I am mostly going to let this stand by itself, but I do want to highlight a few key points after the video.

There is much wrong with this video that I am really unsure of where to start. First John Kasich seems to be living in a time where men and women still sleep with boards between each other in their own beds. Christopher Kulawik doesn’t say a heck of a lot, so his side of the argument to Brittney Hoffman is from John.

KEY POINTS //

• “if we have a transgender problem than that is a bigger problem” — where does John get off publically saying that transgendered people are PROBLEMS. They understandably do not fit into his category of conservative republicans, but they exist, so too bad for you John.
• Chris states that these policies should not be instantiated because they only aid to minorities and the majority of people are going to use these policies in an abusive manor. Sorry Chris, but this is an actual need. GLBT students are not the only people are going to use these policies. Straight people with significant others and straight people who CAN ACTUALLY BE FRIENDS WITH GIRLS are going to use these policies. Plus, some people just feel more comfortable around girls. I wish I could have roomed with my best friend my first year of college, but as John stated he “couldn’t imagine what it would be like to room with a girl at Ohio State” — glad we are living in the dark ages still. On the other note, should we not be protecting minorities? According to Mr. Kulawik, minorities do not deserve to be safe. This point is brought up when John asks Brittney how many students are transgendered and she replies “the number is not important — it is a matter of safety”.
• The most ridiculous comment made by John throughout this entire video has to be “I don’t know who is going around beating up transgendered people”. He has obviously never watched another news station besides Fox, or read any newspapers because transgendered people are victims of abuse almost more than any other minority around because of their gender expression.
• I wish Brittney Hoffman had more time to speak, but she kept getting cut off. I felt as if she would have had more valuable information for viewers as well as John and Chris (though they were obviously not interested). They pretty much cut her off when she was making valid points as well as mocking her (“i think girls and boys still like each other”).
• One of the most interesting pieces of the segment is when John starts talking about his tax dollars. The safety and comfort of all persons are not deserved by someone if they do not agree because their precious tax dollars hold power over people in this society (when in fact his tax dollars are not increasing by creating safe environments for everyone as Brittney stated). It was easy to tell that he was scared that he would be “supporting” this “outrageous policy” if his tax dollars were aiding the safety of people. In reality, his tax dollars right now are aiding to a system that segregates and creates awkward situations for people (which may lead to them getting beat up — oh wait , i forgot, that does not happen!)

There is a lot wrong with this video, but I guess anaylzying conservative media provokes such conversations. I often do not watch conservative media, so it is good to see what both sides are saying about structures that relate to gender. Feel free to comment with related thoughts on the video or the issue of genderblind housing.

I will be the first to admit, I shop at wal-mart. In a perfect world, I would not be a poor college student, but until a time I can afford to support better economic paradigms, I am stuck there. I just wanted to clear that up because this post isn’t posting blame on shoppers, but rather just to raise awareness of some issues.

The overall goal here, in part, is to talk about www.responsibleshopper.com because it really keeps up on the politics of corporations. This includes anything from environmental, pay wages, lawsuits, all the way to things that related to GENDER EQUALITY.

What I mostly want to point out is something I saw on the wal-mart page.

Now, I already hate how much religious memorabilia you can find at wal-mart, but the problem here is specifically that they are forcing the values of the board of directors onto consumers. This really grinds my gears because I don’t see how company policy should ever reflect a political or religious agenda because they are there strictly to provide products to people that will (presumably) enhance their lives. It is clear that they are taking an abstinence stand when denying these women their right to have sex without the ramification of pregnancy, but I always see this as the most irrational excuse ever. If someone does not provide birth control people will A.) find it elsewhere B.) just have sex. We have chemical and biological responses to wanting and having sex, and I find it ridiculous that companies like wal-mart (or any anti-contraceptive arguement) try to deny this basic piece of our culture — PEOPLE HAVE SEX , Get over it!

Reproductive rights is obviously a huge controversy (though I don’t see how it should be). Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but if companies are putting themselves into the public — they need to have policy that is neutral and safe for all people. Does wal-mart really want to aide to the overpopulation of America — because if the only place in the entire world (let’s just say) to get birth control was at wal-mart the only options are more babies or more abortions.

NARAL – the group that protested the Wal-Mart refusal to stay in stock of the morning after pill sent the below letter in 2006 to the wal-mart headquarters.

February 13, 2006
H. Lee Scott, Jr.
President and CEO
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
702 S.W. 8th St
Bentonville, AR 72716-8611

Dear Mr. Scott:

The enclosed 26,441 messages from Americans in all 50 states call on your corporation to end its practice of refusing to stock emergency contraception also known as the “morning-after” pill.

The message from these Americans, many of whom are your customers, is clear: Wal-Mart’s management should not decide what medicines women may or may not take.  When a doctor prescribes emergency contraception for a woman, Wal-Mart should not have the right to overrule that decision.

These messages also reflect the growing support of a lawsuit brought by three women in Massachusetts that calls on your company to reverse a policy that unnecessarily denies women their right to access safe, effective, and legally approved medication.

The morning-after pill is most effective if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, contraceptive failure, or sexual assault.  It has tremendous potential to help prevent unintended pregnancies and the need for abortion.  To underscore the issues of time and access in this matter, we are sending the first 26,441 messages generated within the same 72-hour time frame.

Last week, we were encouraged to read a spokesperson’s statement to the Associated Press that “Women’s health is a high priority for Wal-Mart, so clearly there are broader considerations and we are giving this a lot of thought.” We hope this statement is a sign that you are beginning to realize that the public wants women’s health to be a priority for those who operate pharmacies.
As the nation’s largest retail pharmacy and the sole source of prescription medication for many women, particularly those in rural areas, you should be a leader in guaranteeing women’s access to birth control.

We hope that you see the delivery of these petitions as an opportunity to end a discriminatory policy and replace it with one that improves women’s access to birth control that’s vital to their health.

Sincerely yours,

This letter was sent in 2006, and there is still a huge problem with the denial of pharmacy availability of certain types of contraceptives.On the more recent side of the news though NARAL released this report on Sunday about chain pharmacies and their denial of birth control. This includes stories and pesronal accounts as well as policy information from stores like Wal-Mart, who have obviously not changed their policies at all :

January 2007, Ohio: Tashina Byrd tried to
obtain over-the-counter emergency
contraception, but a Wal-Mart pharmacist
refused, with his supervisor’s support, to
provide her the medication. She and her
boyfriend’s primary contraception, a condom,
had broken, so they were taking responsible
steps to prevent an unintended pregnancy.
Despite the FDA’s decision, Wal-Mart still
allows pharmacists to refuse to help customers
access medication to which they are personally
opposed. Tashina eventually obtained the
back-up birth control at another pharmacy.

There are a lot more interesting stories at this link:
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/Birth-Control-Pharmacy-Access.pdf

Though I have talked a lot about Wal-Mart, places like Walgreens and certain local drug stores have the same business practices. When will we instatitate business apart from personal politics? This may be never, but we all do have the choice of where we shop. There is a big problem with corporate ethics pertaining to customers, but each dollar we spend reinforces our involvement in these activities. I don’t have a lot of solutions, but when I read about stories like this I usually don’t shop at that business (usually wal-mart) for a long time. Maybe one person reading this will go somewhere else to get their prescriptions filled from now on. I have never filled a single presciption at a wal-mart, which makes me feel good. I feel really bad for the women and/or couples who have went to wal-mart looking for help and had to experience something as awful as an attack on their personal views from a pharmacist.

When I think about opression against women I often thing of white collared men keeping women in low secretarial positions or an at home mom working all day for her family, but I do not often thing of how fathers can opress their daughters — until now. I will admit up front I do not like Ashlee or Jessica Simpson. I have a certain negative feeling towards people who were born into a life of priviledge and allow that to take presidence over values in our society. That is besides the point though — this post is about Joe Simpson. Joe Simpson used to be a minister and when his daughters got famous, he took the fast train to a managerial position for their careers. I don’t think I have to talk too much about celeberity parents and how they get caught up in their children’s fame and take it way too far, but Joe Simpson has taken his position way too far. This is undoubtedly not the first time something like this has happened, but it is worth taking note that Joe Simpson exploits his daughter’s sexuality in more ways than one.

