Blog 10

I have attached a link to one of the commercials for Kotex’s ad campaign Reality Check. I love this commercial and the various other ads that Kotex are using to promote their product. Most commercials for women’s products are so ridiculous and this one in particular is blatant about how the media utilizes women as an irony.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOM4AMV050A&feature=related

I just completed a ten page paper on how women are utilized as tools in advertising. There are seven patterns in which women are depicted in the mass media. 1) artificial appearance 2) dismemberment 3) commoditization 4) the feminine touch 5) relative size and positioning 6) function ranking 7) ritualization and subordination. I have briefly explained each pattern below and being attentive to every detail of what surrounds us in mass media and advertising these images are what dominates our culture.

1) This is the most obvious pattern. Everything fake and airbrushed and Photoshop. Excessive thinness and perfection.

2) Presenting women as fragmented and disconnected body parts detracts from thinking about women as real people with their own intellect, feelings, dreams and desires.

3) Where the female and the product become equivalent where the women become part of the product.

4) Describes this as ritualistic touching and those women’s hands are used to outline objects rather than being depicted in any “utilitarian activity.” 

5) Positioning of bodies displays appropriate social roles for the genders. This depiction images of women are positioned as a symbol of lower statues.

6) Where women are displayed in traditional roles such as caretaker or “supportive, assistant, or decorative accessory role.

7) This is  encountered in advertising such as on the floor, the kiss, woman as child, and withdrawn.

 It is the messages projected from these types of images that culminate into a society of distorted thinking as to what is reality and what is myth. I think it is important that we are educated and aware of these messages since they are so dominated in our culture. There is a great sight on the internet called “About Face” (http://about-face.org/) that advocates by bringing attention to the best and wost messages that the mass media sends on a regular basis. I located the ad below there which I think is a great advertisement for women. Even though the media bombards us with negative messages and engrained in our society a gross misrepresentation of what reality is-there are more ad campaigns that are beginning to surface that are a more positive reflection on women.

Post 9

The newspaper article in our supplemental reading this week “Joe Francis: ‘Baby, give me a kiss’ By Claire Hoffman. (LA Times Staff Writer. August 6, 2006) “The man behind the “Girls Gone Wild” soft-porn empire lets Claire Hoffman into his world, for better or worse.” Pretty sure everyone recalls this article and think as a general consensus the class agreed this Francis guy is vile.

Reading a blog posted on “Say It, Sister” (National Organization for Women) written by Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director titled “Charlie Sheen Circus Shines Spotlight on Sexist Gender Roles” reminded me of this Joe Francis and the many clones of men like he and Sheen that are thick in our culture…especially in the mass media industry. And who can forget Mel Gibson…and the many others that have outright threatened and abused their female mates. The list goes on when it comes to the degrading light in which these sexist guys view women in general. As Bennett writes in her blog these guys thrive on keeping women under their power and use their wealth and fame to do so. Then further insist she remain home to increase that control and power and then turns around and blasts her for being worthless and dependant.

I think the big issue is the system that enables these arrogant men with mere slaps on the wrists. Not only this but their wealth allows them to buy their way out of situations that the average Jane or Joe would be held to strict accountability for through the system. This genuinely exhibits how the structure of wealth and power in our culture operates to maintain control and accommodate one another. Unfortunately as a result this allows the cycle to continue. Right up there in what this type of media behavior contributes to is a very strong message that this is acceptable behavior and these guys such a Francis, Sheen, and Gibson are being observed by many as examples.

This is the link to the blog: (http://www.now.org/news/blogs/index.php/sayit/2011/03/07/charlie-sheen-circus-shines-spotlight-on-sexist-gender-roles) and you can also link to the National Organization for Women website from here and various things that the NOW are involved in as far as advocating for women on a wide array of issues.

Post 8

An  article in USA Today titled”Married women unite! Husbands do less housework” written by Sharon Jayson is about a study conducted as it applies to married couples verses cohabitating couples and the division of housework responsibilities. I found this to be a very interesting study because it revealed that married women worldwide after the institution of marriage overwhelmingly assumed the bulk of the housework. This is in opposition to cohabitating couples where the men tended to do their share on a more balanced scale. It seems like once the couples are married the traditional “ideals” about what a wife  tends to be redefined just by assuming that title. The author of the study explained that this is an important phenomenon to be aware of and states “Even the most untraditional couple will fall into it after marriage, unless they are very conscious of it. They judge themselves against this centuries-old standard of what a wife does, which they didn’t have to do when they were just living together.” For me this was intriguing because this indicates that couples before marriage seem to consider themselves more equal partners then after marriage. The “title” wife seems to take on a different dynamic. Since we discussed the institution of marriage a couple of weeks ago and explored housework in our studies this week this kind of combines the two and explains that there is evidence that after marriage roles do tend to change. Here is the link to the article if you are interested in the findings. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-08-28-housework_N.htm)

Post 7

There were several readings relative to “sex trafficking” in class this week but most of these articles addressed the issue in developing countries. The problem is not exclusive to the barbaric acts of regions far away it is on the increase here in the United States. I have watched several programs on Tv and read numerous articles how this is an increasing issue right here in the United States. All one has to do is browse the sex offender registry to realize that child molesters are rampant in our own culture. I do not think that we realize being accustomed to living in smaller “safer” communities how much of an issue this is becoming on the streets of large cities. Children are being sold and exploited routinely. I was in California a few years back and was astounded at the number of VERY young children that were walking the streets of Hollywood Blvd unattended by any adult. Many of them teens and homeless. These children are prey of this type of activity.

