WS798: Presentation Comments (part 2)

Rachel dove into the topic of how mental illness, particularly schizophrenia, is portrayed in the media. This often brings up the question of corporate responsibility to accurately portray mental illness. Are producers obligated to accurately portray individuals with mental illness? I honestly don't think movie producers (or screen writers) can get in trouble for this since they don't portray every other person accurately either. But what I thought was interesting was the question of why is the only exposure to mental illness "bad" exposure? Persons with mental illness are most often depicted as hurting someone, raping someone, committing a crime, etc. I think it can be somewhat difficult (to an extent) to know whether mental illness is portrayed accurately if you've never had experience with or prior knowledge of any persons with the illness. I think that is one way that stereotypes develop: an illness is portrayed inaccurately, but because it is in the media and it's the only exposure some people will have, people assume those are the truths for that illness and assume all people who have that illness go through that same experience that was portrayed in the one movie they saw. I think it's important that we take a second look before accepting these portrayals as fact.

Katie's presentation was pretty brief, but I did find the differences between eharmony and compatiblepartners that she mentioned interesting, especially since compatiblepartners is owned by eharmony. While I don't think I would ever use a dating website anyway, I am extremely turned off by eharmony and would not recommend it to anyone I know. In fact, I would probably discourage people from using that site. As Katie mentioned, eharmony only allows for heterosexual users and, since it is religious in nature, does not allow people to select agnostic or atheist as a religious preference. I find it ridiculous and extremely discriminatory that eharmony has one website for people they consider "normal" or acceptable, but then also created a separate website, compatiblepartners, not because they are interested in helping other people to find partners, but because they realize there is a market and they will make more money by hosting this website. On compatiblepartners, same-sex options are available, as are agnostic and atheist options for religious preference, but on this website preferences for marriage and children are not allowed. This is further discrimination from eharmony and its absolutely ludicrous.

One quote that stuck out from David's presentation was "cyberspace highlights the performance of identity", which he exemplifies using the manhunt.net website as evidence. Manhunt is a dating website for gay males. Although it is exaggerated and over-stereotyped, Manhunt shows one way in which gay males perform homosexuality. Other dating websites (mainly heterosexual dating websites) focus on finding a person to have a committed relationship with and promotes marriage and family. Given the pictures found on the website and the questions that were placed in the user profiles, Manhunt essentially focuses mainly on having sex. I don't think I would even consider Manhunt to be a dating website, I would be more apt to call it a website for sexual encounters. Basically the creators of Manhunt are making money off of gay men having sex. I'm not sure if that is what David meant by saying "queer fetish develops has a commodity in these queer dating sites", and maybe there's more to it than that, but that is how I understand the concept of queer fetish as a commodity.

The part of Kelsey's presentation that interested me the most was when she said young boys and girls sometimes think that cyberbullying is somehow "better" than physical bullying because there is no physical harm done. It reminded me of a discussion I had in a class once. The professor asked our class if they thought physical or mental abuse was worse. People had arguments for both sides, but I said that I don't think anyone can judge which form of abuse is worse. I think it depends on each individual situation, but even then no one has the right to judge how bad an experience is for someone. This applies to physical/mental/cyberbullying as well. Kelsey mentioned that she feels cyberbullying can sometimes be more harmful because it goes out on the internet and once it's out there it won't go away. I don't think this is a valid argument to say that cyberbullying is worse than physical or mental bullying because there are ways that all three types of abuse can last a lifetime. People need to understand that no hierarchy exists for abuse or bullying because our world is not that black and white.

Leah's presentation on women in the military in the media was a compelling topic because I had just had a conversation about it in a class earlier that day and I know a few people in different branches of the military. Leah posed the question of whether military women are actually being treated more fairly in real life than in the past and the public only thinks they are being treated poorly because the media portrays them in that way. I don't think this is the case at all. I don't think women are being treated more fairly in the military. Women are constantly blamed for anything that goes wrong, they are harassed and assaulted on a daily basis, and they are treated like they aren't as tough or as dedicated as the men. I know Leah has a strict focus of where she wants her paper to go, but I was a little disappointed when Leah said she wasn't going to look at the way the media portrays sexual assault of women in the military. There might not be a lot of scholarly sources on this topic, but it would be interesting to see what is out there and what is being talked about, if anything is being talked about at all.

