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.
Mascots and Offense
Regarding the film “In Whose Honor” about Native American mascots, I was shocked how emotional the main woman was about seeing the Native American mascot at a basketball game. Personally, I think she was being a little overdramatic with her insistence that things that she was taught to respect were being mimicked for entertainment purposes. Yes, it is true that entertainment was the goal, but the intent was not to offend anyone. I think she was so emotional about the whole thing because she is so connected to her heritage and culture. I have a friend that is part Native American and she goes to Florida State University, whose mascot is the Seminoles, and she finds no offense to it whatsoever. The fact that the mascot is the Seminoles was not a deciding factor when applying to the school, or when deciding to attend. But then again, she is not extremely involved in her Native American heritage like the woman from the film was.
I think that really there isn’t a huge reason to change these mascots. But if it is going to prove to be more trouble than it is worth, the school might as well change them. I think that some people will be offended no matter what the mascot is changed to. You can never please everyone. In cases like these, I feel that it is important for those who feel offended to think about the intent of the mascot. If the mascot was chosen to represent an authority figure that commands respect, then shouldn’t people be proud? Because I don’t have an opposition or direct cultural connection to these mascots, I find it hard to understand why this huge controversy exists.
The idea of Native Americans being mimicked and portrayed out of tradition brings up a topic which we discussed earlier in class, Halloween costumes. A few people in class seemed very opposed to dressing up like Native Americans. Personally, I find nothing wrong with this. One of the things I dressed up as this past Halloween was a cowgirl. I ask, am I offending cowboys in the west when I wear this outfit? Will I really offend people if I decide to be a Native American next Halloween? What if, my eight year old sister just loves Pocahontas, a Disney character, and wants to be her for Halloween. Is that just as offensive? What if she decides to be Jasmine, a Disney princess, who is Middle Eastern, will she offend people from the Middle East? If she is Mulan, will she offend the Chinese? Where and how do we decide what is offensive or acceptable? I feel that because everyone finds different things offensive, it is impossible to get rid of all mascots that people find offensive. It is impossible to simply draw the line that defines what you can do that is acceptable and what is offensive. It is going to be different in every case, under every circumstance. No matter what, to some extent, there will be controversy.
I think that really there isn’t a huge reason to change these mascots. But if it is going to prove to be more trouble than it is worth, the school might as well change them. I think that some people will be offended no matter what the mascot is changed to. You can never please everyone. In cases like these, I feel that it is important for those who feel offended to think about the intent of the mascot. If the mascot was chosen to represent an authority figure that commands respect, then shouldn’t people be proud? Because I don’t have an opposition or direct cultural connection to these mascots, I find it hard to understand why this huge controversy exists.
The idea of Native Americans being mimicked and portrayed out of tradition brings up a topic which we discussed earlier in class, Halloween costumes. A few people in class seemed very opposed to dressing up like Native Americans. Personally, I find nothing wrong with this. One of the things I dressed up as this past Halloween was a cowgirl. I ask, am I offending cowboys in the west when I wear this outfit? Will I really offend people if I decide to be a Native American next Halloween? What if, my eight year old sister just loves Pocahontas, a Disney character, and wants to be her for Halloween. Is that just as offensive? What if she decides to be Jasmine, a Disney princess, who is Middle Eastern, will she offend people from the Middle East? If she is Mulan, will she offend the Chinese? Where and how do we decide what is offensive or acceptable? I feel that because everyone finds different things offensive, it is impossible to get rid of all mascots that people find offensive. It is impossible to simply draw the line that defines what you can do that is acceptable and what is offensive. It is going to be different in every case, under every circumstance. No matter what, to some extent, there will be controversy.
Segregated/Integrated Proms
I thought the documentary “Prom Night in Mississippi” was so eye-opening. The main reason I was so shocked by the town divided by race, was because even though I am from a town that is dominantly white, I don’t feel like there are people that are totally anti-black or other minorities like some of the white parents in the video were. In my opinion, the idea of segregated proms, especially still today, is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. The United States has a legal document entitled the Bill of Rights, explaining what rights people are entitled to, and then some white parents think that their white children should not attend a dance with black children. Ridiculous. It is ideas such as these that I truly do not understand.