I was reading a post on AOL yesterday about how he is their own personal photographer. Normally, this may not be a problem, but he sells scatilly clad pictures of his own daughters for millions of dollars. There is word that Ashlee may be pregnant and he is jumping on the bandwagon before anyone else to cash-in as the exclusive photographer.

Now, since I have not thought about how the position of father and daughter relate in a gender perspective (outside of gender learned behaviors), I do not know how to analyze this situation. Joe Simpson is a bad father. That may seem like a brash statement, but when you bring a child in this world you are supposed to protect them, and selling their bodies online is not protecting them. How bad has society gotten that a father will sell his daughter? This reminds me of the old days when father’s would send off their daughters with suitors who they barely knew (usually for a certain price, or a good family name), but this is strictly about making a lottery off of the bodies of your children.

I don’t have much reaction, I mostly just wanted to put it out there. If this is something AOL covered, it is probably a lot worse than even their take on it. The media either tends to soften the blow or blow events out of proportion, but with just the facts of Joe Simpson’s relationship with his daughters makes it apparent than there is much more going on here than even the story covers.

The worse part is that both Jessica and Ashlee are grown adults and they allow their father to do this to them. Of course it is hard to stop your father from taking photos and ask “are you going to sell these”, but they have to know that he has been doing this for a long time now. I really hope this backfires on him so he can see the error of his ways.

AOL posed a question as a poll on the page asking “if Jessica and Ashlee were boys, would this be different” — though the answers posed opposing connotations for some reason — they raised an interesting point. Looking at this situation in a typical manor, if they were boys — it may not feel wrong, but regardless the feeling of the situation would change dramatically, which just reinforces how we view gender so differently in our culture.

It’s not hard to tell that he is trying to cash in on his daughters from the pictures below – he obviously wants to be famous and the only way to do that is through his daughters, it is too bad he is exploiting his daughter’s sexuality as the means to do so. His actions are nothing less than dispicable, and he should be stopped. It’s funny that neither his wife or two daughters see a problem with what is happening. How is it that he keeps them all at bay of the opressive behaviors? It’s hard to generalize, but I would say that he comes across as a caring father who means well and loves his daughters, but anyone can see that he is trying to get rich and famous using his daughter’s bodies. SICK!

This is going to be a relatively short blog because I want to just post a song and talk about it for a few minutes. I am a huge fan of progressive music that relates to gender issues (or any sociological issues really). Superchic[k] is a band that deals with a lot of girl empowerment, deconstruction of stereotypes, body image kind of music, which is right up the alley for progressive forms of media for this blog. I often like to critique the paradigms that are intruding on our senses and personal portrayals in this society, but it is good to be positive and look at media that really shines to exemplify a truly better way to interact. Now, I think this was evident in the “free to be you and me” post, this post is more about media that critiques cultural norms (and other times other media). Sometimes the only way to bout with a system is to use the same forms of communication in order to get the point across that there are problems embedded in the system.

The song I want to feature is called “Courage” which deals with eating disorders. Now, I have only heard maybe one or two other songs that deal with eating disorders so outwardly and blatently. I’ll post the song then highlight a few key moments in verse.

I told another lie today
And I got through this day
No one saw through my games
I know the right words to say
Like “I don’t feel well”
“I ate before I came”

Then someone tells me how good I look
and for a moment
For a moment I am happy
But when I’m alone
No one hears me cry

I need you to know
I’m not through the night
Some days I’m still fighting to walk towards the light
I need you to know
That we’ll be okay
Together we can make it through another day

I don’t know the first time I felt unbeautiful
The day I chose not to eat
What I do know is how I changed my life forever
I know I should know better
There are days when I’m okay
And for a moment
For a moment I find hope
But there are days when I’m not okay
And I need your help
So I’m letting go

I need you to know
I’m not through the night
Some days I’m still fighting to walk towards the light
I need you to know
That we’ll be okay
Together we can make it through another day

You should know you’re not on your own
These secrets are walls that keep us alone
I don’t know when but I know now
Together we’ll make it through somehow
Together we’ll make it through somehow

I need you to know
I’m not through the night
Some days I’m still fighting to walk towards the light
I need you to know
That we’ll be okay
Together we can make it through another day

First of all, I know superchic[k] knows what they are talking about because they often receive fanmail and letters from listeners about persona situations, plus eating disorders are so typical in teenagers (and adult women these days). I don’t want to say men do not have these same disorders, but the statistics are overwhelming given the media images of how a “perfect” woman fits into our culture.

They do a fantastic job of digging into the core issues of eating disorders as well. Admitting secrecy is so often such a huge part of this problem. I am sure we all know someone who has had an eating disorder and we do not even know it.

The chorus has gender prescription written all over it. “Someone tells me how good I look, and for a moment, I feel happy”. So much of female pride comes at the hands of being accepted into the ideal image of what it means to be a girl.

Just today, a friend and I were having a conversation about body image. She fits very well into the ideal images of what girls are “supposed to look like” and she told me that she still feels not thin enough at times, and we talked a lot about food consumption. Our culture both gives us the worst options in nutrition and does not focus core nutrition for all (easier and cheaper to stop at McDonalds and get a $1 burger, than make a salad and have a whole wheat sandwich). There are so much about eating disorders that has to do with class structure as well — if someone cannot afford proper nutrition they may end up weighing more, which is said to be horrible — therefore feel forced into eating disorder.

The fact that any person needs to look to others for true happiness is not instinctively a negative thing. We are a social culture and who we are is very much shaped by other people and how we interact with them, but when the norms of a society inhibit a person’s ability to self-actualize, it becomes a problem. Gender construction is very hardcore when it comes to fulfilling idealistic images of body. Many girls who have eating disorders are already underweight. We talk so often about overweight people that even using the term underweight seems off the beaten path.

Marshall Mcluhan said “the media is the message”, which has been debated and talked about since he said it, but there is so much truth and implication behind the statement. We are affected by every image we see out there, and no one ever takes accountability. I think media such as the “Truth Ads” that tackle the tobacco problem do a phenomenal job with portraying the negative effects of smoking. With something like smoking there isn’t much debate though — it kills (regardless of opinions). On the other hand, something like body image or gender construction — everyone can (and does) have a different outlook. If we, as people in this society, determine that the images and scenarios that are given to us are not ones that we choose to accept, we must TAKE media and form it in our own ways to portray alternative images of people portraying alternative lives. That, in part, is what this blog’s focus is — to provide a hub for alternative media, as well as point out the flaws in a media that puts us into a box.

Until girls can grow up in a world where a size 2 is not “fat”, I think there will be work to be done in gender deconstruction. There are many points of liftoff to look at gender arguments (i.e. until men can cry in public or women are not questioned in atypical professors such as automechanic), but body image is so concretely related to sexuality, that we must preserve the right to look the way we were born. Though a lot of the things in this blog will relate to sexuality (just by the fact that so much social gendering implies thoughts and reactions of sexuality), which is a core biological need. What does it say about our culture when we use gender as a way to inhibit the ultimate goal of the human species (to make more of us). Though that is a huge topic best dealt with more in depth on another blog, it seems that gender prescriptions keep us confined to one way of living instead of multiple possibilities.

As a society, we are often option-happy, constantly looking for 5 different alternatives to any form of consumer product. We enjoy alternate endings of films and crave a car that comes in 20 different colors or a popsicle that comes in 15 different flavors, but why are we so subscribed to having only two genders who’s only options are those that were dicated before we were even born?

food for thought if nothing else (because food is healthy and we should all be eating to a degree that both fills us up and makes us healthy without overstepping or understepping the bounds of what is nutritional regardless of the images of idealistic persons who control mainstream media).