I hadn't really given much thought to Kenlyne's topic of cybercheating, but I found it engaging nonetheless. She brought up, as an example, a couple who had been together for seven years and while the girl's facebook was deactivated the guy was having a secret relationship with another girl and posting about it on his facebook. All I could think about was how much it would suck being the last person to know that your boyfriend has another girlfriend and then wondering where things went wrong and questioning the last seven years you spent together. I understand where Kenlyne was coming from when wondering how much one person can really know another, especially when a couple of seven years can fall victim to cybercheating and one partner has no idea anything is wrong. Thinking about your partner in this way (wondering how much you really know them) can sometimes stir up skepticism and mistrust over nothing. I think if two people are in a committed relationship and have never had a reason to distrust each other, they should believe what the other is telling them. And if something questionable pops up on facebook or twitter or whatever, it would probably be best to ask your partner than assume anything is going on otherwise because that can break down the relationship unintentionally and cause unnecessary drama.

WS798: Presentation Comments (part 1)

I found Dana's topic to be really interesting because the concept of using the internet as a replacement for consulting a professional goes far beyond pregnant women using it for medical information. I was intrigued by the thought of other people using the internet as a replacement tool as well. For example, websites can be used as organization tools to plan their own wedding instead of hiring a wedding planner, a resource for legal information instead of consulting a lawyer, or a guide for how to use or troubleshoot a computer instead of calling an IT specialist.

Rebecca's topic made me wonder about how personal preferences can get in the way of the loyalty of doctors to their patients. One of my doctors told me about her personal preference on how she would help me, but also gave me several options and asked what I would like to do. I feel like it could have been so easy for her to just tell me the method she preferred and gave me that medication without presenting me with any options. And I've definitely heard of that kind of thing happening with other people I know. There are debates on many medical topics out there and certain doctors have their own personal preferences with how they would treat a certain illness or steps to take to diagnose a certain disease. I think that doctors should be obligated to present their patients with information on all of their possible options as well as all side effects so that the patient can make the decision that best suits them.

Danielle's topic made me curious about the desensitization to violence that results from people playing violent video games. I'm sure that there are people who would argue that playing a video game does not affect how people act in real life, but I think the opposite. I wouldn't argue that every person who plays grand theft auto will steal a car and run people over with it, but I would argue that the games alters people's attitudes toward certain actions. If people are repeatedly stealing cars, shooting people, beating people up, killing people, raping women, etc., then they are likely to find it more acceptable and not react quite as passionately when this type of violence occurs in real life.

I found Jayne's topic on mistrust, jealousy, and infidelity on facebook to be somewhat psychological. I tend to think that the human brain is capable of tricking people into believing things that aren't necessarily true, such as making up situations that haven't occurred and then believing wholeheartedly that they are the truth. I haven't studied psychology at all, but I did find it interesting to think about the human brain in this way and wondered how people perceive actions differently. Relating to facebook, one person can see a wall comment that says "i had a really fun time last night" to mean several different things, but a jealous significant other might automatically assume that comment means something intimate probably occurred.

Niquesha's topic about homophobia in the Black community, especially in the religious Black community, reminded me of a conversation that happened in one of my classes last semester. Some people wonder, why would a group that is marginalized (the Black community) turn around and hold such a stigma for another marginalized group (the gay community) when they know how it feels to be a minority? This isn't the first time this re-victimization has happened. When white women began to form a radical movement demanding rights for women, they too held stigmas against the Black women that wanted to join the movement. And then there is the gay rights movement. People have always lumped transgender folk in with the gay community (even though gender identity and expression is different than sexual orientation) and when it came time to vote on laws the gay community abandoned our transgender brothers and sisters in hopes to alleviate some of the stigma and obtain rights for the gay community. I see it like this: one group that is marginalized wants to gain a respected place in the community and won't accept being an ally to another marginalized group (especially one that is seen as MORE marginalized) because they don't want to carry any of that stigma. I find it to be complete bullshit that people actually put faith in that logic, but that is what still exists out there today.

Emily chose a topic that brought up a lot of discussion in class: online dating and social inequalities such as racism and homophobia. I happen to think that the internet is a pretty accurate portrayal of what happens in reality. Real life attitudes and behaviors such as relationships, advertising, religion, art, entertainment, shopping, etc., are mirrored onto the internet. I find inequalities and oppression to be no exception. I think it's cool that Emily is going to get specific and focus on inequalities on dating websites because they are used by so many people and some people (usually people who are privileged) don't even notice the discrimination that happens so blatantly on these websites.