If anything, the only thing I can even slightly attribute their reasoning to is to having grown up in a past generation. It seems like past generations are definitely a lot less accepting of many things, race especially. I had thought that the majority of people from my generation were very accepting of all races, but the one girl in particular from the documentary that claimed to be threatened by a black girl proved that racist parents still have the ability to instill their same views into their children. If anything, I think this is sad. I feel bad for the girl, since most likely she will always view race in such a way, and she will never get it. She will never get it through her head that all people are equal. Personally, I just cannot fathom not understanding that. Growing up, I never thought I was better than anyone for being white, if I even thought anything at all, it was simply that my skin was not the same color, and that made us look different. End of story. I feel like you have to be extremely selfish to not realize that everyone has thoughts, and feelings, and people are people. Their skin color does not make them any less human.
Pertaining to the interracial couples that attended the integrated prom, I was shocked when the one white girl’s dad said that he hopes that she and her (black) boyfriend go off to different colleges and grow apart. I felt like this was such an incredibly sad thing for a parent to say. No matter what, a parent should want not only what is in the best interest for their child, but also what makes them happy. It is preposterous for her father to think that it is best for them to slowly “grow apart” simply because he does not like the fact that his daughter is dating a black boy. If anything, I would at least like to give him credit for acknowledging that it is a selfish thing for him to say. It is still a wonder how someone realizes they are being racist, but feels no need to change their ways or beliefs. All in all, I am glad that the integrated prom was a success, saddened that a white prom was still held, and I hope that the integrated prom is still held at the Mississippi school.
If anything, the only thing I can even slightly attribute their reasoning to is to having grown up in a past generation. It seems like past generations are definitely a lot less accepting of many things, race especially. I had thought that the majority of people from my generation were very accepting of all races, but the one girl in particular from the documentary that claimed to be threatened by a black girl proved that racist parents still have the ability to instill their same views into their children. If anything, I think this is sad. I feel bad for the girl, since most likely she will always view race in such a way, and she will never get it. She will never get it through her head that all people are equal. Personally, I just cannot fathom not understanding that. Growing up, I never thought I was better than anyone for being white, if I even thought anything at all, it was simply that my skin was not the same color, and that made us look different. End of story. I feel like you have to be extremely selfish to not realize that everyone has thoughts, and feelings, and people are people. Their skin color does not make them any less human.
Pertaining to the interracial couples that attended the integrated prom, I was shocked when the one white girl’s dad said that he hopes that she and her (black) boyfriend go off to different colleges and grow apart. I felt like this was such an incredibly sad thing for a parent to say. No matter what, a parent should want not only what is in the best interest for their child, but also what makes them happy. It is preposterous for her father to think that it is best for them to slowly “grow apart” simply because he does not like the fact that his daughter is dating a black boy. If anything, I would at least like to give him credit for acknowledging that it is a selfish thing for him to say. It is still a wonder how someone realizes they are being racist, but feels no need to change their ways or beliefs. All in all, I am glad that the integrated prom was a success, saddened that a white prom was still held, and I hope that the integrated prom is still held at the Mississippi school.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Derogatory Terms
In response to the question, “Do you think women should be offended by words like “bitch and ho,” I would say yes, women SHOULD be offended by these derogatory terms. However, if you were to ask me “ARE women offended by words like “bitch and ho,” I would say no, they are not. At least in my generation, in the culture I have been brought up in, these words mean little, if anything. Yes, people go, “Oh, she is such a bitch; she did such and such…” But at the same time, girls will say things like, “Bitch, we need to go shopping this weekend. Text me.” It is like one of those words that loses its meaning over time. If someone from my mom’s generation were to be called a bitch or ho, I think it would mean a lot more, because that generation still associates those terms with the bad meaning they are really supposed to have. Differences between generations and their views on things really are shocking.
I feel that derogatory words such as bitch and ho are similar to someone saying, “That’s gay” or “That’s retarded.” Because these words have been so overused, and used out of context, the meaning does not mean what it used to mean once upon a time. I think that a lot of my generation uses vocabulary that older generations find offensive, and this is because they still connect a meaning with these terms. In my generation, these terms do not mean what they used to, so we tend to not get offended as would be expected.
