in the Papers.  These same ideals should and do apply to the Internet.  People are constantly disapproving of the Internet.   Mostly for censorship reasons but also for legitimacy reasons.  How many people actually know the source of the websites they get their information from?  Are they familiar with the names of actual people who created a site or put information on it?  Sometimes it is literally impossible to find this information.  People can't hate the Internet and the information it leads to unless they are able to have a conscious argument against it.  To have adequate reasoning they must have adequate information.  Most of what we see on the Internet is random bits and pieces that happen to be there by chance.  This is the same concept Klosterman discusses when he is referring to news appearing in the media.  The same rules should apply. 

Lion King is This Generation's Star Wars

Star Wars embodied and promoted the ideals that Generation X embraced.  As Klosterman noted Generation X didn't require happy events, functional families, or respect for authority.  One can generalize seeing these qualities in Generation X.  To say that Lion King is comparable isn't exactly a shot in the dark.  It is a film that represents my generation a.k.a. Generation Y.  Both films have been put on shelves repeatedly throughout the years and re watched by new generations of children.  Although Lion King came out in 1992 it has been reproduced and replayed in theaters.  Tragedy is also seen in both films.  For instance, Mufasa dies in the Lion King leaving cub Simba to fend for himself.  At the end of the first Star Wars film viewers were left to ponder what might have happened and the hero wasn't victorious at the end of the second film.  There are also dysfunctional families in both films.  For instance, Luke Skywalker discovers that his father is the supreme evil he has been fighting.  In Lion King, Simba's Uncle Scar tries to have the cub murdered and sabotaged throughout the entirety of the movie.  One can also observe a lack of respect for authority figures in both films.  Simba refuses to stay within the borders of the kingdom his father has set for him and later runs away because he thinks he is accountable for his father's death.  Luke Skywalker was anti authority in many of his actions as well.  There is however a voice of wisdom and reason in both films provided for both generations. In Star Wars its the little green guy named Yoda and in Lion King its the obnoxious baboon, Rafiki.  Both of these movies defined and developed generations.

Fake Reality

The "reality" portion of reality television should be excluded.  In reality people don't and shouldn't act the way they do on reality television.  In class we watched a video of how editing reality shows works to an extent.  People working in the production and editing of this form of entertainment can take snippets of captured moments and portray people and situations however they want to.  In Chuck Klosterman's article, What Happens When People Stop Being Polite he states, "The show [The Real World] succeeds because it edits all personalities into archetypes."  This is true in most cases of "reality" television.  In reality people also don't have near as many conflicts as reality television.  In Chuck's article says this of reality TV stars, "People started becoming personality templates devoid of complication and obsessed with melodrama."  Although all this can be said, I agree with Klosterman in the statements I discussed previously but also when he discusses that there is a "Real World culture", or a reality television culture if one will call it that.  These shows truly affect people.  My own peers have melodramas that mirror the hot messes we call reality stars.  Its a bit sickening when people start idolizing Snookie from the reality show Jersey Shore.  We expect each other to live like we are on a reality show.  If a person doesn't have constant conflict they must be dull. This is not reality.  I wonder what Chuck Klosterman would say about Jersey Shore.

Finding Similarities in Country and Hip Hop

Country and Hip Hop genres should be considered polar opposites on the music genre spectrum but there are a couple ideas that say otherwise.  In class we discussed how there are stereotypical listeners.  Whether someone listens to Country or Hip Hop they are being stereotyped.  On a macro level however there is the idea of idolization and worship in both genres.  For instance, in the article Editorial Observer: How Hip Hop Lost Its Way and Betrayed Its Fans, Brent Staples discusses how Hip Hop is idolized to the point where people will murder because the music promotes it or because someone insulted their favorite artist.  There were even gangs created in support of certain artists.  In Chuck Klosterman's article Toby VS Moby the Dixie Chick fans are described as teenage girls idolizing and listening like a teenage boy might do at a concert.  Obviously country music artists and hip hop artists are idolized in different ways but they both have affects on the listeners.