I thought Ben's topic was interesting because it is similar to mine, except that she is focusing on transmen and my paper encompasses how people use vlogging on youtube in general. My topic focuses a lot on using youtube as a tool for both self reflection and a sense of community. I think her topic is an interesting compliment to mine, as she delves deeper into the community aspect of youtube and is exploring how transmen use this community to ask for and give each other advice and stay connected for support.

WS798: What is the digital divide?

The digital divide is a relatively new concept, emerging with the invention and widely growing use of the internet. The internet has grown by millions of users in just the past few years and it seems that everyone we know has an account on facebook, myspace, twitter, youtube, flickr, skype, or aol instant messanger. We use the internet for school (research, communication with professors or classmates, submitting assignments, registering for classes, etc), work (background checks, communication with our boss or co-workers, research, marketing tips, world, national, and local news, etc), and personal tasks (communication with friends and family, informal advice, how-to guides, quick recipes, online journals, entertainment, etc). If so many people have access to the internet and it is required for so many personal, educational and professional tasks in life, then what exactly is the digital divide, and who is affected? Put simply, the digital divide separates those people who have access to use the internet and those who do not, and people who have the knowledge required to use the internet from those who do not. Being a part of Western civilization, we assume that everyone has the luxury of using the internet because that is all we know. In fact, there are certain communities, and even whole countries, whose governments ban certain websites--like YouTube--or don't allow people access to the education required to use computers.

What can be done about the digital divide? To address the digital divide, it would take a lot of time and money that probably isn't available. It would be nice if computers could be made available to all children at a young age and incorporated into elementary education to provide knowledge of the technology. I also think all public libraries should provide their communities with access to computers and have staff on hand for troubleshooting. It would be ideal to somehow provide educators and technology to anyone who doesn't currently have access to them. For a lot of people, even if there aren't government restrictions, they have financial restrictions that prevent them from keeping up with the technological hype of our era. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford to go to school, and not everyone can afford to buy a computer. Any solutions that I can think of are strictly ideal and would need a lot of unavailable resources to implement.

I do believe the digital divide to be a civil rights issue to an extent. I would say that civil rights are rights that are guaranteed to us. I suppose it can be argued that access to technology is a right that is guaranteed as long as we have the financial means, but it can also be argued that access to food and shelter is a right that is guaranteed as well, and not all people have that luxury either. Technology has become essential to our survival in our modern world and those of us who aren't afforded the luxury of its use get left behind. This is a huge issue because it prevents people from being able to attain certain jobs, communicate with certain people, complete certain tasks, etc. My aunt, who is currently in her sixties, has recently joined facebook, and has been sending me messages asking how to do what I think are simple tasks on her computer. If we grow up with the internet and are up to date on each new piece of technology, we assume that everyone else has that same knowledge until we are told otherwise. I really had to think twice when my aunt was asking how to upload a picture on facebook, how to use online banking, and whether or not searching on google costs money. These things are like common sense to me, but are completely foreign to someone who is new to the internet. My aunt only recently was afforded the luxury of having a computer in her home, but has not been educated on how to use it. I know how well off she is and seeing her so behind in this new age of technology makes me wonder where the rest of the world really is.

WS798: Revised Research Proposal

Revised Proposal:
After doing a little research and looking through articles, my revised proposal is pretty similar to my original one. In my paper I will define all terms I intend on using including the following list:
vlogging - video blogging, usually personal home videos posted on the internet for others to view on a regular posting schedule.
YouTube - the most popular video sharing website and home to many personal vlog channels and social communities.
symbolic interactionism - the theory that people will perform certain behaviors according to the perceived meanings of those behaviors, and the meanings are formed from social interaction and can be changed through interpretation.
looking-glass self - a tool for self reflection; people see themselves how they perceive others to see them.

I am still writing my paper with the assumption that, although vlogging may have begun as a private way to keep a video diary or track progress on a task, etc, it has evolved into a medium of communication and is currently the means by which many users interact on a daily basis and form personal relationships. Communities develop when a group of people create and view vlogs of interest and engage in discussions based on the vlogging topic. I think it is important to extract and observe the relationship between the vlogger and the viewer.