So, I was in the mall the other day with a friend when something happened that has not happened since high school – harassment from a total stranger(s)! I was walking just as “normally” as I could and a group of young males (freshman to sophomore level in high school) walk by and shout “can you teach us to be cool?”. At first, I didn’t even know they said this to me , but soon realized. I was baffled about why they even said such a thing but deducted it probably had something to do with my piercings (I have a bunch) or possible that my hair was styled. Regardless, I brushed it off — “damn high school kids”.

About 5 minutes later, we saw the same group of students, but this time they shouted from across the other side of the mall walkway — “Hey, is that your girlfriend, or are you gay?”. This time I was baffled beyond belief. A mixture of laughing and pure anger filled me.

There are so many levels to dig into this comment. I was not so winded as to never have been called gay before (I’ve always realized I was not a “typical guy”), but rather that this would happen in such an open place. One contributing factor on their part was for sure the fact that they were all together, which makes them more masculine. It was funny to see a huge group of girls walking in front of them the first time we saw them because it just indicates to me that the culture of “men and women cannot be friends outside of a love relationship” perpetuated. Now, my optimistic side would like to say that high school has gotten better, but when something like this happens — it makes me think it has gotten worse. I really have nothing to back up either statement.

The mall is also a very symbolic place for this to happen. A place that congregates stereotypes through it’s shops and it’s shoppers. (also, what better place to challenge gender norms).

I actually had a dream that night that me and a few friends were hanging out playing board games (in Hannaford for some reason), and they kids came back. One of them separate from the group and came to apologize to me (though he was only about 12). He quickly tried to run-off, but I held him back for a moment and said “why did you do that in the first place” and he replied — “because I wanted to fit in”, then he started crying and said “what they don’t know is that I am gay”. The rest of the dream is irrelevant, but I think I had a pretty sociological dream there. With statistics the way they are, each one of those young males know someone who is gay, and I really hope they do not treat them with utter disrespect, but if they are willing to treat a random person who doesn’t fit a typical male stereotype in the mall (public) like that — something tells me they go a lot further on their own grounds.

The biggest piece of this, and a huge pet peeve of mine is that a straight man cannot be friends with a girl without it meaning something. Now, this is because our culture believes gender and sex are the same thing. Growing up, I was always called gay (whether it be in a negative or just friendly yet presumptuous way — or in the way that people said I was in denial. I think that is interesting that people’s views on gender are so embedded that they couldn’t even accept that i was both atypical and straight?!?!) because I had a lot of girl friends, was sensitive, hated sports, was active in school, got good grades, etc. I have dealt with that my whole life, which isn’t a huge deal. I don’t think it’s overly important to tell people I am straight all the time because by contesting it all the time, I am almost saying that it would be a horrible thing if I were gay. Sometime I will throw in that I am straight because I think it means something a lot different (especially to women) to see men that are both straight and deconstructing the MAN BOX. People (like those students in the mall) do not even understand what GENDER IS, and that people can act a certain way and that does not dictate what their sexual orientation is (or that gay, straight, and bi are only 3 of about 40+ known sexual orientations). I really cannot wait for the day where people realize the differences between gender and sex. Even though it’s not a huge deal to constantly be thought of as gay when in fact people are really trying to say “you are an atypical male”, it would be nice for the culture to realize a difference.

At times, I wonder where I got so much of my atypical male persona, but sometimes I see or re-examine things from my childhood, and I can tell right off where it came from. I think any form of outcasting allows people to be more open (although sometimes it allows school shootings, but we’ve talked about that). I know a lot of my life I was teased and such because I had asthma (it seems ridiculous to look back and think that I was teased for having a medical condition I could not control). This made me weak and unable to play sports or participate in gym oftentimes. Since I was outcasted, I kept to myself, and probably did not get a lot of the peer messages that people get. I think a lot of times the societal norm structure infects 4 – 5 friends then they pick up and share those traits (like being hyper-masculine). When I eventually did form friendships, they were with girls (probably because society was telling them to be sensitive and nice). From them on out (til this very day) women have been my primary sect of friends. I find it ridiculout that culture dictates so much of who we are, and also that people are so willing to accept it themselves. Now I just reject those gender norms because I can see how blatant they are. It’s really sickening how saturated our culture is with this…disease. I look at front page AOL or MSN news and it’s so gendered, I don’t see how everyone could not notice it.

Because of how I grew up with “girl friends” a lot, I adopted more “feminine” qualities than masculine. When I was younger, my mom and i were very close, so I did a lot of things like cook in the kitchen with her, etc. Now, doing all these “girl” things — did not make me gay. It’s disconcerting to think that the general public cannot distinguish. I get it though, we base our primary opinions of people based on gender stereotypes, yadda yadda yadda, but this really constricts people to choose “boy or girl” and not — I can play sports and wear a dress (boy or girl). Until we deconstruct what it means to be a boy or a girl, we cannot fully do all of the things we want. I am sure one of the teens in that crown would love to go to an animal shelter and help little kittens (or – insert female related activity here), but will that happen? Given his current attitude about the world and what it means to be a man, i’d say no.

Life is too short to let other people dictate what you can do with your body and your mind. I truly feel that no one WANTS to hold down other people and that it is the greater struggle to gain respect in our culture. We need to find other ways to gain respect from each other that does not include putting down others.

Below is a list of 10 things men can do to End Violence Against women, but really, I think if men were to do these things, they would end violence against other men, they would end the perpetuation of what it means to be a man, and so much more. (http://www.acalltomen.com) :

1. Acknowledge and understand how sexism, male dominance and male privilege lay the foundation for all forms of violence against women.

2. Examine and challenge our individual sexism and the role that we play in supporting men who are abusive.

3. Recognize and stop colluding with other men by getting out of our socially defined roles, and take a stance to end violence against women.

4. Remember that our silence is affirming. When we choose not to speak out against men’s violence, we are supporting it.

5. Educate and re-educate our sons and other young men about our responsibility in ending men’s violence against women.

6.”Break out of the man box”- Challenge traditional images of manhood that stop us from actively taking a stand to end violence against women.

7. Accept and own our responsibility that violence against women will not end until men become part of the solution to end it. We must take an active role in creating a cultural and social shift that no longer tolerates violence against women.

8. Stop supporting the notion that men’s violence against women is due to mental illness, lack of anger management skills, chemical dependency, stress, etc… Violence against women is rooted in the historic oppression of women and the outgrowth of the socialization of men.

9. Take responsibility for creating appropriate and effective ways to develop systems to educate and hold men accountable.

10. Create systems of accountability to women in your community. Violence against women will end only when we take direction from those who understand it most, women.

______________________

Now, the situation i had in the mall was portrayed through utter ignorance of our culture, but I think it exemplifies how young men will act so accordingly to attain that alpha male image. I’m sure their parents wouldn’t like them heckling random people in the mall. I think it’s a general consensus today to not be filled with feelings of hate towards others, but somewhere along the gender messages they received they felt it was easier to just go along with them, instead of challenging them and saying “this isn’t right”. I honestly hope that somewhere along their educational path, they learn a tolerance for others, and realize that having piercings? (if that was the reason) does not make a person gay.. (or “cool” for that matter).

I don’t know where else to go with this, I just wanted to share the experience and a pet peeve of mine (which I wish was a pet peeve of all people).

gender sex

I was searching around today for music with positive gender roles within them, and I came across this non-fiction piece on a website. I thought it was an interesting perspective on gender roles in television and music in the 60s and 70s. She gives her perspectives on the entire thing, so I am just going to let you read it and make a few comments! Interesting piece!

