Rat Race II: Racial prejudice in print media.

All of us have received countless letters from a variety of schools with a brochure telling us how incredible the school is, But have you ever taken a moment to look at the front cover? Have you noticed anything a little odd? You may have noticed that the students on the front cover are specifically and strategically placed to trick the reader into believing that they are going to be welcomed into a diverse and open school. However, the sad reality is that you will find that thee students are not what they appear to be.

First of all, the majority of them are white, however there are the strategically placed African American, Asian and Middle Eastern students. Usually among eight Caucasian students there are two or three varied ethnicities. Look for example at the Boston College welcome brochure we received when we first arrived; there are 6 caucasians (4 of which are men) ONE African American and TWO Asian students. This sad display of "diversity" is discouraging and incredibly obvious.

While researching, I found a study done by Eugene Caruso, an assistant professor of behavioral science at Chicago Booth; Emily Balcetis, an assistant professor of psychology at NYU; and Nicole Mead, a postdoctoral fellow at Tilburg University, where students were asked to look at photographs of biracial government people, including Barack Obama, and tell whether they saw that the person was more or less like they themselves. They found that the lighter skinned the candidate, the more students supported him. The researchers said this: (1)"The results from three studies suggest that political partisanship can shape which perceptual depictions of a biracial candidate people see as most representative of who he really is. Our data suggest that people's perceptions of skin tone for both novel and known candidates are systematically related to their stated voting intentions and reported voting behavior, such that both are positively correlated with the extent to which people see lighter skin tone as representative of the candidate. Across the three studies reported here, we found that partisans not only ''darken'' those with whom they disagree, but also ''lighten'' those with whom they agree. Future research should aim to clarify the specific relationship between skin tone perception and voting behavior, to determine whether ''coloring'' a biracial candidate's skin tone plays a causal role in the relationship between political partisanship and voting behavior."

Although sad, the findings accurately portray Americans views of race: you are only valuable if you aren't the minority.

(1) Marc Ambinder, Politics in The Atlantic, Jan 2008, "Lighter skin, More like me".

To read the entire article, visit:http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/11/_reply_reply_to_all.php

Rat Race: Has society changed or are we more racist than ever?

With the election of Barack Obama as President, many have commented that the nation is overcoming its race issues, however there has also been no signs of real progress. We have yet to see a decline in racially charged crimes and just recently a judge in Louisiana refused to marry a biracial couple. Furthermore, Disney just recently created a movie with their first ever African American princess, needless to say the cartoon movie was set in the 1940's, the princess has a southern accent and is surrounded by supporting characters who use poor grammar and slang. With such poor examples of racial diversity like that in the media, can we honestly say that progress is being made in the battle against racial prejudice?

As I contemplated this question myself, I searched on many different networks for shows that incorporate a variety of races without creating the "token black guy" effect. Unfortunately, I could not find one. Some of my favorite shows are Law and Order: SVU, Grey's Anatomy and The Game. Two of which-- Grey's and Law and Order have "token" races; both have one asian character and one black character. The asian characters on both are made to be the most intelligent and the black characters are lighter skinned men who have "made it out of the hood". On the other hand, there is "The Game" which was first aired on the CW but was cancelled because it was unpopular, however when BET picked up the series, ratings went through the roof and the rights to the show were bought by BET. Sadly, the truth is that there are two kinds of shows; one where there are token races, strategically placed in stereotypical roles or the latter, sitcoms that are centered around one race and thus only popularized by that race, such as "Meet the Browns". Below you can see the trailer for the disney movie and judge for yourself if it fits the media's stereotypical roles with race.

Although these racial prejudices are still very much alive in the media, I truly believe that all it takes to fix the problem is to have one giant media source

display and race and human relationships in an accurate and fair light. It may be a ways off, but there is always the hope the intellect and human

understanding will override any media conglomerate looking to make money.

False Advertising I: Consumerism

My blogs this week will be a series of three inputs, all connected, about consumerism and advertising with regards to sexism.

One of the questions we were given the choice to answer/ talk about was the one that stated: "What sorts of societal tensions do current advertisements seek to heal?". I found this question interesting both intrinsically and because of the discussions the class had about cultural branding in relation to societal tensions. However, I would like to see this question from the opposite angle: "What sorts of societal tensions are being ignored and/or exacerbated do to current advertisements?"

Recently, Reebok has come out with a new shoe (The EasyTone) that is said to "lift your butt and tone your legs". Alone, the claim is perfectly acceptable but paired with the advertisement below, it does two unfortunate things-- objectifies women and their bodies and tells them that what they need to look like or what they should look like, are the women in this commercial.

When I first saw this commercial, among the three others that I have seen

regarding the same issue, I was appalled. Firstly, because I cannot believe that

companies are allowed to run such sexual ads that are inappropriate for the majority

of viewing audiences i.e. Teen boys and girls, pre-teens, and children under the age of 12.

Secondly, because I assumed that women would refuse to let their bodies be objectified and

used as ways to make money.

The commercial is so blatantly using women as objects that I first thought it was a joke.

