In one of the “How it Went Down” readings about Sarah Silverman, the ‘guy’, (who was an audience member) says something like, its ok if Sarah makes jokes about the Jewish community, but it is a whole different story when it comes to making jokes about “chinks.” I thought this was a very intriguing comment for many reasons.
First, it shows the double standard that our society tends to apply. Many people in class were discussing how certain jokes are appropriate if an individual of that race/religion says them and not ok if they are about a different race/religion than their own. At first this made sense to me and its like I have always thought this “social norm” without really thinking about it. I can see how someone making fun of their own identity is funny and its typically because the jokes they choose to tell are often less offensive to individuals like themselves. For example, a white person might choose to make fun of the Caucasian race with more accepting comments than if an African American chose to make fun of whites with comments that may be less accepted. Overall, there are certain stereotypes in groups of people that are more or less accepted than others and an individual making jokes of their own group will typically chose to poke fun of the stereotypes that are more accepted.
However, when I thought more about this double standard I realized that it does not really matter whose mouth stereotypes are being made fun of from. Society has a deceiving image of certain stereotypes because they have co-opted them. Often, the same stereotypes are poked fun of while other cultural aspects of a group of people go unheard. By only allowing society to hear certain stereotypes get made fun of, the comedian is almost changing the way a society perceives that certain culture. With this thought, I do not believe that anyone has the right to choose how an entire group of people’s culture is perceived by society. I don’t think it make a difference whether the person is in that group or not, that is not a privilege anyone should have.
So these apposing ideas really confuse me. I see both sides, however, I don’t necessarily feel against comedians who use these comical methods to make people laugh. After our last lecture I have come to the conclusion that I believe it’s about the intent of the person poking fun of the stereotype. This makes sense with my first viewpoint because obviously people who are poking fun of themselves don’t intend to inflict pain or offend anyone from their own race/religion etc. Also, going along with the second viewpoint, most comedians’ sole purpose is to entertain. I do not think they are necessarily trying to co-opt other cultures because while trying to entertain their intent is not to condense cultures, restrict real cultures, or give a false image of a certain culture. With that said, although comedians mean to entertain, it does not mean that they don’t also do those things unintentionally. In a discussion we had in class, I thought someone made a good point when they said an individual going to the Sarah Silverman show should go knowing what to expect, and thus should not take offense to the jokes she makes. However, if a comedian goes to speak on a talk show such as Silverman did at Cannons, people are not there to be accepting towards the jokes she makes. In this case, if the saphire of the joke is not correct people will get offended.
All in all, comedians should stick to entertaining audiences with their stereotypical jokes at their own shows where audiences are expecting it, and they’re to see it. While doing that elsewhere, I think is inappropriate.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Black and White Proms
After we watched the video about divided proms in Mississippi, I was really baffled. That in 2008, we still had separate proms for black and white students. In a society where we are taught to be color blind, and accept people for who they are, I was extremely surprised to see how much these parents fought to keep them separate.
Heather was dating a black boy and neither of their parents accepted it and were not allowed at each others house. Her dad out right stated that he wanted to keep races separate. He tried to take away her phone, forbidding her to see him, etc in order to break it up. He did state however that he would accept it if he was who she really wanted to be with, really? It didn't look that way! His parents were just as unsympathetic from what I saw. It is really a shame that parents cannot look past outward appearances and give these two a chance. Additionally, Heather and her boyfriend drove separately to the prom, probably because they were not allowed at each others houses to go together. She also stated that she had lost friends because she was dating a black boy. Yet, while at the prom- they got the biggest cheer from their peers when walking across the stage together. Their relationship will be tested everyday in a town like Charleston.
Jessica was a little spit fire in that, she told you how it was and that was that. Her parental relationships seemed very dysfunctional which appeared to make her a stronger girl. She was very proud to say that she had black friends, and that color didn't matter to her. She was labeled negatively in her town because of it. As well, she claimed that businesses wouldn't hire her due to the fact that she associated with black people. I have a feeling this is exaggerated, but looking at the town, I am not so sure. Her stepfather even threatened to kill one of her black friends because he was at her house.
I think that it is easy for my generation to say that we grew up color blind, but I was not one of them. The biggest thing that makes people mad in my hometown is that buses of children are being sent to our schools from inner city Milwaukee. The taxes where my parents live are really expensive, and most of that goes toward the school system. My mom lived in a town that tried integration, where some of the inner city kids were sent to the suburbs, and vice versa. My mom was one of the students that was sent to the downtown location and she faced racism every day. She was shoved down the halls by black students and witnessed multiple fights where knives, hair picks, and other weapons were pulled on students. She was all of 100lbs soaking wet and was not able to stand up for herself, and she has a lot of built up anger towards black people because of it. My mom is really mad for the fact that she moved away from that city so that her kids did not have to go through that and they are going to do it in the city she moved to. I think that if that decision is made to integrate my old high school, my parents will move.