• My mother tells this story. When I was three years old, she became pregnant and wanted to know what I was going to do with my new brother or sister. I answered, “If it’s a girl I’ll give her one of my dolls, but if it’s a boy, I’ll have to give him one of my trucks!” The story always gets a lot of laughs, mostly from adults over forty. For younger adults, the story rings too true.I was born in 1972, and just then, the world of children’s education was changing with leaps and bounds. Probably the most important leap in education for very young children was Sesame Street. The first television show with a curriculum, Sesame Street and its creator-company, the Children’s Television Workshop, was often criticized for presenting too much information too quickly. Those of us who watched it adapted remarkably quickly, though, and Sesame Street had an enormous effect. It taught us our numbers, our letters. Same and Different. These are the People in your Neighborhood. Before the world of kindergarten ever started, Sesame Street was our street.On the more sinister end, others accused the Children’s Television Workshop of trying to brainwash children, with their repetition and bright and colorful screens and catchy tunes. In a way, maybe they were right. In any American town, start singing “Sunny day, sweepin’ the clouds away” and see how many people under thirty join in. Brainwashed or not, we learned our letters and numbers, and enough social skills to get us ready for kindergarten. What else could we have been made to believe?

  What we saw on television had an enormous effect, and not just on Sesame Street. And these shows also gave us an understanding of gender roles. We were quite possibly the first generation to have Television as Babysitter, and it was an excellent opportunity for this generation to learn that boys and girls were more alike than anybody else said. In television, at least, it didn’t quite work. We may have seen intelligent women on these shows, but they were far surpassed by modern damsels in distress, Muppet girls in dresses, and even Muppet Monster girls in dresses. The Land of Make-Believe was a monarchy, and even if King Friday wasn’t the ripest apple in the bunch, he was still the King.

  So where, then, did I get the idea that I could play with trucks even though somewhere I learned that trucks were for boys? For that, I introduce you to another medium, separate from television but, at least in my life, more powerful than Sesame Street ever was. I refer to the record. Actually a specific record. An experiment by a group of 60s and 70s entertainers who were tired of seeing no positive gender roles for girls. It was called Free to Be…You and Me, and it was in so many ways more powerful than the CTW ever was.

  Led by Marlo Thomas, the album starred voices such as Carol Channing, Diana Ross, Alan Alda, Mel Brooks, and Harry Belafonte. The ideas were radical for the early ’70s, even if they seem obvious or even silly by today’s standards. “William’s Doll” told us that it’s OK for boys to play with dolls, and large, booming football-player voices told us that “It’s All Right to Cry.” “Ladies First” told us that acting like a princess all the time might get you attention that you don’t want (getting eaten by a tiger, for one). “Atalanta” showed us that boys and girls could both excel in sports if they both try hard enough. And “Boy Meets Girl” reminded us that we all looked the same in diapers in the nursery. The main message of the album? Straight from one of the album tracks: “A person should do what he wants to/ and not just what other folks say/ A person should be what she likes to/ A person’s a person that way.”

  I have often wondered how many other people in my age group had the same mix of entertainment, and how it affected them. By the age of five, I had made distinct proclamations about what was for boys. Baseball was for boys, as were auto racing, trucks, and monster movies. But these were also things that I loved. Did the boys make similar proclamations about what was for girls, and did they, even secretly, love those things, too?

  Dar Williams, a 30-year old modern folk singer, performs certain songs in concert to explain to her audience just who she is. Her first song from her first album-the song that introduced the world to who she is is titled “When I was a Boy.” And what a song. When I heard it for the first time, I knew. This was someone who shared my experience. “When I was a boy,” she sings, “see that picture that was me/ grass-stained shirt and dusty knees./ And I know things have gotta change/ they’ve got pills to sell/ they’ve got implants to put in/ they’ve got implants to remove./ But I am not forgetting/ that I was a boy too.” Dar doesn’t just explore the gender ambiguity of her childhood but expands it to include current trends that women face today. How can it be that I, who rode the bus alone at age ten, need to be escorted home at night by a man, seventeen years later?

  The ’70s were a changing time for everyone. ’60s teenagers were growing up and having their own children. Everyone, it seemed, wanted to educate us in one way or another. Sesame Street was for the mind. CTW probably didn’t even think about gender; they just needed their ABC’s and 123’s to get through. Free to Be…You and Me was for everything else. Somewhere along the line, the signals got crossed. But along with the entertainment-adults unknown to us deciding what we should know-there were the parents. My mother, a college student in the ’60s, wanted strong-minded, free-spirited girls, and to be sure, she tried to turn us into modern girls. But she still had some older notions of what girls did, how they behaved, what they wore. As much as I may have wanted to climb trees, it’s damned hard to do in a dress. Moreover, as much as my parents may have said that we would grow up to be whatever we wanted to be, the fact remained that Dad went to work and Mom stayed at home. Example itself showed that women were mothers. When we were asked what we would be when we grew up, both my sister and I would respond with a modification of “mother.” I was to be a “Doctor-Mother” and Whitney would be a “Pedodontist-Violinist-Mother,” because, no matter what anyone else said, girls grew up to be women, and women were by definition the mothers.

  Further, our parents and television were not the only influences, though they may have been the strongest. Once school started, we faced the opinions of other adults. The same teachers who showed us the film of Free to Be…You and Me (I didn’t even know there was a film until I was seven) encouraged girls toward traditionally female roles and boys toward traditionally male ones. In our drawings, anyone in pants was presumed to be male; anyone in a dress was presumed to be female.

  It’s not their fault. All of them, every adult I had contact with who tried to mold my awareness of the world around me thought that they were doing the right thing. It was a remarkable time-just a short span of years between old gender roles and new ones. Were I born ten years earlier, I likely would have had no attempts at early-childhood gender modernization. I would have been a regular, dress-wearing, doll-playing girl, and I’d have probably picked up more modern gender identification by high school. My sister, born just four years later than I, faced far less ambiguity. In fact, she finds Free to Be…You and Me to be insulting in its simplicity. She still doesn’t understand. It was first, and it did more than any other medium had ever attempted. I count myself lucky to have been a part of these very first attempts. When I meet someone, male or female, born in the U.S. between 1970 and 1974, we often discover a bond that just doesn’t exist in people slightly older or slightly younger. We had the Children’s Television Workshop. We knew Mister Snuffalupagus when only Big Bird could see him. We had visions of being a guest on Romper Room. We had “William’s Doll” and Dudley Pippin, who learned first that “It’s All Right to Cry.” And we had a childhood where we didn’t always know what or who we were supposed to be but where we learned that eventually, whatever we wanted to be would be just fine.

Now, I as well, I grew up with Seasme Street as well, and thinking back on it, there really were a lot of positive messages in program, but as the piece suggests, many shows, even if they stepped outside of the tradition box, still put people in certain gender roles.

Now, I cannot even blame them for doing that. When I think about the 60s and 70s I think about a very free time where people were challenging a lot of the social structures (with the starting of social movements, etc.), but I wouldn’t have thought “oh the media back them was trying to deconstruct gender norms”. Now, maybe Seasme Street didn’t do this 100% but “Free to be…You and Me” is rather a huge feat. Though I had never even heard of the album before today, there were obviously some children of the time that were able to benefit from such progressive media.

I was able to find a few of the videos from this album online! I need to seek out the net more to see if there is more of this kind of progressive children’s media out there. I know when I look at what is on for children now-a-days, it seems like there is a total reinforcement, which makes sense. The media is more powerful, so getting decentralized messages out there is very difficult. If anyone knows of any contemporary pieces that are doing this kind of work let me know!

INTRO TO THE SERIES.

FREE TO BE…YOU AND ME (what a wonderful concept!) The only thing I have to say is that I wish every child could hear this. It is amazing the pressures we put on children to be who society wants them to be.

IT’S ALRIGHT TO CRY.