I found an article written  By HUMA KHAN (WASHINGTON, May 5, 2010) for ABC News. (http://abcnews.go.com/US/domestic-sex-trafficking-increasing-united-states/story?id=10557194) It reports on the increasing demand for this type of activity and cites the internet as being a breeding ground for the commercialization of sex trafficking. As I expressed in one of my posts there have been an increasing number of US children who are lured through the internet and trafficked in the US AND Internationally being imported and sold for sex slaves. If you do a search you will find tons of information about this increasing atrocity as it resides in our own back yards.

Post 6

Mine is a basic blog this week because it relates to what we have discussed this chapter and is relative to one question that I ponder on from time to time.

Abortion has always been a heated topic no matter what ones stance is on the issue. One pro-life organization in America is called Operation Rescue. I think everyone should be allowed to have a voice and own a belief system no matter what that may be. One of the striking aspects of the abortion conflict is the violence that is involved. Now one could own the stance that abortion is violence but the manner in which many notorious pro-life organizations approach the debate is none the less violent in many instances. I guess this is what knags at me the most in relation to the debate. Operation Rescue has been known for its aggressive verbal and physical attacks on the staff and clients of clinics nationwide. Actually one of the tactics that is understood throughout the organization is they will go to jail to save a life. There are actually fugitives associated with this organization that are suspect in bombings of clinics and murders of doctors.

Eric Rudolph is on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list for murdering a police officer in the bombing of a medical clinic in Alabama.  Paul Hill is serving a life sentence for the murder of a doctor in Florida. George tiller a late term abortion doctor in Kansas was shot by Scott Roeder while the doctor was attending church. Operation Rescue admitted to supplying personal information to Roeder as the organization is known for making public personal information about not only the doctors but their families’  information. It is just difficult for me to grasp how this and other organizations as such justify using violence to protest violence? I simply can not wrap my mind around that logic.

Post 5

I procrastinated taking this basic English/Writing class required for my General Studies program. I love to write but get the jitters when I am required to write on an academic level and have my writing critiqued! When it was revealed that we were going to write a Literary Analysis on a short story I was petrified. Then the details of the critique was explained by the professor as being an analysis of the short story utilizing either/or Marxist or Feminist theory, I was a tad more optimistic about tackling this assignment. This story illustrates how male authors used women as tools in their writing and it was in a very negative respect.  Fortunately as the result of many things I have learned in this class I was able to make some educated observations.

The short story is Faulkner’s “Barn Burning” and I am not sure if anyone has ever read that story or not, but is depicts in a huge way how women were marginalized. The author certainly expresses this in numerous forms throughout the story. The entire story revolves around a system of inequality and privilege that involves power. It expresses the epitomes of oppression as the product of the ruling class retaining control and a culture of a type of interconnectedness that support to maintain one another. There is definitely sexism, classism, and racism that all are applicable to feminist theory. Here is a link to the story if you are not familiar (http://www.rajuabju.com/literature/barnburning.htm).

The women are basically powerless because their role was restricted to domestic duties and they were socialized to this being their position. Their position in this instance were reduced to and shaped by the system of male dominance and because there were very distinct gender roles at this time this was and their thoughts were framed and they seen it as nothing outside the norm. Their lives were confined and shaped by these roles.

On a historical perspective during this time frame society was constructed so that women had no voice and were to be submissive and reverent to the white male. There was a distinct organization of gender difference between male and female. Although the father and his family were the product of the oppression of the white male patriarchy that held the dominate power on the hierarchy of the socio-economic class, the women were oppressed by the organization of white male superiority through gender difference. The women in this story seem to go unnoticed because that was their role.

In any event, I just found this short story was very applicable at every angle in relation to the topics that have been addressed in this class. Just is nice to be able to read this story from the feminist perspective and understand the concepts clearly enough to be able to help me in another class!

Blog 4

http://www.thelocal.se/20232/20090623/

Lydia Parafianowicz (news@thelocal.se). Published: 23 Jun 09.

The above article is about a couple who had a child and has kept the sex of the child a secret.  They have both male and female clothing and the child is allowed to select the attire accordingly. One day it could be a boy’s outfit the next a girl’s. But the true gender is hidden and has not been revealed except to a select few who change the diapers.

The parents stated that they have done this because of the labels and stigmas that are attached to gender identity. They think in doing this that they are protecting their child from the onset of being placed in a gender mold. They believe that as long as they do not reveal the sex that the ideas of how people should be treated male or female will be avoided.

I kind of had mixed feelings about this because I think you can have a male or female child without projecting them as a pink or blue child. Whatever sex the child feels comfortable with is what it seems the parents would want to support. This instance it seems like it would be more confusing to the child because it is not the child who is expressing what is “between the ears”

I just wanted to throw another scenario out there in relation to gender and identity and get some input from others as to what their thoughts are to going about choosing a “no” gender for our children? Especially when the child is not expressing their own needs for the parents to respond to.