I also think it is important to survey the outcomes of vlogging--whether it weakens our already existing community (face-to-face interactions), enhances community (by creating space for online interactions and communities), or transforms the nature of community (a new definition incorporating online interaction with face-to-face interaction). I personally hypothesize that our world is always evolving and we must learn to adapt to new social situations; as technology becomes an integral part of social relationships, human social interactions and social communities will evolve to incorporate technology.

I realize that this topic may still be a bit broad and I am looking into making it more specific to one community, but this is just a general overview of what the specific topic will cover.


Annotated Bibliography:
Bell, Vaughan. "Online Information, Extreme Communities and Internet Therapy: Is the Internet Good for Our Mental Health?" Journal of Mental Health 16.4 (2007): 445-57. Print.

Bell's article is mostly focused on how the internet affects our mental health in general, but does go into specifics in certain sections. The section regarding internet therapy especially relates to my paper. Bell questions whether the internet can be used as a form of therapy for some users, especially those who may be dealing with extenuating circumstances. Bell introduces "extreme communities", which are used as support networks for people with a multitude of disorders. Extreme communities mentioned by Bell include pro-anorexia, pro-suicide, pro-amputation and likely-psychotic groups. Bell concludes that these communities are effective in helping some people and it may even be beneficial for mental health professionals to actually create online groups as a form of treatment and to provide additional resources to their patients.

Lange, Patricia G. Fostering Friendship Through Video Production: How Youth Use YouTube to Enrich Local Interaction. Proc. of International Communication Association Conference, San Francisco, California. 2007. Print.

Lange discusses the current debate of whether avid internet use weakens community, enhances community, or changes the nature of community. She states that while social networking sites, such as YouTube, connect people on a global level, they are also used to foster local relationships between users. Lange also argues that this form of media can be used to facilitate new social ties or enhance existing ties between people of one local area. Other scholars have argued that relationships that are created over the internet lack emotional cues and, therefore, create an inappropriate atmosphere for emotional exchanges. Vlogging, however, consists of personal videos created by vloggers, which allow for certain visual emotional cues to be disseminated. Lange also states that it is important not to ignore key social particulars that are crucial to understanding how interaction functions in specific contexts.

Lange, Patricia G. "Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube." Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13.1 (2008): 361-80. Print.

Lange pays particular attention to how YouTube users form social networks by creating and allowing access to their personal videos. Lange also studies the social relationships that are created among youth by sharing their videos online. As the title of the article suggests, public versus private content is brought into question. Lange describes "publicly private" behavior as "video makers' identities were revealed, but content was relatively private because it was not widely accessed" (Lange, 361), and describes "privately public" behavior as "sharing widely accessible content with many viewers, while limiting access to detailed information about video producers' identities" (Lange, 361). Lange suggests that membership in different social networks is determined by what content is made publicly private, or privately public.

Nardi, Bonnie A., Diane J. Schiano, and Michelle Gumbrecht. "Blogging as Social Activity, Or, Would You Let 900 Million People Read Your Diary?" (2004). Print.

The Nardi, Schiano, and Gumbrecht article reports the results of their study focusing on individual or small group-run blogs with limited audiences. They discuss different motivations for blogging, including in response to requests from their friends, as well as the relationship between the blogger and their audience. Some people leave comments on their friends' blogs and others post their response as a new entry in their own blog. This article is interesting in that the blogger-audience relationship is recognized and analyzed thoroughly. Nardi et al look at whether bloggers reply to comments, how long conversations can go on in the comments, whether the commenting on blogs is reciprocated, as well as who is "following" anothers blog. Nardi et al don't directly address vlogging (which is the focus of my paper), but they speak particularly on blogging. I am using information from this article to provide evidence of the benefits of online communities and relationships that can develop from posting a "diary" online--whether it is in video or text form.

Wesch, Michael. YouTube and You: Experiences of Self-Awareness in the Context Collapse of the Recording Webcam. Hampton Press, Inc., 2009. 19-34. Print.

Wesch's article most directly related to the original idea that I had for my paper. He explores how people use YouTube to experience both self-awareness and self-reflection. Wesch's article directly mentions vlogs (accounts of user's personal lives, short for video logs) and different outcomes or goals when users create, view, and respond to them. Wesch proposes that this process uses a symbolic interactionist framework, as it is globally connected and allows people to share their moments of self-reflection with others, creating community. The premise of the theory is that people will perform certain behaviors depending on the perceived meanings of those behaviors, and the meanings are formed from social interaction and can be changed through interpretation.

