shiel097

Multiculturalism @ Coffman

2007-05-01T19:08:54Z

While I was walking around Coffman, I decided the best place to be was on the main level, next to the main entrance and left of the escalator. I wasn’t very surprised to see all of the people sitting on the chairs; the place is usually always busy when I’m there. Of course, there were people sleeping on the loveseats with their iPod headphones drowning out the noise of everyone else. I swear this generation would be lost without technology. As far as any multiculturalism is concerned, nothing was too out of the ordinary. Sure, I heard people speaking in different languages to one another, but I hear that every single day. It’s just what happens when you go to a school of 50,000 people. What I did notice, however, was that people who were in a group talking all seemed to be dressed similar. There were three people sitting in the chairs closest to the entrance that were all wearing Abercrombie & Fitch shirts and khaki shorts with flip-flop sandals. On the other end, were three middle-eastern women sitting together wearing their head dresses and their bodies were almost entirely covered. That didn’t necessarily strike a socio-economic difference between the two, but it did show me that people usually hang out with others who are like themselves.
Something else that I noticed in that area and throughout the entire building was the use of technology. Almost every single person in the cube, main lounge, and over by Jamba Juice was on their laptop, had their headphones in, or was on their cell phone. It is really interesting to see how we use technology as a means to escape. It’s not to say that people are anti-social, but would rather be facebooking (yes, that is now a verb in my dictionary), downloading music, or doing their homework in that type of environment. I hadn’t really noticed the diversity at Coffman, it was just something that I don’t necessarily pay attention to until I was forced to.

Suburbanite through and through

2007-04-24T20:55:14Z

I thought a lot of the stuff we talked about in class yesterday was very interesting. It was weird to see how people from the cities talked about the people from the suburbs and vice versa. It seemed like people had things that were totally opposite of what I think of where I live. I wrote what I think about the city from a “suburbian�? perspective.
I described the city as dangerous. I feel like I have to lock my car doors at all times and not have the windows down, like I’m going to be shot at or something by some gang wandering the streets. I think of all the buildings as run down and all having barred windows. It seems really impersonal, because there isn’t a park to go to or yards for kids to play in or anything. When I’m walking at night it seems like I’m going to be robbed, so I have my wallet and phone in my front pockets. The people who live in the city seem poor to me. Most of the houses are poor quality and are unkempt. I am probably all wrong in my description, but it’s just how I see the city from living in a nice suburban neighborhood my whole entire life.
I think my decisions on describing the city were influenced solely by the neighborhood I grew up in. I almost feel sheltered because of that. My neighborhood is virtually 100% white, middle to upper middle class, successful people. In my cul-de-sac alone, there is the Vice President of a bank, CEO of a company, dentists, and people who retired at 40 after selling their company for millions. It is hard to see beyond the realm of what I was raised in to get any other description of the city. At the same time, I don’t feel like it has destroyed my perception of the city, I mean, after all I do live in Minneapolis now. I love it here; it is way more diverse, more night life, and more fun than living in suburbia.

Advertising and People of Color

2007-04-10T19:03:14Z

In the article, Advertising and People of Color, I found myself questioning the point of the author’s arguments. Many things are not race specific. It is just simply how you choose to interpret what you see. For example, the Aunt Jemima pancake mix; yes, the lady on the box is black, but what would change if they made it a white woman? Would the whole idea of “advertising with color�? disappear? People really shouldn’t make a big deal out of things like that. If you don’t like the person on the box, then don’t buy the freaking box of pancake mix.
With the example of the cowboy, which we discussed in class, I really like how Landyn interpreted it. Who is saying that it is a bad thing for the person to be Mexican? If he was just riding around in battle or something, of course he is going to be sweaty. Why the controversy? For the people that were complaining about this commercial, what should have been done differently? It’s easy to point fingers, but when it comes down to it, they don’t know how to fix the issue.
Something that makes this article virtually useless is the fact that all of the statistics are from the 1970s. Unfortunately, this is 37 years later…so I just make myself read this article with a grain of salt (I’m not sure if that is the correct expression). So, about the statistics with 2% of people being black in magazine advertisements, I don’t think I can believe that. Another thing that we talked about in class was if the advertisements perpetuated stereotypes that we already have, or develops them in some way. Personally, I can’t think of a racist commercial. Nothing in any TV commercial stands out as prolonging a stereotype. I just don’t see it. The most I can do is hope that if someone ever sees a TV commercial using racist ideas, that they can forget about it. After all, it is JUST a TV commercial.