However, I keep trying to tell my parents that it is because of white suburbs that integration is happening. When white people move out of cities and take businesses with them, what are left are people who have no resources and no source of income. If businesses were opened up downtown Milwaukee, more jobs would be available which allows for an expendable income for its citizens. As well, these school systems are failing and no one wants to teach for them because of the low wages and sketchy neighborhoods. Yet, one of our elementary schools had flat screen TVs in their cafeteria with announcements and the lunch menu playing. How can you say that his is a necessary purchase for the school? If that money was put into fixing up school systems downtown- there wouldn't be this need to send the inner city kids to the suburbs.
I think that my parents generation is a big set back for many equality changes and hopefully my generation can be the beginning to fixing these problems.
A Class Divided
I thought the “A Class Divided” video was so crazy. I just loved how involved the young, third grade students were. It is so baffling to think that in third grade, children understand when they are being discriminated against. They know that it isn’t right or fair for a person with blue eyes to be better than them, or a person with brown eyes to be better than them. They are probably about eight years old, and they immediately know when they are being treated unfairly. I think this was a great experience for the children and definitely helped them further understand what discrimination is. Most of all, I find it shocking how quickly cooperative, thoughtful children could turn into hateful, vicious, discriminating third graders. The children went along with what the teacher told them, even though it wasn’t right, and even the next day, when the roles were reversed, they still played their part. I think that in this scenario, the teacher can be compared to society. When society sets certain expectations, beliefs, and statuses about or for people, the people feel the need to go along with them, and in this case the people are the children. No matter it is right or wrong, the majority of people abide by what society says.
When society attacks one group of people in a certain way, it requires others to fight back and fight for what is right. Just like with discrimination between races, people have worked hard to prove that all people are equal. The goal is for people to be color blind, or race blind. It is to not see color and just see people. It is reassuring that today, we have gotten to a certain point where most people have equal chances and opportunities that are not affected by their race. I think that it really is possible to not see color. It definitely is a worthwhile goal to strive toward. I think that it is possible for people to acknowledge differences without making judgments, and by doing so the color line will start to blur and not be as distinct as it has been in the past or is still today. Someday, maybe equality for all people really will exist, no matter what their skin color may happen to be.
Skin color, eye color, no matter what feature it may happen to be, really is a silly thing to make a judgment call on or discriminate against. People are people, each with thoughts and feelings, and when people truly realize, that in reality, everyone is so much like them, maybe they will be more accepting. Race is something you are born with. You can’t choose to be a certain color. You have no control over it. There is no reason for the color of your skin to, in any way, shape, or form, dictate any part of your life. Every person has the right to the pursuit of happiness and a wonderful life unaffected by race.
When society attacks one group of people in a certain way, it requires others to fight back and fight for what is right. Just like with discrimination between races, people have worked hard to prove that all people are equal. The goal is for people to be color blind, or race blind. It is to not see color and just see people. It is reassuring that today, we have gotten to a certain point where most people have equal chances and opportunities that are not affected by their race. I think that it really is possible to not see color. It definitely is a worthwhile goal to strive toward. I think that it is possible for people to acknowledge differences without making judgments, and by doing so the color line will start to blur and not be as distinct as it has been in the past or is still today. Someday, maybe equality for all people really will exist, no matter what their skin color may happen to be.
Skin color, eye color, no matter what feature it may happen to be, really is a silly thing to make a judgment call on or discriminate against. People are people, each with thoughts and feelings, and when people truly realize, that in reality, everyone is so much like them, maybe they will be more accepting. Race is something you are born with. You can’t choose to be a certain color. You have no control over it. There is no reason for the color of your skin to, in any way, shape, or form, dictate any part of your life. Every person has the right to the pursuit of happiness and a wonderful life unaffected by race.
The English Language
The United States is one of the few countries that does not have an official language. Even though it does not officially have one, the English language is one of the most frequented languages within the country. Pertaining to whether or not businesses should be allowed to require customers to speak English, I think it really depends on the circumstances. If it is a restaurant where it can be easily communicated what the person would like to order, or a store where the person can simply check out items at the cash register, I think there is no great importance for the customer to be required to speak the English language. However, I feel that employees should speak English if they are going to be associating with customers, because at least in Wisconsin, the majority of people seem to speak English.