WS798: Alexis Pauline Gumbs: "We Are Not Machines!"

After leaving the event with Alexis, I found myself repeating her words, "We are not machines." The event really made me think about how sometimes (perhaps subconsciously) people think of themselves as a machine in terms of doing our day-to-day jobs, or as one part of a machine in terms of our purpose in the greater society. People get so wrapped up in power and capitalism that we begin to only see ourselves as having a purpose in completing an overall task. For example, the women in my sorority can be seen as each holding specific chair positions that are essential to the overall success of the sorority and if one woman is not doing her job, the rest of the sorority will suffer. This trivializes the raw beauty and natural essence that each woman possesses individually. People no longer see themselves as a strong body, energized and ready to play. We think of ourselves and one another as part of a mechanical whole, with only one task to complete.

Another concept that Alexis pushed was "information overload." From what I understand (and this might be a bit off), information overload refers to people being bombarded with information that may be conflicting or repetitive, but received from all around nonetheless. By receiving too much information it is difficult for people to make sense of it and understand it, and therefore not being able to provide an adequate response or make decisions. Making use of the internet, it is very easy to experience information overload, and that is exactly what new users are experiencing, whether it be youth or middle-aged folk who are being introduced to the internet for the first time.

I found it extremely refreshing to hear Alexis' point of view on this topic. She wasn't necessarily a guest speaker for our class, but I somehow felt she was speaking directly to our class because of the content in her presentation, and I felt it to be overwhelmingly related to the subject matter that we've been discussing throughout the semester.

WS798: Blog Holiday!

This week I'll be taking my blog holiday! :)

WS798: Research Paper Proposal

In the past couple of months I have familiarized myself with vlogging and have been very interested in watching other people's vlogs. Vlogging refers to video blogging, that is, videos posted by an individual to a blog with regular entries. To date, the most popular video sharing website is YouTube, the home of millions of user vlogs. People who vlog keep a sort of online diary over a certain period of time and they vlog for the purpose of initiating dialogue between them and their viewers, via the comment tool. People vlog about a multitude of topics, usually whatever is happening in their life at the time of the post, good and bad. Some vlogging gets very personal and people share what is closest to their hearts, including gender identity disorders, a list of what they've done that day, this week's crush, discrimination they've experienced recently, an update on any changes in their personal relationships, any recent news they've received, a new job they've gotten, they're current playlists, etc. After these video diaries are recorded they are posted into cyberspace, where millions of YouTube users can watch it and potentially leave their comments, questions, advice, etc. Taking advantage of these feature, YouTube users often use vlogging as a form of self-therapy.

I'm going to observe how YouTube reinforces the “looking glass self” and serves as a tool for self-reflection. Unlike on ChatRoulette, people can choose what content their viewers see because it is recorded before it is uploaded and users can view it before submitting it to their vlogs. By watching their videos beforehand, they can see how their viewers are going to see them, thus determining what content they're going to allow their viewers to see. Vlogs are self-produced and self-distributed, defining the “looking glass self”—people see themselves based on how others see them and respond to them. These people enter cyberspace because they're feeling a disconnect with the “real life” people in their lives. They use YouTube as an attempt to connect with other people and form a community—an ultimate attempt to reconnect with humanity. I'll also touch on how people tend to express human values in their vlogs that are not necessarily prevalent in society. Other areas I am considering looking at include how vlogging has changed ideas of community, how vlogging has changed social interaction and integration, and how vlogging helps shape identity.

University of New Hampshire Students Shred Porn

I was at this demonstration shredding some magazines myself and I am in this video clip, but I bet you can't find me!


"Leaders of the student organization Womyn's Club organized the event which originally intended to burn the magazines, but weather forced them to resort to shredding. The group is looking to raise awareness about pornography by giving people an opportunity to destroy any piece of literature that relates to or portrays sexual domination, misogyny or racism."
-FOX 25 / MyFoxBoston.com

WS798: Blog Audit.

This week is a blog audit and I attempted to re-read all of my past blog entries and notice what topics I choose to write on and how I choose to analyze them. Interestingly, I did find several themes that I didn't expect and are good to keep in mind when writing future blog entries.