The Female Self in Disney

2007-04-05T01:04:01Z

While reading Construction of the Female Self: Feminist Readings of the Disney Heroine, I was a bit torn on what the authors were trying to get across. I understand that they show how some women characters seem defenseless, helpless victims who are dependent on men. At the same time they show how some women are so courageous and independent. The examples that they give to show the passive characters are Cinderella and Aurora. With these examples, it makes it seem as though the women need to be married to their prince charming to live happily ever after. It perpetuates the idea that women are dependent on others, which may or may not have been the goal of Disney. On the contrary, Pocahontas “breaks new ground.�? She is an independent woman who is strong and she doesn’t feel as though she has to marry to maintain herself.
In our class discussion, a lot of good points came up. The main one was concerning children being unable to process these ideas. Children, for the most part, watch these movies for enjoyment of seeing the characters, magic, and ideas that seem surreal. I don’t necessarily think that a 5 year old is sitting there watching Cinderella saying, “Well it seems to me that this woman is perpetuating the idea of women being dependent on men.�? I just don’t see it happening. Although they may model some of the behaviors of princesses or warriors, the deep down message that we are talking about probably isn’t on their mind. Another thing we brought up was other types of movies that do the same thing. It is not just something Disney does. Look at TV shows like The Simpson’s; Marge is a stay at home mom. Does that necessarily mean that every woman is like this? Or that this is how women should be? Who knows.
Oh, and about the sexual images in some of the Disney movies, like The Lion King and The Little Mermaid. That’s just funny. It spices things up a bit.

In Living Color: Race and American Culture

2007-03-27T20:27:35Z

I’m going to excuse some of the articles ignorance solely based on the fact that it is from 1989, just to throw that out there before I begin. In class, however, I thought it was very interesting when we discussed overt racism and inferential racism. The fact that we can sit here and just say that Jews are bankers, Asians are good at math and science, and foreign people work at gas stations shows that our minds have been engrained to just accept these ideas. They aren’t necessarily bad, but just go “unquestioned,�? as the article states. With overt racism, the book gives a very ignorant example of how race actually blocks things from their advancement. Saying that black people are very muscular and good at sports is what they are meant for, and that being president of a bank might not be for them is just blatant exclusion.
On page 255, it talks about how racial minorities have significant differences between their groups, they go on to say that Latinos are very violent and angry, blacks are strong but dumb, and Asians are sneaky and evil. It’s really unfortunate that we have to sit here and categorize people based on their ethnicity and race. What’s the point? The fact that people discriminate against a particular group isn’t going to stop the reproduction of the race, nor is it going to make your life any easier. It seems so pre-historic that we judge people based on that, it drives me nuts actually. At the very end of the article it mentions a few possibilities for change, like changing the brand name “nigger hair�? to “bigger hare�?, the Asian community getting Charlie Chan on television, and the suggestion to boycott major league baseball games to promote fair hiring practices. I guess some improvement is better than none at all.
Oh, and MTV rarely plays black music videos? Haha. Yes, this was definitely written in 1989.