This song is so important for young boys to be hearing. I think so much of the anger that happens through later teens (if it does occur) happens through a process of bottling emotions. Men are not supposed to have feelings. They are supposed to be robotic supermachines that get stuff done. There is a lot of talk in the domestic violence movement (which I support and very much part of) how men objectify women (which I completely agree with), but society often objectifies men as well because objects do not have emotions. Not that it would solve all gender problems, but if guys admitted they cry (because guys still cry whether they let girls know it or not) there would be a huge difference in our society (I feel). It is funny how one little tear could change such a huge gender norm because crying isn’t just about crying it is a symbolization of humanization.

SISTERS AND BROTHERS.

Sisters and Brothers speaks true to itself. EQUALITY, plain and simple. We are all equal and we are all human and we should love and respect each other. I would like to note it is called SISTERS AND BROTHERS and not BROTHERS AND SISTERS. I can’t believe something this gender positive came out so long ago (re-thinks own thoughts about social movements!)

MARLO THOMAS TALKS TO CHILDREN.

I found this video to be very telling. Marlo talks with children about their relationships with their siblings. You can plainly see that gender segregation has already gotten to these kids (who are maybe 5 or so). Making boys and girls completely different people does not allow for that open environment where you can say “I Love You” all the time. I felt really sad when Marlo asked the little boy if “deep down in his heart” if he LIKED his sister at all – he said no (mainly because she often beat him up). It is important to not make boys and girls seem like aliens to each other, otherwise you get these kinds of reactions.

WHEN WE GROW UP.

REVOLUTION! Rejecting american-capitalist ideals. We don’t have to change who we are to be good people, good friends, good family members, good PEOPLE.

WILLIAMS DOLL.

I think most boys have played with dolls as a child, and depending on parental comfortableness. The ending of this video just blows me away with what it is saying. The grandmother tells the father that dolls will prepare William for having his own child — why do we not see this more often? Nurturing does not mean homosexuality (which is the huge concern with boys doing “girl” things). The best part in my opinions is “William has a doll, William has a doll, but someday he is going to be a mother too”. It may be easy to construe this, but the way I see it is that “mother and father” should be the exact same thing and they are different to denote SEX not GENDER in a sense.

When thinking about childcare – women are often the caregivers, but is society saying men shouldn’t care for their children at all? I have entirely different views on children as it is, but for the sake of not changing every societal paradigm that exists – should we not be giving boys dolls so they can learn how to care for others — thus one day being a good parents? We give them to girls only because we want to keep women in that position where THEY are they caregivers. Very telling video!

BOY MEETS GIRL.

WOW! This speaks volumes about socialization and gender pressure to BABIES. It may seem like a metaphor (and parts of it is), but I think it s a (great) direct example of how parents gender their babies as well. It speaks also to the fact that some people (children AND adults) often do things JUST BECAUSE they are SUPPOSED TO (according to the gender roles). I thought it was pretty funny how the boy wanted to be the cocktail waitress and then was still ecstatic to be a boy. The piece that is great to pull from this is that both babies were excited to be a boy or a girl – it did not matter to them. Once again, pulling out something very small out of the video that means so much — and if children are watching this – BOY! … (and girl!!)

ATALANTA.

GENDER EQUALITY. At first watching the film, I just thought Atalanta was going to win (but in reality women being better than men is no better — and this video proves it!) It’s funny that they both thought there was no match for them, but the symbolism of being tied at the end of the race was perfect. The “old ways of thinking” brought on by the king still wanted John to have Atalanta, but neither Atalanta of John would have that. I also think the fairy tale / medieval setting is symbolic of a VERY OLD way of thinking. It seems we haven’t come too far, but still puts things into perspective. I keep getting so excited to find the next video, these are just great!

LADIES FIRST.

These videos keep competing for my favorite video. So many thoughts in my head. This makes me think of my Avril Lavigne post from the other day. Also just like Atalanta — being equal is fair, being any kind of archy (matriarchy or patriarchy) leaves room for opression and inequality. Now if the little girl did not insist on using her gender as a privildge, she may not have been eaten (quite the contrary because if she wasn’t snobby, the next traditional role to fit is protecting her). I think these videos are doing a GREAT job with not aiding to just women, or just men, but being fair and equal on all planes.

DUDLEY PIPPIN.

This reminds me a lot of the “it’s alright to cry”, but speaks more towards having positive male role models for boys. There are so many efforts to try and deconstruct gender norms of a “man box” for small boys (and adults), and it really does start with positive role models. Children are victims of their environment, and if more people step up and say “it’s alright to cry” or “it’s alright to deny your suitor”. etc, then people can be more “Free to be”.

THREE WISHES.

Not huge on the GENDER PERSPECTIVE, but as with anything EVERYTHING affects and is part of gender and gender construction. I like how the mother did not aide to the girl right away (“i know how you can be too”) – girls are not supposed to be mean, but if we look beyond gender roles we can see all. I do like how Xenobia wished for Victorious to come back because as the mother did say “good friends is what the world needs” — which can speak to friends who will not judge you based on ANYTHING!

I’D RATHER BE THE SUN.

SHORT.SWEET.& TO THE POINT. I’d rather be the sun than the moon that shines off of someone else’s light. BE YOUR OWN PERSON, stand up for what you believe in! Simple, yet amazing!

AGATHA FRYE.

A video about helping others. Huge part of this has to do with men helping women and women helping men. In both stories the girl was doing something and the man helped — men do not always have to be the one making and fixing, but can rather be auxiliary to a project.

PARENTS ARE PEOPLE.

I am really glad this video exists because the videos thus far have not delved too deep in the “non-traditional clothing / profession” category. I really like how Marlo presented that even though the main focus of this video was to show all the work that parents do (and for the love of it) for children yet men and women can be any profession they want to be and it doesn’t have to affect the kind of life they lead (they are still parents). Parents being the anchor of the video shifts the focus so that the outside gender professional roles seems natural in a secondary way (which is a large piece of the gender category).

YOU WERE ONCE A BABY.

Wonderful insight about how we socialize babies. “No baby grows up to be a person all by itself” – goes way beyond even this video because each baby’s brain is mailable to socialization.

UNTITLED.

These baby videos have very interesting thoughts inside of them. Even though some are about things other than gender (this one speaks to me more on a children are people too follow up for parents are people video), but the interesting thing is how candid and equal the babies seem regardless. They both look the same (even though you can distinguish their voices), which gives a sense that them as a gender doesn’t matter, but rather the external situation.

UNTITLED 2.

Another funny play that parents and children seem so different (but shouldn’t at the same time). Same comments as “UNTITLED” pretty much.

CIRCLE OF FRIENDS.

This is the next to last video in the film (though i haven’t put anything in order except the first video, this video, and the last video). A great wrap up to the film. Circle of friends, as far as gender perspective is very symbolic. They say how love goes around in a circle, and friendship, but in a circle ALL PARTS ARE EQUAL. Women and Men regardless of their backgrounds…. LOVE GOES AROUND IN A CIRCLE – the earth is a sphere (many circles) , so why do we still lack the love?

CONCLUSION.

BABY WRAP UP. Very metaphorical of the separation of women and men.

Overall, I want to say I think every child should see this film. What an inspiration. Obviously aimed towards children, but I feel so happy after watching it. I really do hope that someday ….

“…you and me are free to be…you and me”

Yesterday, I was browsing the interweb for gender related materials and came across someone’s blog from a few days ago entitled “Reasons Cosplayers Scare Me“. At first, I was not clicking for gender perspectives, but Cosplay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosplay if you don’t know what it is) seems a little strange to me, but for different reasons than the author of this post. As I read the post, I got relatively annoyed (which is usually the emotion I feel when brash gender stereotypes are thrown onto the playing field). As you keep reading you can tell that everything is tongue-and-cheek, but I thought I will respond as if it weren’t because I have heard a lot of of people talk about cosplay in almost this same manor.