Technically Communicating

With the development of texting and Facebook, connections have certainly grown stronger.  Or have they?  Facebook has promoted networking and making connections.  You can write on some one's wall that lives on the opposite side of the world and you can be "friends" with someone who you've never really met but this one person you met at party is "friends" with so-and-so who's friends with so-and-so who knows this someone so you sent them a friend request.  Now this someone chats with you every time your icon says you're logged on.  In the meantime Facebook is also helping to keep in touch with old high school buddies and family members.  If they update their statuses enough you can literally know all about their lives on a day to day basis. This is handy and both of these are considerably positive but what about serious communication.  Anybody can communicate with anybody without forming meaningful relationships that are deeper than just "poking" someone by pushing a button.  People can also control how they are perceived by tampering with their profile information.  The person you chat with may not be the person you think they are.  Stalking is also not a healthy form of communication and runs rancid if one has a Facebook account.  A few years before Facebook came along there was another astonishing development in the communication world.  It was dubbed, texting.  Overall texting is fantastic.  Its convenient when you don't have time for a phone call or you just need to tell someone something that only requires a couple of words.  This is definitely positive but this isn't how most of us utilize it.  Now people text entire books rather that talking on the phone.  We've even created "Sexting".  I don't think I need to elaborate on the lack of communication with that idea.  There are people who are confident through text and can't even look at you when you talk to them in person.  Klosterman discussed how computer games and technology in general can pull one away from reality and stint one's creativity.  I think Facebook and texting do the same.  They take people away from reality and can block the mind from communicating with people as opposed to machines with people on the other side.  Klosterman also discussed relationships on the Sims game.  He became frustrated when he tried to compare them to realistic everyday relationships.  Relationships that only communicate through texting and Facebook should also be considered frustrating.  There really is only light communicating.  Although I participate in and utilize both of these technologies on a daily basis I'm aware that they can have harmful affects on communication skills.

I found this video on YouTube.  Its from the comedy series 'That Mitchell and Webb Look'.  In class it has been discussed that there are different expectations and stereotypes for women and men.  Men are depicted as violent and cunning while women are supposed to just be beautiful objects with only certain tasks such as homemaking and pleasing men.  It was even said in the article From "Knockout Punch" to "Home Run": Masculinity's "Dirty Dozen" Sports Metaphors in American Combat Films, "A woman is what she looks like, and a man is what he does."  I don't believe that women have it worse than men do by any means but I thought this video offered a bit of comic relief and over exaggerates stereotypical attitudes.

Hitting You Makes Me Manly

The media seems to help define masculinity as a series of violent acts.  Men are depicted as tough, violent individuals.  In the APA Congressional Testimony on Media Violence and Children: Testimony of Jeff J. McIntyre on Behalf of the American Psychological Association children are discussed as a whole as being affected in negative ways by violence in the media.  In any of the media I have been exposed to I have rarely seen women shown as violent.  It is safe to assume boys are affected and may have more violent tendencies when they see that that is the proper way to be masculine like their adult celebrity idols.  In the video "Tough Guise" Katz states, "In fact, some of the most serious problems in contemporary American society, especially with those connected with violence can be looked at  as essentially problems in contemporary American masculinity."  This effect is every one's problem.  Boys who grow up thinking violence and masculinity go hand in hand may grow to be violent men.  Perhaps the media should change the connotation of masculinity.

This Isn't Competition. This is War.

Men are expected to take an intense liking to sports.  If they don't they're masculinity may be questioned.  When discussing what can be considered if a male does not want to participate in sports Ralph Donald states, "The alternative, say the mainstream voices of American socialization, is too dreadful to consider: life as, at best, an un-manly male, or at worst, a suspected homosexual." (From "Knockout Punch" to "Home Run": Masculinity's "Dirty Dozen" Sports Metaphors in American Combat Films)  When men do participate in sports they are expected to behave violently and seriously.  As Ralph Donald's article discusses, they learn violence early and the language they use is similar to what can be heard on a battlefield.  This is evident when most of the terms used in football could directly link the players with being soldiers.  We as a society keep promoting sports so strongly to men because they're masculinity is so significant to us.  This is why perhaps people will go so far as to question they're sexuality if they lack interest.