As far as dealing with businesses in which employees do speak English, but do so poorly, I think it is very aggravating for the customer. For example, a lot of issues arise with new technologies and devices, and when you call the 1-800 number, most likely, you are talking to someone in another country. At least with computers and cell phones, this seems to be India. Personally, I have a very hard time with accents of other countries, so I get very frustrated, and when a person purchases a product and it ends up having problems, at the very least all they want is to be able to understand what the person on the phone is saying so they can attempt to fix the problem. Language definitely is a barrier between communicating.
Besides in the business world, I think that schools should not be required to provide multi-lingual education. I feel like that is a lot to ask of a school, at least in regions where the majority, if not all students, already speak English. Seeing as though there have been so many budget cuts, specifically in gym, art education, and music education, I don’t understand how any school could be expected to provide a multi-lingual program as well. If they did, I feel like other classes would end up getting cut in addition to those already eliminated, and those classes would probably benefit a lot more students than the multi-lingual program would. I feel that the school could probably provide a family with resources to help their child learn to speak English, but should not be forced into providing a multi-lingual program. If schools were required to provide one, I think a lot of tax payers would be very upset, because most likely, a lot of their children would not even benefit from the program, yet here they are paying higher taxes toward their child’s education when gym, art, and music are being cut.
In school, children often have the opportunity to learn Spanish, French, and sometimes German and Japanese. I think that if young students can be open to learning another language, can’t people who live in the United States be open to learning English as well?
As far as dealing with businesses in which employees do speak English, but do so poorly, I think it is very aggravating for the customer. For example, a lot of issues arise with new technologies and devices, and when you call the 1-800 number, most likely, you are talking to someone in another country. At least with computers and cell phones, this seems to be India. Personally, I have a very hard time with accents of other countries, so I get very frustrated, and when a person purchases a product and it ends up having problems, at the very least all they want is to be able to understand what the person on the phone is saying so they can attempt to fix the problem. Language definitely is a barrier between communicating.
Besides in the business world, I think that schools should not be required to provide multi-lingual education. I feel like that is a lot to ask of a school, at least in regions where the majority, if not all students, already speak English. Seeing as though there have been so many budget cuts, specifically in gym, art education, and music education, I don’t understand how any school could be expected to provide a multi-lingual program as well. If they did, I feel like other classes would end up getting cut in addition to those already eliminated, and those classes would probably benefit a lot more students than the multi-lingual program would. I feel that the school could probably provide a family with resources to help their child learn to speak English, but should not be forced into providing a multi-lingual program. If schools were required to provide one, I think a lot of tax payers would be very upset, because most likely, a lot of their children would not even benefit from the program, yet here they are paying higher taxes toward their child’s education when gym, art, and music are being cut.
In school, children often have the opportunity to learn Spanish, French, and sometimes German and Japanese. I think that if young students can be open to learning another language, can’t people who live in the United States be open to learning English as well?
Income and Wealth
I think that in order to establish a financial base that can be passed on generation to generation, people can start by living within their means and saving money. Although, just because someone is born into a low income family, that does not mean that they do not have opportunities to come into wealth during their lifetime. I think the majority of success stories have a lot to do with people being driven and working hard toward their goals. When someone is determined and puts their mind toward something, they can achieve great things.
I do not agree with Shapiro that our lives are shaped by the wealth of our parents or prior generations. I look back at my dad’s parents, my grandparents, who worked hard in life, but lacked higher education. They were by no means at all wealthy, but my dad went on to college and got a degree, which I believe is a huge factor in wealth. I believe that education is the key to success. Yes, a few famous people have greatly succeeded without higher education, but in reality, education is pertinent to success. He and my mom both worked for a while until my mom had kids, then she stayed home, but the thing is, my parents are big savers. I think saving money plays a huge part in wealth. Sometimes people spend money like it grows on trees. And obviously, it doesn’t. I think there are so many ways that you can create wealth for yourself and your family. You can put money aside each and every month into bank accounts, to save for your children’s college funds and just simply to have money in the bank. When you save money you can own things and have them be yours, not owned by the bank or dependent on a loan that has to be repaid. I think independence of owning things creates pride in what people have. Also, people tend to value things that they have worked hard for.