THE PART I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS ON IS DESCRIBED BELOW

WTG

• Sometimes I like to play a game with my friends and random passerby called “What’s That Gender!?” The goal of the game is to determine the sex of the person in question. If close examination of the subject does not cause the real gender to become evident, players are encouraged go up to the subject and attempt to begin a short conversation in order to determine how deep the subject’s voice is. If the gender is still in question, players punch the subject in the crotch and measure on a scale of 1 to 10 how much pain was caused to the individual. Optionally, players without the guts to do such a thing can just throw their hands in the air and scream “WHAT ARE YOU!?!?!” If the subject does not answer, it is determined that he/she is a mute mangirl. I’m betting that the thingy in the picture to the right is composed of two bearded Vietnamese midget women standing on each others’ shoulders. It really is a toss-up though. Disgusting, and yet hilarious.

Okay, so there are some real ignorances presented in this paragraph alone. First of all playing a game called “What’s that gender” both implies that it matters and that it is not about how that person identifies but more how they are filling their prescribed gender stereotypes. I will admit , what little I do know of cosplay, there is a lot of gender ambiguity. You see this a lot with anime and Asian exported media.

Reading more the details of this “gender game” these people play (which they very well may not even play and this could just be a humorous commentary on cosplay – but really shows a reinforcement of gender stereotyping). Although this article WAS NOT written in a serious manor, this “gender game” happens on a daily level outside the cosplay world. We are constantly (and I am guilty as charged as well) assigning gender to people who we have no clue about. These people could ID as masculine, feminine, a mix of both, neither, anything.

The author also suggests that the (obvious) man is a “thingy” and that if a person does not fall discretely in their roles then they are categorized as a thing. This is extremely interesting to analyze because when we objectify humans (which happens all the time), it becomes very easy to hate on them. Now, I am not going to lie, I think cosplay is a little weird (not because of the gender ambiguity, but rather the extreme levels of role playing a fantasy life that is very outside our own life – but to each their own), but everyone has the right to express themselves how they want to. Even though this article is aimed in a humous way, it says a lot about our culture because if we saw the man in that picture walking down the street we would play that “gender game”, and some people may take it as far as objectifying them as a human being. It is important to humans to label others so that they can ID them as good or bad, but we need to note that things like sexuality and gender are not good or bad, they just are.

Though cosplay is a very unique subculture of dressing up like favorite anime characters (or video games), a portion of these people are partaking in cross-dressing (though they may just see it as fun and not cross-dressing in a transgendered sort of way), but the outside sees this as a socially queer (pun intended) thing to do. These attitudes need to stop. I don’t want to get much into the psychology of cosplay, but I can imagine that a reason these people are dressing up and living alternate lives is in part because they have been cast away from (or feel they don’t fit right) in the society that we have created. For that, I do not blame them. I also think, they just want to do it for fun, and if we send the message that it is not alright even to “cross-dress” for fun, then what are we telling people who truly are transgender?

Although the subculture is a little strange to me (any subculture can seem strange to outsiders), I think that cosplay introduces some interesting topics on gender. The fact that men and women are dressing like a different gender (called CROSSPLAY), they are therefore playing with gender (gender bending), and also just some of the characters being gender ambiguous allows for a conversation about deconstructing gender to happen. Rather than adopt the attitude of the author of that blog, we can look and say “wow there are other forms of gender expression out there”. It is good to have parts of our culture that shows gender ambiguity because otherwise there would be no alternatives. Even if people do not feel gender ambigious , there is nothing wrong with being fluid with gender, or just playing around. There needs to be more than Halloween that says “we can step outside of our traditional roles”.

“A prime candidate for a rousing
round of “What’s That Gender!?” – Slapstic

Like I have said, even though this article was written tongue-in-cheek, many people play the game of “what is that gender” (and well beyond cosplay).

I wonder what Sherri Shepard would have to say about this?

Thank You Avril Lavigne for leading the forefront of “non-conformist conformists”. See, this is a tad personal. I used to be a huge Avril fan. I used to think that she stood for standing apart from the crowd, challenging norms, all of the great things about “being liberal”. Her second album talked about abuse, broken homes, and living life to it’s fullest, then she took sabbatical from all these values – got a make over (with some plastic surgery), and suddenly she is the BEST DAMN THING — according to her new album. There is much wrong with her new album in the way of gender, but the worst is her newly released video. Hot off the internet reels take a look : (the lyrics are right below the video if you want to follow along)

Let me hear you say hey hey hey
Alright
Now let me hear you say hey hey ho

I hate it when a guy doesn’t get the door
even though I told him yesterday and the day before
I hate it when a guy doesn’t get the tab
And I have to pull my money out and that looks bad

Where are the hopes, where are the dreams
My Cinderella story scene
When do you think they’ll finally see

[Chorus:]
That you’re not not not gonna get any better
You won’t won’t won’t you won’t get rid of me never
Like it or not, even though she’s a lot like me
We’re not the same
And yeah yeah yeah I’m a lot to handle
You don’t know trouble, I’m a hell of a scandal
Me, I’m a scene, I’m a drama queen
I’m the best damn thing that your eyes have ever seen

Alright, alright
Yeah

I hate it when a guy doesn’t understand
Why a certain time of month I don’t wanna hold his hand
I hate it when they go out, and we stay in
And they come home smelling like their ex girlfriends

I found my hopes, I found my dreams
My Cinderella story scene
Now everybody’s gonna see

[Chorus]

Give me an A (always give me what I want)
Give me a V (be very very good to me)
R (are you gonna treat me right)
I (I can put up a fight)
Give me an L (let me hear you scream loud)

One, two, three, four

Where are the hopes, where are the dreams
My Cinderella story scene
When do you think they’ll finally see

[Chorus]

Now, I don’t even think I NEED TO POINT OUT THE WRONGNESS WITH THIS SONG, but I will do it anyways. There quite possible could be many more levels of dark age gendering than even I can find, but let’s start with the basics. It is easy to construe this song as a “positive girl power proverb” but I think it’s also easy to see the very patriarchical values and female submissiveness within her lyrics as well.

I hate it when a guy doesn’t get the door
even though I told him yesterday and the day before
I hate it when a guy doesn’t get the tab
And I have to pull my money out and that looks bad

OKAY, well she wants chivalry once again (and she wants it bad, she’s DEMANDING IT). She wants a guy to be her slave, which could be interpreted two ways – both of which are nothing to be proud of.

1. Matriarchy - there is a possibility her terms are to set things straight and be on top, but matriarchy is not a better system than patriarchy because if people have power over each other does it really matter which gender it is?
2. Helplessness - can you not open your own door? It’s no secret that a huge gender stereotype for men is to protect and serve women (and yet degrade them?). Regardless, it is easy to see that if she wants a guy to open the door, she can’t do it herself. To me that’s a huge slap in the face to the female population to say “guys have to do stuff for us”. There’s a difference of being nice to someone and helping them out and doing something because it is both expected and prescribed to your gender role.

BUT WAIT, Let’s not forget she also hates it when “a guy doesn’t get the tab” because if Avril Lavigne (working woman with millions and millions of dollars) puts HER OWN money out, it looks bad. This also says two things to me.

1. Same Old Roles – there is part of this that may be saying “even though I have money and fame, I am still a woman” and is held down by those ideals. Even though some women are strong and unique, there are still parts of their lives that conform to gender norms. It is hard to speculate because it is such a personal detail, but also because fame is a whole other paradigm of gender roles.
2. Sold Out – bell hooks explains about the same thing happening to Madonna “selling out”. Avril will do what it takes to make money, and if that includes making music that seems like a 15 year old would  be singing in her diary, so be it. It’s hard to blame Avril, for millions of dollars would you sing a song about guys opening doors for you – probably so.

The part that annoys me most about this portion of the song is that she has money and she has fame — why would she need a guy to get the tab? Although possible unconnected, a lot of this behavior seemed to happen after she got married.