First, I want to comment on the tone of my posts. I noticed that some of my posts actually sound a bit hostile without meaning for them to be. I guess it depends on how a person reads the post, but I noticed this tone in entries such as “I hate the patriarchy”, “Individuality or Conformity?”, “AVATAR: A Movie About the Na'vi Clan, starring a human”, and “Multiple Identities = Multiple Oppressions: A Response to 'It Gets Better'”. I also notice that in a few of my posts I aim my whole argument around disproving another person's argument (“Human evolution has gone digital. What's next?”, “Individuality or Conformity?”, and “Multiple Identities = Multiple Oppressions: A Response to 'It Gets Better'”).

I find myself questioning a lot of things instead of taking everything I see, hear, and learn as fact. I recently watched a documentary about a sociological study involving two people where one asked questions to the other and for every wrong answer they would press a button that sent an increasing voltage of electrical shock into the other person's body. There was a researcher in the room observing and recording the situation and facilitating when needed. The object was to see how high people would increase the voltage and shock another other person while they were screaming in pain, just because there was a person in a white lab coat telling them to. At the end of the experiment the researcher revealed that there was actually no electrical shock being transmitted, the screams were fake, and they were debriefed on the experiment. It turns out that over 50% of the people that participated in the study continued until the voltage was increased to a fatal level—450 volts—even when the other person stopped responding. I think these findings parallel people's actions in the real world. It is all too common that people go along with what the government, media, politicians, authoritative figures, or anyone in a power position tells them. They go along with the accepted rules and norms of the community—and don't question what they're doing. Questioning what was given to me was one duty I think I did well in my blog entries (i.e. instead of accepting that technology is making people dumber I questioned why technology is necessary in our society, instead of accepting that there is no policy limiting or restricting the use of pornography in public libraries I questioned why consuming pornography is an acceptable practice in our culture, instead of accepting Dan Savage's “It Gets Better” campaign I took a step back to question who honestly benefits from this campaign, etc).

I see that my posts are becoming increasingly feministic as the semester goes on. For example, my first post held only an argument about technology and my second post only held an argument about sustainability, and I did not tie in much of what I've learned from women's studies. Especially beginning with “I hate the patriarchy”, I noticed my analyses coming from the feminist lens that I was talking about in one of my first introduction posts for this blog. I largely attribute this to the fact that I'm learning valuable information from the readings in my two Women's Studies classes, as well as from the conversations that I have at work in the Women's Studies office. My original goal for this blog was to really open up to see the world through a feminist lens and reflect that in the analyses that I write in my blog posts. It's comforting that I am starting to see that show up and it makes me excited to write future blog posts.

I did recognize that “Individuality or Conformity?” was, in my opinion, the worst post that I have written to date. I didn't take the time to write an introduction or even conclude the post in an interesting way. My ideas were all over the place and not organized or developed well at all. That is the type of blogging that I want to stay away from and is probably the one post that I wrote that I don't feel is worth revisiting (unless it is to completely revise the post).

I also realized that I don't have many comments on my blog. I have one from a person in our class and the other is anonymous so I'm not sure... Part of our grade is commenting on our classmates' blogs so I can't help but wonder why I only have one comment. I'm guessing it's either because I don't write anything of substance and nothing is worth commenting on, or because my posts are too lengthy for my classmates to want to read and write a thoughtful comment on. Not to be conceited, but unfortunately, I'm thinking it's the latter. I would really like feedback on my blog in some form, because for all I know I could be rambling aimlessly and not making any sense to anyone but myself.

From my posts, I can't tell if I didn't go into the depth of analysis that I should have, or if I just have new opinions from newly gained knowledge when re-reading them now. Because although some of my posts are a little lengthy, there is still more analysis that I wish I could have included. There haven't been many comments on my posts but I also realize now that my posts could use a little more clarification. I think sometimes I get so into my argument and after I think I've proven my point, I just submit the post without re-reading it. This kind of blogging is pretty new to me and I think it would be a more useful tool if I really thought about what I want to communicate to my audience. Re-reading, revising, and clarifying points would definitely help (especially with the few spelling mistakes that I found!).

However, I do like that I get my opinions across and still leave room for audience interpretation—at least I hope that is how my posts come across to others. It is difficult reading and taking apart my own blog entries because I know what I was thinking when I wrote them and it's hard to be objective and read them with different eyes. Overall, I think many of my posts are well written and are worth revisiting. I think it is easy to see that I do not just write entries to get credit for blogging in the class, but also to really take the time to analyze the information I am learning, ask questions about it, and apply it to real life situations and my own experiences.