Besides saving money, I feel that living within one’s means is extremely beneficial to wealth as a whole. My family was never one to go out to eat every night of the week or buy whatever we wanted at the store. Going out to dinner at a restaurant has always been a rare event, since it is very expensive to eat a single meal at a restaurant for six people. When we go to the store, my mom only buys necessities and what is on sale or clearance, and she uses coupons. If she doesn’t need it, she doesn’t buy it. To me, this makes perfect sense. If I want something but I don’t literally need it, I have to buy it with my own money. I feel like when parents instill values in their children about the importance of money, it is evident that they impact their perspective about how crucial saving and living within ones means really is. Along with wealth comes the relief that your family will never go without, and you will always be able to provide for them.
I do not agree with Shapiro that our lives are shaped by the wealth of our parents or prior generations. I look back at my dad’s parents, my grandparents, who worked hard in life, but lacked higher education. They were by no means at all wealthy, but my dad went on to college and got a degree, which I believe is a huge factor in wealth. I believe that education is the key to success. Yes, a few famous people have greatly succeeded without higher education, but in reality, education is pertinent to success. He and my mom both worked for a while until my mom had kids, then she stayed home, but the thing is, my parents are big savers. I think saving money plays a huge part in wealth. Sometimes people spend money like it grows on trees. And obviously, it doesn’t. I think there are so many ways that you can create wealth for yourself and your family. You can put money aside each and every month into bank accounts, to save for your children’s college funds and just simply to have money in the bank. When you save money you can own things and have them be yours, not owned by the bank or dependent on a loan that has to be repaid. I think independence of owning things creates pride in what people have. Also, people tend to value things that they have worked hard for.
Besides saving money, I feel that living within one’s means is extremely beneficial to wealth as a whole. My family was never one to go out to eat every night of the week or buy whatever we wanted at the store. Going out to dinner at a restaurant has always been a rare event, since it is very expensive to eat a single meal at a restaurant for six people. When we go to the store, my mom only buys necessities and what is on sale or clearance, and she uses coupons. If she doesn’t need it, she doesn’t buy it. To me, this makes perfect sense. If I want something but I don’t literally need it, I have to buy it with my own money. I feel like when parents instill values in their children about the importance of money, it is evident that they impact their perspective about how crucial saving and living within ones means really is. Along with wealth comes the relief that your family will never go without, and you will always be able to provide for them.
Gender Roles and Masculinity
I think that in 2010, gender roles are not as clear cut and separate as they used to be years ago. It is no longer the man that always goes to work and makes the money, just as it is no longer the woman that always stays home with the kids and does the cooking and cleaning. In society years ago, those were the expectations. There were female roles, and there were male roles. Today, society is a lot more flexible about what is socially acceptable. Certain roles are no longer specific to gender. A woman can go to work and be the bread winner, and the man can stay home with the kids and take care of the household. It seems to be that there is a lot more emphasis on the male contributing more to the household and upbringing of the children. Involvement of both parents in the family life seems to be more important, yet expectations tend to be fairly equal for both parents. One parent isn’t simply expected to support and take care of the entire family by oneself. In this way gender is no longer as set on specific roles as it was in the past.
In particular, I like the idea of “doing gender,” that gender is not something you are, but rather, it is something that you do. I think this is very true. People can definitely look masculine, but a lot of the time clothing and poise add to that masculinity. The way someone portrays or acts makes them more or less masculine. I think that women are attracted to more masculine men, and for this reason men may seek to appear as masculine as they can in order to attract women. Also, I think men strive to be more masculine than other men in order to seem tough, like they can’t be messed with. Society and the influence from media definitely encourage masculinity.
I also thought it was an interesting concept that there is a difference between masculinity and masculinities. It is very logical that the old way is the one masculinity of the male gender role, the male going to work to make money and support the family. This goes along with the guidelines, norms, and expectations on behavior. The new way of multiple masculinities is intriguing, in that there is a hierarchy of masculinity, with which everyone in society agrees with the hegemonic, or top of the hierarchy, masculinity. This may involve a rich, powerful, and attractive man. I think that a lot of society’s expectations for this masculinity have developed from media. On television, there are shows like “The Bachelor” where there are all of these beautiful girls who are all there to fall in love with this one man who has it all. He is masculine, rich, exciting, and of course has a great personality. The ideal masculine man in society continues to have higher and higher expectations. Really, sometimes the list of all these things that fit the ideal category for a masculine man seem like they are unattainable and only present in dreams or fairy tales.
In particular, I like the idea of “doing gender,” that gender is not something you are, but rather, it is something that you do. I think this is very true. People can definitely look masculine, but a lot of the time clothing and poise add to that masculinity. The way someone portrays or acts makes them more or less masculine. I think that women are attracted to more masculine men, and for this reason men may seek to appear as masculine as they can in order to attract women. Also, I think men strive to be more masculine than other men in order to seem tough, like they can’t be messed with. Society and the influence from media definitely encourage masculinity.