I thought that no woman, thinking clearly and sanely would involve herself in the kind of bigotry

and sexism that this commercial displays. How did we let advertisers get to the point where

they think that this is the kind of advertising we will respond positively too? Unfortunately, they

know that it will be popular because they know that they can brainwash women into believing that

if their butt or legs don't look like the ones they see in these types of advertisements, then there is

something wrong that needs to be corrected. Furthermore, it endorses provocative and unbecoming

behavior: "It will make men speechless and women jealous". As competant human beings we should

be able to say that this is unacceptable but as consumers we are driven by either what we feel we don't

have or don't have enough of. Thus consumerism

Below you will see a different commercial advertising

the same shoe. Again, this is another display of how grossly women's bodies are used to grab attention

and sell merchandise.

By watching that commercial you are staring at a woman's breasts for 25 seconds out

of its total length of 32 seconds. As a consumer, I would never buy a product that endorsed

such blatant disrespect of the female body. However, I also understand that it is a widely accepted

belief that women want to look like the women they see on TV because those women are universally

accepted as "beautiful" or "attractive". Furthermore, it is clear that Reebok understands that by

putting out such an ad, they are encouraging women to do what is natural; create an attractive

look to attract the opposite sex and be out other potential mates, as the narrator says "so 88% of men

will be speechless, 76% of women will be jealous." However, the way in which it is done is distasteful

and disrespectful. We must realize that although consumerism is a large part of our lives, we can control

how these advertisements are delivered, and the message they contain.

Hegemony: The American Dream Wedding

Recently I was watching the movie 27 dresses, starring Catherine Heigl, and, as it was promoted, seemed to be a movie about the conflicting ideas of what a wedding is truly supposed to consist of and what society says it is supposed to consist of.

Although the whole premise of the movie is to breakdown both old and new ideas of marriage and courtship, it still paints a very Disney-like idea of what relationships and marriage are supposed to consist of: The main character is a "damsel in distress" and her "prince" comes to save her (0:29-0:39); The blonde bombshell gets the guy instead of the woman who is a better match(1:13-1:20); and a beautiful wedding means an expensive gown, lots of flowers, and your tall, dark, and handsome, prince charming (entire trailor :)). As you will see in the trailor below, any attempt by this film to pioneer a new idea about love and marriage is replaced by the superficial ideas of our society.

Our class discussion on hegemony about a week ago sparked my interest in the history of marriage and how the ideas of bridal showers, engagement rings, and wedding celebrations came to be.

As I researched engagement rings I found that they dated back to the Medieval Era when Pope Innocent III instituted a required waiting period between the time of engagement and the time of marriage. However, only wealthy nobles could afford precious stones for their rings thus the generally accepted engagement rings were solid metal bands. Though in later times a much greater population could afford precious stones. Because of this change, the partnering of certain stones on a ring were meant to symbolize something greater than wealth and status. For example, an engagement ring would include a Lapis lazuli, Opal, Vermarine, and Emerald, stones whose initials spelled "love". These traditions were practiced all across Europe as well as Germany, Sweden, and Denmark. However, in modern day England and the United States, the most popular engagement ring was/is the diamond solitaire. This idea of engagement rings was largely due to a DeBeers campaign in the 1940's whose slogan was "A diamond is forever". Since then engagement rings are called to be large and expensive to show how much a man "values" his beloved and how deep his commitment is. Today we see stars all over the media getting engaged, toting around boulders on their fingers, and creating a ridiculous interest in exactly how much those diamonds cost. Sadly, that theme has trickled down into mainstream lifestyles and people everywhere have come to believe that the bigger the diamond,the greater the love; Instead of representing a lifelong commitment, and And the things that should represent love the most, like commitment and sacrifice, have been replaced with dollar signs and carat counts.

http://poponthepop.com/images/gallery/khloe-kardashian-engagement-ring.jpg

A diamond may be forever, but the love that it is supposed to represent is not.

curcover (Lamar caught cheating)

Bridal showers began in the late 1890's in place of a woman's dowry. Her closest friends and family would come together and celebrate her marriage by presenting her with gifts of necessity so that she and her new husbands money could be saved and spent on more important needs. Today, however, bridal showers have morphed into bridal extravaganzas whose only purpose is to pamper the bride-to-be even more than she already has been. Although I believe that these age-old traditions have somewhat gotten out of hand, they still serve as fun ways to welcome young and old men and women into the adventure and commitment of marriage.

Mass Media in My Life

The media has always been a large part of my life in terms of entertainment and networking. As someone who grew up during the mid nineties/early millennium, the internet was my first introduction into the exciting world of mass media. I remember making my first AOL email account and receiving updates on all kinds of current events, from politics to the entertainment business. However, as is expected of most pre-teens, politics was very low on my list of things to discover. That lack of interest has been fully nurtured by a society who no longer believes in discretion or privacy; Any opportunity that presented itself to me to learn about the more important things going on in the world, was overshadowed by celebrity gossip that was made to look ten times more entertaining than any breaking news that was reported. Unfortunately, that bias toward gossip, instead of factual information, has created some pretty horrific tendencies. For example, in stead of starting my homework at 7 (as I had planned), I looked up celebrity reactions to the Kanye West VMA disaster. Some might say, because of observation alone, that mass media is very important to me, but I see it as just another vice that has become apart of all the other things I do throughout the day: sleep, eat, workout, check E! news for any celebrity gossip. It doesn't help that the majority of my educational obligations require a computer as I am, for the most part, an internet consumer. Thus because it is so much apart of my everyday routine, I would have to call myself an expert.