WS798: Multiple Identities = Multiple Oppressions: A Response to 'It Gets Better'

Dan Savage started a campaign called "It Gets Better" to reach out to LGBT youth who are struggling with bullying and he attempts to let them know that despite the hard times they may be going through now, to stick it out because in the future, their lives are sure to get better. Joelle Ryan responds to his campaign in her blog by making several important points. She blatantly disagrees with Dan Savage and offers several examples from her own life where she states that she faces transphobia, fatphobia, and classism everyday and it certainly has not gotten any better for her. Joelle even goes so far as to say, "Telling vulnerable queer and trans teens that it gets better when it doesn't is incredibly cruel and heartless" (Ryan, 2010).

I think it is important to bring up these intersectionalities of social identities, especially if it results in multiple oppressions for a single person. This is something that Dan Savage cannot relate to, as he is a white, gay man and really only speaks about the hard times he has had regarding his gay identity. He doesn't face racial, classist, or sexist discrimination on a daily basis and, for some people, their multiple oppressions are what put them over the edge. Several times, Joelle mentions that LGBT youth need to be told the truth about the patriarchal world they're about to grow up in, instead of sideswiping them with the fallacious notion that their future will be better and brighter if they just wait around for it long enough. The truth is, not all children can look forward to a rosy future with promises of health, prosperity, acceptance, and happiness. Dan Savage's story is just one experience and there is no way he can speak for all gay youth in America. I am not a pessimistic person, I am honest and rational, and would rather speak a realistic truth than an idealistic lie.

Even for those people who do decide to live in the "it gets better" mentality, what about the present, the here and now? Some people are literally dying out there and can't just sit around and wait for their lives to get better. Children are ostracized, bullied, mocked, beaten, and abused everyday and they need help now. I think a more effective approach is to be active. Dan, if you really want to help the youth of America, educate them, give them resources, give them support, give them truth. Give them anything but false hope. I am in complete agreement with Joelle when she says "I wish more people had been real with me about what was ahead for me in this patriarchal world" (Ryan, 2010). I wish I were better prepared to live in such a hierarchical way of life. Maybe somebody could have explained to me that under the patriarchy, hierarchies exist for every social identity and at least for race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, sex, gender expression, religion, political affiliation, and class, I am close to the bottom rung of the ladder and I should expect members of the dominant identities to step on me as they make their ways to the top. At least then I would have known the only thing that can help me survive is my own strength, because as we know, the bottom rungs of the ladder encounter the most weight.

WS798: AVATAR: A Movie About the Na'vi Clan, starring a human.

•  

As Lisa Nakamura points out in Digitizing Race, "...the massification of the Internet has not damaged the market for traditionally racialized representations of people of color... White people are still depicted as the users that matter in these narratives that are so influential among popular audiences, especially young audiences" (208). This holds true for James Cameron's 2009 science fiction film, Avatar. The movie takes place in 2154 when humans discover a valuable mineral, unobtainium, on Pandora, the home of the Na'vi clan who are non-technological and worship Eywa, a mother goddess. While scientists have created avatars for humans to observe and learn about the Na'vi and the biosphere, the RDA of the military plots to send a former marine to Pandora via an avatar to persuade the Na'vi clan to move away from Hometree, the clan's dwelling, which sits on top of a particularly rich mining site for unobtainium. Obviously, a war ensues between the Na'vi and the military, and guess who saves the day? The White male human--and former marine--who befriended the Na'vi through deceit and manipulation.


Now, let's for a moment imagine that Jake Sully(the ex-marine) hadn't joined the Na'vi clan. How would this movie have ended? Well, presumably the Na'vi clan would have been wiped out or forced to relocate when the military waged war on them, attacking them with tanks, guns, and other advanced weaponry, and leaving the Na'vi to defend themselves with bows and arrows and an apparent defeated response to their home being destroyed. So basically, the only reason that the clan survived and overpowered the military is because they had an alpha male human on their side to tell them what to do. I also must add that even though most of this racism isn't only through human races/ethnicities, it is between species, that the actors and actresses who play the main Na'vi characters (the lead Na'vi female--Neytiri--whom Jake falls in love with, the clan chief, Neytiri's mother, and the Na'vi male that is skeptical of Jake) are all played by Dominican, African American, or Native American people. No White people. And the main human characters (Jake Sully, the head scientist and doctor, and the military men--the colonel, corporal, and private) are all played by White actresses and actors. Now, that's interesting. How stereotypical is it that they cast a Native American man to play the Na'vi chief? And the only main human character who is not White is Trudy, the Hispanic female pilot who turns against the military and steals a helicopter--like a true criminal (which is a typical stereotype of Hispanic people, in case you didn't catch that).