The majority of my friends do use the words bitch and ho, sometimes in a mean way, sometimes in a nice way. It sounds funny to call someone a bitch or ho “in a nice way,” but the terms can almost be used to address other girls today. When you think about it like that, it is almost like a man calling a woman “his bitch.” This kind of situation brings up the concept of female objectification. The idea that women are eye-candy, and worthless, simply sex objects definitely has a connection with these derogatory terms. Until you think of it like that, it doesn’t seem like a big deal at all, but when a man seems to own a woman like that, it seems like there is a problem.
Then again, if I think about relationships and the whole boyfriend girlfriend thing, I think that people kind of put a label on their partner. A man may introduce his girlfriend to his friends and say, “This is MY girlfriend so and so…” and a woman would probably introduce her boyfriend the same way. It is just strange to think how when referring to relationships, it is almost in a possessive sense, as in someone belonging to someone else. When I think of it like that, I think that it is the girl that belongs to the guy, she is his. That is where “his bitch” comes into play. Even though society may view the words bitch and ho, as well as other derogatory terms, in this sense, I think that these terms should be considered offensive. Even though their meaning may not be as strong as it once was, the words still have that underlying meaning.
I feel that derogatory words such as bitch and ho are similar to someone saying, “That’s gay” or “That’s retarded.” Because these words have been so overused, and used out of context, the meaning does not mean what it used to mean once upon a time. I think that a lot of my generation uses vocabulary that older generations find offensive, and this is because they still connect a meaning with these terms. In my generation, these terms do not mean what they used to, so we tend to not get offended as would be expected.
The majority of my friends do use the words bitch and ho, sometimes in a mean way, sometimes in a nice way. It sounds funny to call someone a bitch or ho “in a nice way,” but the terms can almost be used to address other girls today. When you think about it like that, it is almost like a man calling a woman “his bitch.” This kind of situation brings up the concept of female objectification. The idea that women are eye-candy, and worthless, simply sex objects definitely has a connection with these derogatory terms. Until you think of it like that, it doesn’t seem like a big deal at all, but when a man seems to own a woman like that, it seems like there is a problem.
Then again, if I think about relationships and the whole boyfriend girlfriend thing, I think that people kind of put a label on their partner. A man may introduce his girlfriend to his friends and say, “This is MY girlfriend so and so…” and a woman would probably introduce her boyfriend the same way. It is just strange to think how when referring to relationships, it is almost in a possessive sense, as in someone belonging to someone else. When I think of it like that, I think that it is the girl that belongs to the guy, she is his. That is where “his bitch” comes into play. Even though society may view the words bitch and ho, as well as other derogatory terms, in this sense, I think that these terms should be considered offensive. Even though their meaning may not be as strong as it once was, the words still have that underlying meaning.
Hip-Hop and Rap
I thought that the film “Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes” was very eye opening. I am from the Milwaukee suburbs, I went to an almost all white school, and the majority of people my age definitely listened to music stations like 103.7 Kiss Fm, basically all hip-hop and rap music. Hearing that 70% of hip-hop listeners are white males came as a slight shock to me. I expected the percentage to be high, but I thought it would have been a little more balanced in comparison to the number of black male hip-hop listeners.
Personally, I really like hip-hop and rap types of music. At school dances, that is what we always listened to. When I would go to clubs in Milwaukee, that is exactly the kind of music that would be playing. I feel like hip-hop and rap is the music of the current generation. However, this definitely does not prove true for my mom’s generation. If we are driving in the car and I turn on hip-hop or rap she immediately changes it. She insists that she “can’t even understand what they are saying, so she is not listening to it.” In contrast, my dad doesn’t mind at all when I play music like that, in fact I think he thinks it is funny, because he often raps along and acts all thug, when in reality, he is a very Italian white guy. Most of all he just likes to give me a good laugh, but it is reassuring that he isn’t so harsh toward what I like to listen to.
When Fat Joe said, “Everybody wants to be hard,” I totally agree. Guys want to seem tough and powerful, not necessarily like a total hard-ass, but definitely cool. I don’t believe that this applies to females too, but I do have a girl friend that lived in Atlanta, Georgia for a few years, and she is white, but she acts pretty “ghetto.” And by ghetto I mean that she acts like she is a total thug, which is often expressed by her vocabulary. I think that living in Atlanta gave her this desire to act in such a manner, and she also wears clothes that are typically advertised toward black women, such as Apple Bottom, Ecko Red, and Baby Phat. By wearing these clothing brands, it is her way of acting ghetto. Back to guys wanting to be “hard,” I think that the tough front commands respect, and every guy wants to be respected, so that is what is so appealing about being “hard.” Giving off a rough and tough persona is like saying, “Don’t mess with me,” and shows a dominating nature.