Culture shock

2007-03-08T05:54:19Z

To say the least, I think that the show clips we watched were a culture shock. It is interesting and virtually baffling to see what is truly going on in our society. It really didn’t hit me until I saw it being said by somebody else. Being born and raised in the middle class, it wasn’t uncommon to see people who were above me economically speaking, but rarely did I meet people who were dirt poor and couldn’t afford livable housing. One thing that I found almost comical in the video clip was when they were discussing how the more income a family has, the less white bread is in their house. I can honestly say that I have not had white bread in my house in a decade. But it is only because my mom is a complete health freak. When they were interviewing people at the shelter, they couldn’t even GIVE the bread away for free because it was a type that people in lower classes have never even heard of.
From the clips we saw today in class, I was astonished to see that that poor lady walks 10 miles to work everyday. Seeing the conditions that they lived in made me want to never complain about anything again. You really don’t know what dirt poor is until you are living in it yourself I guess. The part about the high school girls and having a ton of different cliques made me want to throw up. I am so glad to be done with that ridiculous bullcrap. To a certain extent it continues in college, but with much, much less severity. When they were talking about the cars they drove, the clothes they wear, and how money defines who they are was nothing other than pathetic. It’s like so what? My parents bought me a car, la dee fricken da. I don’t make friends based on what car they drive or how much their parents make, I can’t think of something more ignorant. Those girls have reality coming to slap them in the face sometime soon. It’s not even like they are millionaires, they seemed middle class to me anyway. But all in all, I think watching those clips was a step towards seeing how other “cultures�? or classes react to certain situations and how they really live their lives.

Class & Virtue

2007-03-01T01:31:21Z

While reading Class and Virtue by Michael Parenti, I began to think about what our society has come to. The thesis clearly states that the media presents the working class as unlettered and unclothed but also less desirable and less moral than others.
Since this blog entry is to counter that thesis, my first example comes from Grey’s Anatomy. We discussed how Callie breaks this in 4 ways (thanks to Landyn), and it is so true. Although broke and living in the back room, she has authority. She has a higher position than her husband when considering the workplace, and comes from a Hispanic decent. Usually people don’t think of women on television as being hard working, successful, and minority all at the same time.
Law and Order is another TV show that I think goes against many of the examples given in the reading. There are several blacks, women, and other minorities that have high ranking positions in the police force. There is nothing to show that these people are less desirable and less moral than anyone else. It is a show that shows a lot of diversity and working together. Race shouldn’t be treated as something that justifies equality. This show does a good example of making things even to show this.
In the movie Titanic, we are faced with something that we do not see very often. A very rich powerful woman and a 3rd class poor working man having a relationship. She is defiant to what her mother tells her which isn’t typical of that type of that era and social class. This does contribute to the other side, however. It proves a point that you have to pretend to be someone else to fit in, as Jack does on several occasions. However, the people themselves and their economic backgrounds are what make this fit into this category. It goes against many of the things that we, as kids, were brought up watching.

Queer Solution

2007-02-13T21:58:54Z

Well, I guess there a lot of things in this article that I found annoying and others that I found to be somewhat true. In the first paragraph I found it pretty interesting how they discussed the coming out process. The author made some good points on why it is such a big deal, how something so uncontrollable effects your relationships with family and friends, and how it went from being an unspoken subject to a topic of debate.
As for the paper itself, on how the media is reinforcing homophobia through traditional gender roles. The show Friends, she claims gives a negative view of homosexuality since the television role isn’t taken seriously. The show is targeted for a heterosexual audience. In her explanation, it mocks homosexual child-raising. I don’t know exactly what to think about this. I think that the idea of mocking same-sex couples on TV is a step in the wrong direction. Making a joke out of it is embarrassing to our society as a whole. Although it has happened for centuries with other races and religions, I don’t see how criticizing someone for something they cannot control is going to solve anything.
The assignment of sex was a very interesting touch to this paper. I think that it makes a lot of sense, since it is all we have ever known. Teaching a male not to show his emotions, to be the head of the family, aggressive, and the breadwinner are things that have been around since the beginning of time. A girl on the other hand has been taught to dress different, play with dolls, teddy bears, and kitchen sets. This just perpetuates the idea of gender roles in our society. It is what we have been taught our whole lives and it isn’t exactly easy to change. Just like our society assumes that a male is supposed to be attracted to a female. It is what we have known, and therefore anything different is abnormal.
What some suggest, having no identity and all being called “queer�?, having no gender roles, and realizing everyone is different…although may be a good idea in theory, would never work. It would stop the hate towards different groups and would erase most hate all together. However, that’s as easy as saying world peace could happen tomorrow.