High Standards of Media

In This is Emo by Chuck Klosterman the idea of "fake romance" was introduced.  Klosterman suggests that there is only fabricated romance because the media sets the standards for a "perfect relationship".  For example, in class discussion it was brought up that in a "perfect romance" a couple will never fight.  Klosterman's main thesis was that no one can ever be satisfied or truly happy in their relationships because they only have the fake definition in their head.  This idea of a fake perception leading to frustration was also introduced when we discussed the female body.  In the article Only 2% of Women Describe Themselves As Beautiful women are described as never satisfied with their physical appearance.  As we discussed in class the media sets the standards as to what physical traits make a woman a "perfect beauty".  The video Killing Us Softly Four actually shows what is done to photos of models to make them appear perfect.  For example, elongating the neck and making the eyes larger and a shape that is not in human genetics.  Therefore women find it hard to call themselves beautiful.  They are often frustrated with their bodies.  We see the same frustration to reach perfection in Klosterman's article.  Both relationships and beauty are defined by the media.  We will never meet the media's standards.

Females' Bodies Are Dead

What I found to be most interesting and most depressing from this weeks discussions and readings is that there isn't really a person in a woman's body.  It is simply just a body and that is all she is.  All that matters is if her body can be considered perfect or if it can sell a product.  For example, in the article Decoding Victoria's Secret: The Marketing of Sexual Beauty and Ambivalence by Marie D. Smith one of the assumptions that a Victoria Secret ad is based off of is that a woman's physical beauty can sell any product.  The article goes on to say "...men first respond to women as a physical object and later as a person."  In the video Killing Us Softly Four Kilbourne describes the dehumanization of women through media and society.  It is no surprise that most women hate their bodies and become frustrated with themselves and that we as a society enjoy to watch violence to human bodies on television (as described in Why Don't We Like The Human Body by Barbara Ehrenreich).  Especially violence to a woman's body.  This way of thinking has a negative impact on the way our society functions.  Women shy away from calling themselves beautiful because of body image.  It seems that a woman can only have a beautiful body but there is no such thing as a beautiful person.  Popular culture and the media are filled with only perfect examples of bodies.  Without a beautiful, perfect body, what do women have to offer?  This seems to be the shallow yet popular way of thinking.  There is no person inside the female body.  There is only a body. 

Let's Talk About Sex

Attitudes towards sex have certainly changed with the times.  Our grandparents most likely only kissed before marriage.  Now it seems like sex is only...well sex.  It seems that there are more one-night-stands and less pressure to get married so young.  The only word to describe sex in today's culture is casual.  Its casual in conversation, in the media, and even the act of.  The words "sex" and "love" are growing farther apart.    This can be considered a positive movement because sex and sexiness are no longer the elephants in the room. On the other hand STDs are more common and marriages don't last.  The lack of censorship is also desensitizing us to sex and sexiness. If a woman knocked on my door and she was naked when I answered, would I even notice anymore?  Would you?  Maybe to improve this negative aspect we as a society should leave more to the imagination and try to instill the "wait" in our children when it comes to sex.

Am I a Result of TV?

My generation has grown up with a television in every household.  My parents make this evident when they tell me the home television was the ultimate babysitter.  I would even go as far to say that television has molded my overal presentation and my way of knowing the newest fads.   When i was younger I knew what toy I wanted the most on my birthday because it was the latest commercial I saw.  Even now I may be sitting down to enjoy my favorite television show and think an actress's hairstyle is sexy and may want to try to dublicate it.  People don't usually percieve me as a follower or even fashionable but even subconciously I may follow trends and common ideal behavior for the young and the beautiful that I watch on television.