I think that music made by black artists represents a different culture. Until you actually sit down and listen to the lyrics, or watch the music video, you may not totally understand what they are singing about. Yes, I understand that these lyrics may exaggerate at times or not represent a real life occurrence, but there are definitely rappers that rap about their life, such as Lil’ Wayne. I believe that music can be really eye opening to other cultures and that it gives people a feeling or sense of connection to other people. Music always has a deeper meaning, and it should be enjoyed and shared with others. Even though past generations may not view hip-hop and rap in the same light that my generation does, we can still embrace it.
Personally, I really like hip-hop and rap types of music. At school dances, that is what we always listened to. When I would go to clubs in Milwaukee, that is exactly the kind of music that would be playing. I feel like hip-hop and rap is the music of the current generation. However, this definitely does not prove true for my mom’s generation. If we are driving in the car and I turn on hip-hop or rap she immediately changes it. She insists that she “can’t even understand what they are saying, so she is not listening to it.” In contrast, my dad doesn’t mind at all when I play music like that, in fact I think he thinks it is funny, because he often raps along and acts all thug, when in reality, he is a very Italian white guy. Most of all he just likes to give me a good laugh, but it is reassuring that he isn’t so harsh toward what I like to listen to.
When Fat Joe said, “Everybody wants to be hard,” I totally agree. Guys want to seem tough and powerful, not necessarily like a total hard-ass, but definitely cool. I don’t believe that this applies to females too, but I do have a girl friend that lived in Atlanta, Georgia for a few years, and she is white, but she acts pretty “ghetto.” And by ghetto I mean that she acts like she is a total thug, which is often expressed by her vocabulary. I think that living in Atlanta gave her this desire to act in such a manner, and she also wears clothes that are typically advertised toward black women, such as Apple Bottom, Ecko Red, and Baby Phat. By wearing these clothing brands, it is her way of acting ghetto. Back to guys wanting to be “hard,” I think that the tough front commands respect, and every guy wants to be respected, so that is what is so appealing about being “hard.” Giving off a rough and tough persona is like saying, “Don’t mess with me,” and shows a dominating nature.
I think that music made by black artists represents a different culture. Until you actually sit down and listen to the lyrics, or watch the music video, you may not totally understand what they are singing about. Yes, I understand that these lyrics may exaggerate at times or not represent a real life occurrence, but there are definitely rappers that rap about their life, such as Lil’ Wayne. I believe that music can be really eye opening to other cultures and that it gives people a feeling or sense of connection to other people. Music always has a deeper meaning, and it should be enjoyed and shared with others. Even though past generations may not view hip-hop and rap in the same light that my generation does, we can still embrace it.
Attitudes toward Sexuality
Regarding “Americans Have a Different Attitude,” I thought there were a lot of generalizations about Americans. In particular, I thought the quote from the Filipina immigrant mother referring to sex and going out with men before marriage, “And I don’t like it to happen to my daughters as if they have no values. I don’t like them to grow up that way, like American girls” was almost funny. She generalized an entire country of girls. I understand that her being Catholic affects her beliefs about sex before marriage, but the going out with men before marriage part is absurd. Personally, I don’t understand how a woman can find a man they are going to date or even figure out what kind of man they want to marry unless they date first to see what they want in a relationship. Yes, I agree that many, if not most, “American girls” date and go out with men before marriage, but all American girls do not have sex before marriage. The way she described American girls made it seem like they are awful people for having relationships with the opposite sex before marriage.
The quote from the second generation Filipina daughter, “I found that a lot of the Asian American friends of mine, we don’t date like White girls date. We don’t sleep around like White girls do” was yet another generalization toward “White girls.” Reading this quote almost made me want to laugh, because that is a ridiculous thought, that this entire group of White girls sleeps around. So not true. But I guess that is the way generalizations about certain groups of people work. People form views and opinions about groups of people and assume everyone of that color or place fits into that particular assumption or category.