I also thought it was an interesting concept that there is a difference between masculinity and masculinities. It is very logical that the old way is the one masculinity of the male gender role, the male going to work to make money and support the family. This goes along with the guidelines, norms, and expectations on behavior. The new way of multiple masculinities is intriguing, in that there is a hierarchy of masculinity, with which everyone in society agrees with the hegemonic, or top of the hierarchy, masculinity. This may involve a rich, powerful, and attractive man. I think that a lot of society’s expectations for this masculinity have developed from media. On television, there are shows like “The Bachelor” where there are all of these beautiful girls who are all there to fall in love with this one man who has it all. He is masculine, rich, exciting, and of course has a great personality. The ideal masculine man in society continues to have higher and higher expectations. Really, sometimes the list of all these things that fit the ideal category for a masculine man seem like they are unattainable and only present in dreams or fairy tales.
Racist Jokes
After reading the articles “You just don’t get it, Silverman” and “How it went down” I was beyond shocked how this one word, “chink,” could cause so much controversy. The dialogue and conversation in the articles went on and on about whether or not it was an appropriate joke for Silverman to have told, and honestly, at that point, if I were Silverman I would feel like never ever telling another joke again. All of this thanks to one word. I definitely think that part of the reason it was such a huge deal was because Silverman is not Chinese. If she were Chinese I think that the audience and anyone else would not have had such a huge problem wither her saying the word. Because she is white, she does not have the “right” to say that word.
I find this extremely similar to the use of the “N-word.” A long time ago in class, we watched a video clip about a teacher referring to his students in such a fashion, insisting that it was okay because it was not only a different tense of the word, but that it was how all of the students referred to each other. First of all, he shouldn’t have been saying it to students in the first place, but if he weren’t a teacher and if here were black, I don’t think there would have been such great controversy over it. A black person is allowed to say that term, but a white person or any other person of another race does not have the “right” to do so.
It is controversies like these that make me not want to ever say a single word that directly indicates race. Many people get easily offended when it comes to the subject of race, and sometimes I find it best to avoid any mention of race at all.
One thing Silverman said that really made me think was, “Yeah, it is clearly a joke, you know, illuminating racism. It’s not a racist joke. It’s a joke about racism.” First of all, I think that all jokes can be interpreted differently. No matter what the intent, the listener forms their own interpretation, and it is their own personal opinion that decides whether or not they even thought the joke was funny in the first place. Second, I do not quite understand what Silverman means by her use of the words “illuminating racism.” Was she showing that racism is a bad thing? I don’t think so. In her joke she implied that the word “chink” was inappropriate, but yet her quote did not make me learn a lesson about racism. Third, I would like to say that I would like to have her explain the difference between a racist joke and a joke about racism. They may seem like two totally different things to her, but this is because of the way she interprets them. When the public is interpreting her jokes, they form their own beliefs, and don’t always understand the joke the way she sees it. For this reason, I think that people who say racist jokes or “jokes about racism” should be very cautious about what they say about other races.
I find this extremely similar to the use of the “N-word.” A long time ago in class, we watched a video clip about a teacher referring to his students in such a fashion, insisting that it was okay because it was not only a different tense of the word, but that it was how all of the students referred to each other. First of all, he shouldn’t have been saying it to students in the first place, but if he weren’t a teacher and if here were black, I don’t think there would have been such great controversy over it. A black person is allowed to say that term, but a white person or any other person of another race does not have the “right” to do so.
It is controversies like these that make me not want to ever say a single word that directly indicates race. Many people get easily offended when it comes to the subject of race, and sometimes I find it best to avoid any mention of race at all.
One thing Silverman said that really made me think was, “Yeah, it is clearly a joke, you know, illuminating racism. It’s not a racist joke. It’s a joke about racism.” First of all, I think that all jokes can be interpreted differently. No matter what the intent, the listener forms their own interpretation, and it is their own personal opinion that decides whether or not they even thought the joke was funny in the first place. Second, I do not quite understand what Silverman means by her use of the words “illuminating racism.” Was she showing that racism is a bad thing? I don’t think so. In her joke she implied that the word “chink” was inappropriate, but yet her quote did not make me learn a lesson about racism. Third, I would like to say that I would like to have her explain the difference between a racist joke and a joke about racism. They may seem like two totally different things to her, but this is because of the way she interprets them. When the public is interpreting her jokes, they form their own beliefs, and don’t always understand the joke the way she sees it. For this reason, I think that people who say racist jokes or “jokes about racism” should be very cautious about what they say about other races.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)