"Cop Killer"

2007-02-07T01:23:33Z

While reading “Cop Killer�? and discussing it in class, I developed several opinions on the issues related to this story. The first has to do with what we discussed in class which was having it just be a “black thing�? or a “white thing.�? Secondly, I think the decision made by Time Warner was just to get a rise out of the public and to make more money.
We discussed the idea of “it’s a black thing�? quite a lot in class, when we talked about the lyrics to the music. However, I think that there isn’t really such an argument. In today’s society that argument is not only politically incorrect, but even offensive. If I was in a conversation with someone and they told me I wouldn’t understand because I am white, I would get kind of pissed. The thing is, it’s the definition of a double standard. There is no possible way that I could go up to a person of a different race and say “sorry, you wouldn’t understand. It’s a white thing.�? It just doesn’t happen. The fact that it was even brought up as an argument was ridiculous. Maybe someone else has a different opinion, but that’s where I stand.
Furthermore, I think the decision on behalf of Time Warner to stand by the rights of the artist was a joke. Although it may have been on the grounds of freedom of speech, I think their motive was to gain publicity and sell more albums. It even said in the article that the album wasn’t even selling that many at first, then as soon as it became a big issue they were selling out in stores. Time Warner had the advantage by saying that in a couple ways. They could say they were standing by their artist and make him happy, but also are getting the public eye on the situation. Win-win for them! Overall, I think the article was pretty interesting.

"Shitty First Drafts" Anne Lamott

2007-01-30T20:48:36Z

Almost immediately during the reading I found something that was fairly interesting. The sentence “All good writers write them [shitty first drafts].�? This isn’t something I think about very often. Since we have such high standards for well-known writers, we just assume that they do not create shitty drafts before their finished works. The assumption that these successful writers can just sit down and write fluidly for hours on end without screwing up is satirical. Like us, none of them can write perfect first drafts.
A point that I found funny in a way was describing your first drafts like the “child’s draft.�? I agree with this completely because all you are trying to do is get your ideas out on paper. You don’t necessarily care that they are scattered all over the place. This paragraph goes on to explain that it doesn’t matter what means you used to get to a certain idea, as long as you have it is the only important thing.
The restaurant review was the perfect example of how I feel when writing papers. After taking a bunch of notes on what you want to write about, you just sit at your desk and think of where to start. I will try to write something and think that it’s going nowhere and telling myself I have to get it done only makes the situation worse. This is when the panic sets in, just as Lamott describes it herself. Getting the first draft done is the most important thing. No matter what you write you feel like you are getting somewhere and if you only use one idea that you wrote, it will still help in the end.
I found this article to be pretty useful. I think that it gets the point across that you have to start somewhere. The quality of your first draft doesn’t matter; it is more of a starting point. This article was very helpful in getting over the fact that your first draft has to be perfect.

"Ways of Seeing" Berger

2007-01-23T17:52:54Z

While reading Ways of Seeing by John Berger, I found many things very interesting and perplexing to read. Throughout our discussion in class, many other things that I hadn’t noticed were brought up as well. Right away in the story, the line “the way we see things is affected by what we know or what we believe�? struck me as something you don’t always think about. To most people it is almost an innate thing that we just assume, since literally everything we see is affected by our past judgments, prejudice, opinions, and past experiences. It is kind of hard to argue this point any other way.
Another thing I found puzzling was the whole concept of reproductions of artwork, which we discussed in class. There were a variety of opinions on this subject, but I feel torn. There is something that we get out of seeing the original artwork. You know that the artist had been sitting at that exact piece completing the work. The texture may be different, along with some colors, shades, or the size of the artwork. At the same time, the originality of the work shouldn’t matter. How you perceive art shouldn’t necessarily depend on if it is the original or not. It is the exact same piece of work.
The invention of the camera, discussed on page 475 talks about how our view of art has changed. Originally, we had no other concept of understanding art other than with our own eyes. Nowadays, the idea of art can be brought around the world without actually physically seeing it. “When the camera reproduces a painting, it destroys the uniqueness of its image. As a result it’s meaning changes.�? When reading the previous quote, I find myself not necessarily agreeing with it. I think that art is art and although it isn’t the original work, it is still the same concept. However, I guess that is open to debate depending on a personal view.