I was very intrigued by the idea of the “conceptualization of white women as sexually immoral.” The Filipina view of American women lacking morals makes Filipinas seem perfect and always holding strong morals. The difference between these two groups seems to be like a competition about which is better, defined by who has the more valuable morals. I think that the interpretation by others of white women being sexually immoral may have been influenced by the media. I feel that especially in television shows aired on VH1 and MTV where there are too many reality shows to count, many of which feature white girls who live the party life. I am white, and when I see shows such as these, I think little if anything of it. I know that not all white women act in a manner similar to the one portrayed on television. The goal of television is to increase viewers and make money. Television show companies are going to air what makes them money, and if it is a show about girl drama and sex, then that is what people will make their assumptions on.
Overall, I feel that no matter what, everyone is going to form their own opinions about other cultures and ways of life. Until you walk in each and every one of these person’s shoes and see life from their perspective, you won’t truly understand the society in which people have grown up. When society is nonchalant about sexuality, people grow up to feel that way about it, nonchalant. Unless importance is placed on something, society will not show it the same respect that it may deserve.
The quote from the second generation Filipina daughter, “I found that a lot of the Asian American friends of mine, we don’t date like White girls date. We don’t sleep around like White girls do” was yet another generalization toward “White girls.” Reading this quote almost made me want to laugh, because that is a ridiculous thought, that this entire group of White girls sleeps around. So not true. But I guess that is the way generalizations about certain groups of people work. People form views and opinions about groups of people and assume everyone of that color or place fits into that particular assumption or category.
I was very intrigued by the idea of the “conceptualization of white women as sexually immoral.” The Filipina view of American women lacking morals makes Filipinas seem perfect and always holding strong morals. The difference between these two groups seems to be like a competition about which is better, defined by who has the more valuable morals. I think that the interpretation by others of white women being sexually immoral may have been influenced by the media. I feel that especially in television shows aired on VH1 and MTV where there are too many reality shows to count, many of which feature white girls who live the party life. I am white, and when I see shows such as these, I think little if anything of it. I know that not all white women act in a manner similar to the one portrayed on television. The goal of television is to increase viewers and make money. Television show companies are going to air what makes them money, and if it is a show about girl drama and sex, then that is what people will make their assumptions on.
Overall, I feel that no matter what, everyone is going to form their own opinions about other cultures and ways of life. Until you walk in each and every one of these person’s shoes and see life from their perspective, you won’t truly understand the society in which people have grown up. When society is nonchalant about sexuality, people grow up to feel that way about it, nonchalant. Unless importance is placed on something, society will not show it the same respect that it may deserve.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Notes on social movement
I was always skeptical about social movement; of all the moments in recent history, I could not recall one which social movement functioned as a major turning point. I do admit that such view is rather extreme, jumping on conclusion, but it seems so true, but however, I do not completely distrust the idea.
Rather, I see social movement as antinomic, unfruitful mass action, which occur after failures of all the other possible alternatives. In uncultured terms, I interpret social movement as "squirming" of people; metaphorically, it is an act of defeated soldiers holding a castle after numerous retreats from invading enemy. Social movement is a "last resort," a final resistance against social phenomena that threaten well-beings of the society. It may fail, and does so in most cases, but its meanings and importance should not be degraded.
In recent decade, "candle light demonstration" became extremely popular in Korean societies. it is peaceful demonstration marked by candle holding demonstrators, and it has been the most popular form of demonstration in Korea for a decade. I remember reading an news article that estimates more than 30% of university students having an experience of attending candle light demonstration.
At first, the popularity of the demonstration was upheld as an icon of Korean democracy. People really believed in it. For a decade people had protested against numerous national cases. However, when I really think about its effectiveness, I am skeptical of the demonstration. candle light demonstration has been the most popular form of social movement in South Korea, but it had never really successfully altered the decisions of the government. The U.S. had gained what they wanted out of FTA deals, Korean version of patriot act was passed, new media law was enacted, and now four major Korean broadcasting stations are ran by people close to the current president. What had countless demonstrations had accomplished was only letting the government know how strongly people are opposed to the current president.