NEXT ON THE LIST :

Where are the hopes, where are the dreams
My Cinderella story scene
When do you think they’ll finally see

[Chorus:]
That you’re not not not gonna get any better
You won’t won’t won’t you won’t get rid of me never
Like it or not, even though she’s a lot like me
We’re not the same
And yeah yeah yeah I’m a lot to handle
You don’t know trouble, I’m a hell of a scandal
Me, I’m a scene, I’m a drama queen
I’m the best damn thing that your eyes have ever seen

This next part gets ultra-annoying as she is talking about the above things (men holding doors and paying for her) as hopes and dreams. What signal is this telling little girls – that hopes and dreams are made up of what a man can provide for you and do for you — a true fairy tale. Now we won’t talk too much about Cinderella today because I have entire projects about construction of gender in fairy tales, but you can imagine what sorts of things I have to say about “princesses”.

The chorus recreates the same gender stereotypes that teenage girls are sassy, brassy, and snobby. She gives a lot of attitude and tries to pull away from the mainstream, but is being a drama queen what anybody really wants to hear about. Then the self-righteous “best damn thing your eyes have every seen” really puts the cherry on top of the “i’m so pretty and beautiful, cater to me”. Now some of this lingo may seem progressive for women, but Avril Lavigne looks a certain way. She may dress “alternatively” (which has been majorly changed with her new favorite color being pink – go figure), but her messages do not co-incide for everyone.

LASTLY :

I hate it when a guy doesn’t understand
Why a certain time of month I don’t wanna hold his hand
I hate it when they go out, and we stay in
And they come home smelling like their ex girlfriends

Now, speaking on this issue as someone who does not experience a period is just hearsay, but I have many friends that are girls, and there are certain times of the months my friends don’t turn in to “raving bitches” – which is the fun stereotype that Avril (A GIRL!!!) is trying to re-create. Now, we won’t get into the matter too deeply, but I don’t think it is necessary for AVRIL to speak on every female and how they act during their periods.

The next part seems to be put in there solely to throw a stab at stereotyping men. Most of the song stays focused to giving women their traditional roles, but this is one where men can continually be cheaters! I don’t know about all you readers, but I have never cheated in my life. There is a HUGE contradiction in her lyrics here because she is all for “shattering what women can and cannot do” (though this song seems rather the contrary). Nevertheless she says “we stay in” – why do women have to stay in? Is that a choice or a gender construction she is creating ONCE AGAIN. She is telling all the teenage girls out there that their boyfriends are going to cheat on them when they are out (because no doubt the hidden context is that men are disgusting pigs — I wonder if her husband is a disgusting pig….?).

I was on her myspace and looking at her pictures and saw this one girl comment “you are so pretty, I wish I looked like you, but I am too fat”

– now if Avril Lavinge was a counter-culture icon (first of all she wouldn’t be on mainstream radio and writing material like this), it would seem obvious that atypical features of beauty are just as welcome. I felt so bad for the girl that posted it because she aspires to be someone else, someone who is “hot” (avril actually has a song called “hot” on her new album, and in the video she is on a stripper pole). What are teenage girls to think when “the best damn thing that your eyes have ever seen” is a 110 (guessing) lb. girl with long blonde hair, famous husband, tons of money, and is still not satisified? Could anyone hold a cup to her? Not in this society – so instead we get 13 year old girls on myspace thinking they are fat and ugly because they are no Avril Lavinge, which sounds to be “the worst damn thing that my ears have ever heard”.

We need to aspire to break these molds of traditional beauty and also gender roles. It’s a real feat for Mrs. Lavigne to have sung a song that is built entirely on recreating multiple gender norms. This possible could be one of the most saturated reinforced gender songs I have ever heard.

There is a lot wrong with the entire album (minus a few songs that were undoubtedly stuck in for traditional fans), but this song for sure takes the cake.

5 years ago I never thought I would be writing a blog talking about Avril Lavinge in a negative way, but it just goes to shows that enough money can change anything, but then again consumers have the choice. I refuse to support her in any way shape or form (which meant throwing away a lot of memoriabelia), but the important part of this lesson is to BECOME CRITICAL THINKERS. I am not saying “BOYCOTT AVRIL LAVIGNE” (though I would probably give you compliments for doing so), but more about saying “maybe i like this song, but ya know she’s using some crude stereotypes about men and women”. Some people can like something and still see something wrong with it. I personally, cannot.

I thought I would come back and post a side by side of AVRIL THEN AND NOW.

2004

2007

Yesterday I talked a little bit about guns and how they are gendered for males. I wanted to follow up a little with that, as well as give some positive media interpretation on violence. Violence is a huge field in gender studies, but I just want to touch of a few key points, show a video, and discuss for a few moments.

In Michael Kimmel & Matthew Mahler’s article entitled “Adolescent Masculinity, Homophobia, and Violence” a discussion about school shootings attached to gender is discussed. There are so many “reasons” why this happens, but Kimmel and Mahler lean towards masculinity and homophobia being key to this spread of violence. None of us will ever truly get the answers to “why” it happens, but we can analyze common denominators within the scenarios. A lot of times they are revenge plots (what I was speaking on yesterday). In the article, Kimmel / Mahler feature a young man by the name of Michael Carneal. They tell his story, which may seem typical for school violence perpetrators. He was a band geek who “felt aliened, pushed around, and picked on. Boys stole his lunch and constantly teased him” (Kimmel, Mahler, 1447) Michael was a very hypersensitive student, so when the pushing got to far, he brought a gun to school (in the hopes of looking cool). He felt ignore, so used the instant fix he thought was best – “killing three classmates, wounding five others”. His golden words were “People respect me now”.

Now, I am also not here to offer up any quick fix answers. I don’t think violent video games and metal music are sole contributors to gun violence. As a child, I played more video games that i’d like to admit too. Parental monitor is a huge part of this because though playing Doom or Halo will not turn the average person into a gun-wielding murderer, the long term affects on the mental health could potentially wan senses of reality. I am not big on that argument just because I know I have played a lot of games in my time, but I think anything can contribute to a person’s mental health and bullying / homophobia / masculinity (expectation of gender norms) is a giant part of this equation. I would say they are the primary factors, and things like games and music are secondary factors.

With the recent burst of school shootings, hope is hard to find. People feel unsafe, but if we look at the large social context of school shootings and start asking “why is this happening” rather than “why did he do it”, we may find some different answers (not quick fix – “it was video games” answers either”, but more like the answers that Kimmel and Mahler find).

One piece of hope is a film called Home Room. The film was created in response to Columbine. Here is a short description of the film :

• The aftermath of a high school shooting leaves Deanna Cartwright (Erika Christensen) seriously wounded and nine others dead, including the perpetrator. Det. Martin Van Zandt (Victor Garber) is assigned the unenviable task of investigating the crime and finding someone to hold responsible. His attention settles on Alicia Browning (Busy Philipps), a darkly troubled outsider who, as the only person present throughout the entire incident, is both the key witness and a possible suspect. Further complicating her isolated existence, Alicia’s high school principal compels her to pay a reluctant visit on the still-hospitalized Deanna. Privileged and popular, Deanna differs dramatically from the alienated Alicia. Yet, beneath an upbeat appearance, she is struggling desperately with the emotional and physical scars left by the attack. Over the next few days, united by nothing more than their common suffering, the two young women form an unlikely friendship to cope with the tragic events that threaten to overwhelm them.

  

There are so many levels to the film, but every time I see the film, the last 10 minutes is an emotional roller coaster. I am going to post a part that really gives me chills (but really it’s a roller coaster ride up to the scene, so you should check out the movie yourself, it is one of my top 10 favorite films of all time).

If you do want to see the film and do not want to ’spoil’ this scene. I will write out the dialogue that I find offers an interesting perspective (from the teens in the video speaking).