During the lecture, Angela had lectured about how social movement take in place, but I couldn't grasp on requisites of successful social movement. I know what I seek to find may not exist, and even if such exist, it would be different for different situations. I guess what I really seek to find is more cases of successful social movements besides the one by Cesar Chavez. I might be ignorant for saying such, but I think the growth and evolution of social movements have failed to keep up with today's fast-evolving economy and culture.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Falling in Love with an Image
In the “Yellow Fever” reading by Eng, there were many ideas mentioned that I could identify with. Eng discusses this “Yellow Fever” she had started noticing in older males who seemed really attracted to her. As a teenager, this artificially boosted her confidence but she soon described this attraction as pure “Yellow Fever,” where males who tended to have a thing for Asian females have this perception of what the woman is supposed to act and be like. The males see the non-transcendent physical symbols and assume that the female will fit all the desired qualities they perceive with an Asian female. Although this is appalling, I have noticed similar behavior in my male friends.
First, one of my ex-boyfriends would always introduce me to his friends and family, and shortly after the introduction would insert a comment that I was Polish. His dad’s side of the family was Polish so when he introduced me in this manner to his family I was not too concerned. But unfortunately, the introduction did not stop there. I noticed he would often insert the fact that I was Polish to everyone he introduced me to and it started getting really annoying. I did not think it was appropriate that these strangers have this pre-conceived image of me before they knew my individual personality. When I finally spoke to him about this he was confused on why I was offended. He proceeded to comment that his older brother once dated an older Polish woman and had always advised him to marry a “Polack” because he could be assured he would be taken care of. This comment offended me tremendously because I did not consider myself a “traditional” Polish woman who was only going to clean and cook for their significant other. When I explained to him I had dreams to go to Law School and that I was not going to be whom he thought I was he got very angry that I was accusing him of believing all these stereotypes about Polish women.
Needless to say, our relationship did not pursue for much longer. I still believe he had these stereotypes instilled into his head, however I am no longer so sure it was necessarily his fault. After learning about co-opting and the impact media plays on the beliefs of individuals, I believe that might have had a large contribution to his perception. I know Polish people, women especially, are always perceived by the media as being the typical housewife. When the image of cooking and cleaning is co-opted, it condenses our culture, restricts other real aspects of our culture and ultimately gives a false image.
I often notice similar behavior from my guy friends who perceive certain sorority girls a certain way. Although these perceptions are passed off by word of mouth and rumors, it is still bothersome that they generalize large groups into one stereotype. It’s weird because I did not realize how judgmental I was until this class. I often find myself pre-disposing people I meet to a certain image and I have been trying to be more cautious of it. No one appreciated being identified as a generalization.
First, one of my ex-boyfriends would always introduce me to his friends and family, and shortly after the introduction would insert a comment that I was Polish. His dad’s side of the family was Polish so when he introduced me in this manner to his family I was not too concerned. But unfortunately, the introduction did not stop there. I noticed he would often insert the fact that I was Polish to everyone he introduced me to and it started getting really annoying. I did not think it was appropriate that these strangers have this pre-conceived image of me before they knew my individual personality. When I finally spoke to him about this he was confused on why I was offended. He proceeded to comment that his older brother once dated an older Polish woman and had always advised him to marry a “Polack” because he could be assured he would be taken care of. This comment offended me tremendously because I did not consider myself a “traditional” Polish woman who was only going to clean and cook for their significant other. When I explained to him I had dreams to go to Law School and that I was not going to be whom he thought I was he got very angry that I was accusing him of believing all these stereotypes about Polish women.
Needless to say, our relationship did not pursue for much longer. I still believe he had these stereotypes instilled into his head, however I am no longer so sure it was necessarily his fault. After learning about co-opting and the impact media plays on the beliefs of individuals, I believe that might have had a large contribution to his perception. I know Polish people, women especially, are always perceived by the media as being the typical housewife. When the image of cooking and cleaning is co-opted, it condenses our culture, restricts other real aspects of our culture and ultimately gives a false image.
I often notice similar behavior from my guy friends who perceive certain sorority girls a certain way. Although these perceptions are passed off by word of mouth and rumors, it is still bothersome that they generalize large groups into one stereotype. It’s weird because I did not realize how judgmental I was until this class. I often find myself pre-disposing people I meet to a certain image and I have been trying to be more cautious of it. No one appreciated being identified as a generalization.
The Intent of Entertainment?
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. They are not trying 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.
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. They are not trying 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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)