SKIP THIS VIDEO IF YOU PLAN ON SEEING THIS (amazing) FILM. (Scroll below for transcript)

THE PART I SPEAK OF STARTS AT MINUTE 2:00 and ends at 3:03

DEANNA : “why the hell did you bring us here”

DET. VAN ZANDT :”because I’m a father and my kid will be your age in less than a heartbeat, and as soon as he is old enough to figure it out, he is going to ask me what it all means, and I don’t know what to tell him”

DEANNA : “your asking us? you’re the adult, you’re supposed to have all the answers. I can’t turn on my TV without hearing someone say why they think it happened”

STUDENTS : “violence on tv, nation rifle association, he was teased too much at school, harassed too much at school, guns without safety locks, guns without safety locks, violent video games, violent video games, violent video games, pulp fiction, pulp fiction, cry for help, culture of death, culture of death, magazines.”

DEANNA : “my head can’t hold all the answers I hear everyday. So you come to us because you want to know why, you wanna know what it means.”

“IT DOESN’T MEAN A GOD DAMN THING IN THE WORLD”

Then the film goes into the VERY EMOTIONAL ENDING. The film is overall just a great film. I think there is some really nice positive forms of gender in this film as well (the relationship between the two main characters is a great metaphor for hope that any two persons on this earth can connect and relate to each other). I think the detective going to TEENAGERS (and mostly girls) for answers because he does not know is a very atypical scenario for a man. Men asking for help is not supposed to happen according to the gender prescriptions.

The montage of students giving answers for why school violence happens is very interesting. We can see even more that school shootings is a predominantly male problem as they say “he”. Also, it is interesting to note, violent video games is said three times because it is the first scapegoat answer that the media uses, but if we look at that more – video games are also a predominantly male activity. It seems like a euphemism that the media uses saying “this is a male problem”. The comment at the end of this scene suggesting “it doesn’t mean a god damn thing in the world” really illustrates that we don’t have answers, and all of these scapegoat answers are not the big “WHY” (although I believe they are CONTRIBUTING factors). It almost seems like a slap in the face to victims of gun violence to say “sorry you got shot because Michael watched too many slasher films” because the double crossed message is that “it is okay to absorb these images of graphic violence, but when you act on them, BAD BAD”.

The other piece of the film I want to speak a bit on is that the captain in the film (the detective’s boss) has his heart set on setting someone accountable for the atrocities that occurred. He is a great metaphor for parents (he even says at one point – “we need to be the voices for these parents and victims”), but he takes an approach that looks for accountability within a single person. No single person is responsible for this type of violence (though there is obviously a huge burden of accountability on the shooter), but there is a piece that goes into upbringing, exposure, education, etc. I am not defending shooters, I am very anti-gun, but I think people are trying to always hold people accountable rather than look at the bigger picture. I don’t have a lot of solutions, but I think the film is so great at portraying so many points about school violence.

If you keep watching the video to the credits, the third song that plays is “I Don’t Like Monday’s” by the Boomtown Rats. The song was a response to a shooting that a teenage girl enacted.

• “I Don’t Like Mondays” was a UK number one single for four weeks in July 1979. Written by Bob Geldof and performed by The Boomtown Rats, it was the band’s second number one single.Geldof wrote the song after reading a telex report on the shooting spree of 16-year-old Brenda Ann Spencer, who fired at children playing in a school playground across the street from her home in San Diego, California. She killed two adults and injured eight children and one police officer. Spencer showed no remorse for her crime, and her explanation for her actions was “I don’t like Mondays.” The song was first performed less than a month later at the Fox Theatre, San Diego. ^(Wikipedia)
  

I think it is a great wrap-up to the film.

Home Room is undoubtedly a very sad movie, but also a movie of hope, unlikely friendships, people. etc. The focus on gender was a littled shifted and hidden today, but I wanted to follow up the article on “manly movies” with some of the reprecussions of those types of films as well as offer a film that takes the other side of the court.

One thing I want to break down in this blog is the gendering online. I am going to be entering graduate school in the fall, and I think that I am going to do my focus studies and thesis on gender in online communities (that or horror films, not sure yet), but there is so much gendering online, but I have not read a lot or heard a lot about how it happens, how it is different, etc. The internet is a very accessible place to put whatever opinions you want out there (like this blog!). Upon my adventures in the online kingdom I have come across some sites that do the very opposite of this site and try to promote “what it is to be a man”. Periodically, I will pull articles from them to give a different perspective (not to completely belittle their projects, but rather an alternative viewpoint of gender construction). Honestly though, these sites make me feel uncomfortable and really put men in a box of how they are supposed to act.

One of these sites I am referring to is justaguything.com – The site is exactly what it sounds, things guys like. From how to pick up girls at bars to “top 10 best ‘man’ movies”. Sites like this single out gender as if gender is 100% this way or 100% that way. I would venture a guess that not one person fulfills their gender stereotype 100% (even if it is a close 99% for some people).

Some of the features on the site like “how to remove a splinter” seem like basic human knowledge. How does removing a splinter have anything to do with “being a man”. The process is a very simple one, but why allow “only men” to have this knowledge that could be beneficial to any human (children, women, etc.). Now, I know their intention is probably of the comical nature (removing a splinter seems neccissary but also rather trivial), but with these simple how-tos are we not putting up a gate and saying “this information is for men only”. There is a linearity of knowledge that only men are able to obtain.

image courtesy of Images by Biff

That is one type of article that the site features, and I think there is a very disctinct “barrier to entry” based on gender stereotypes, but there are features that are specificially rooted in sustaining gender norms. One of these is “Top 10 Guy Films you (probably) Haven’t Seen”. Now, the title makes sense because we already know the site is a “male clubhouse”, but assuming that ANY film is for a guy or a girl (though I will agree films are made in such a way that appeals to gender stereotypes – but that is a different blog!). The films on the list are all action oriented films that portray men that are very fast paced, muscular, hero, gun-wielding supermen. The number one film on the list is a film called “Limey” and the description reads as :

• This is not your typical revenge type movie. It’s a slow burner, focusing much more on the character Wilson, played by Terence Stamp. Wilson is an English criminal who, fresh out prison, heads to LA to avenge the death of his daughter. A simple but effective story line I’m sure you’ll agree. The look Stamp has on his face in this movie is enough to strike fear into the heart of anyone and his vocabulary is wonderfully English.

It is funny that it is not our typical revenge movie because more often than not men getting out of prison and seeking revenge is not the plot of a film! Oh wait, yes it is! The outward problem of these action films are one that promotes a connection between men and guns. There is much sociological research about the connection between male gendering and guns. School shooters are often quoted saying things like “i felt powerful” and “i showed them”, a real life revenge plot that we often do not see in the film (though I will blog soon about an effective film dealing with school violence!). Now, I want to disclaim that no one is perfect. I watch plenty of horror films which have their own engendering process, but I am also critical of the gendering that I see happening. As bell hooks’ often talks about, people should not tune out culture or media, but rather become enlightened listeners and critically think about what they are being exposed to. I don’t want to make a brash statement, but my guess is that the people who wrote the article (having very clear opinions about what it means to be a man) did not think about it in a critical and socialogical way.

This was more of a general introduction to a broader gendering over the web that I want to get into, and in the future I will pick specific articles and dig deeper, but I think a lot of people are not even aware sites like this exist. I know I wasn’t until just a couple months ago, but it was naive of me I suppose to think that the internet of free opinions did not have this type of material scattered throughout. I will showcase some more sites like this in the future as well because I think there are a lot more sites like that that try to reinforce gender rather than deconstruct it. Another piece of information to consider is that even sites that do not intentionally try to recreate the same gender norms, in fact, are. Sites like AOL do this when you visit their homepage – girls in bikinis that are thin and almost plastic, which does not allow elbow room for people to envision themselves being worthy of “net visibility”. This was more of an introduction, but as time goes on I will dig much deeper into gender on the web!

Comments are much appreciated, this is a very new blog and appreciate any support