In Avatar, it is clear that the White humans are the superior race and species, as they have the access to all the technology--they have advanced military weaponry and robots and advanced scientific technology to create the avatars and mentally link them to humans. The Na'vi are so obviously depicted as being primitive, non-technological, and sexual. The Na'vi's only weapons are bows and arrows! They of course have to add a sex scene (although not human sex, it is still sex) between Jake in his avatar body and Neytiri, the lead female Na'vi. Even before the actual scene where they have sex, Neytiri is portrayed as being sexy and one can see how she is slowly seducing Jake although it is meant to appear that she does this unintentionally or subconsciously. Right.

Lastly, I want to discuss the title of this post. Avatar is geared towards a variety of audiences, but is clearly meant to be enjoyed by young people, as it is rated PG-13. Most people, but particularly young people may watch Avatar and only see a movie about the Na'vi clan who live on Pandora, deal with their home almost being destroyed by humans, but ultimately surviving and then living happily ever after. I watch Avatar and see a movie about White guilt. It is a movie that is perceptively about the Na'vi clan, but ultimately stars a human (hence, "A Movie about the Na'vi, starring a human"). This movie could have done without having Jake Sully as the hero for the Na'vi and especially being the praised Na'vi clan member like they all owe their entire species' survival to him. James Cameron could have easily had one of the Na'vi be in the lead role and save their own species from obliteration without the help of any humans. But sadly, he would have rather portrayed the guilt that White people have from being superior to other races (and causing them oppression and distress) and casting that into the movie in the form of human guilt of being superior to the Na'vi, which is why Jake Sully switches sides in the end and betrays the military (and ultimately all humans) to help the Na'vi. Oh, and Jake also gets the perks of being allowed to permanently living in the Na'vi clan and having the daughter of the clan's spiritual leader as his mate.

WS798: Individuality or Conformity?

So, check out the picture on page 145 of Lisa Nakamura's Digitizing Race: Visual Culture of the Internet. The picture has the caption: "Beaner Dreamers avatar group portrait". Just looking at this picture stirred up so much conflict and contradiction for me.

This picture is supposed to portray all the ways that people can manipulate their avatars to express their different social identities on the internet, because users are able to change the avatar's clothing, hair color, skin color, add limited piercings and tattoos and add that little baby bump to signify pregnancy--and this is supposed to be a better expression of their individuality than plain text on the internet. Well, news flash for the people creating these avatars: changing your avatar's skin color does not signify race or ethnicity. The choices that avatar programs have are extremely limited--there are about 3 choices of skin tone: very dark brown, medium brown, and pale peach. Maybe a small percentage of people can pick a color that matches their skin tone, but even then what does that tell you about your race or ethnicity? Does that medium brown tone translate to light-skinned African American? Hispanic or Latino? Indian? Egyptian? What color does a person who is of mixed races with Irish and recessive African American genes (they have light skin and red hair) choose? And what the hell is pale peach? There are many different shades that would be needed to actually portray how a person looks, and even then it doesn't actually show specific races or ethnicities.

Next, I noticed they all have the same facial features, body types, hair types, and height. How expressive is that! There are no overweight avatar options, no options for people that don't have big doe eyes or petite noses, no options for girls without curves, or who don't have a D cup bra size. As far as I can see, the only thing that someone can actually learn about another person from looking at their avatar is the person's name that is stamped next to it. By offering such a narrow scope of "customization options," people are actually being told to conform to societal expectations of what women should look like, which is very limited. It is socially acceptable for women to have small waists, curvy hips, perfectly done up hair, blemish-free skin, fashionable clothing, a prominent jaw line, big breasts and an innocent stance--all for an overall feminine appearance. This picture is a giant contradiction in and of itself. People make avatars so they can express their individuality, but they're actually being molded to fit into a narrow socially acceptable box.

WS798: I hate the patriarchy.

Over the summer, a man from Exeter was caught watching child pornography in the Dimond library. Our class has been debating the idea of a policy limiting or restricting the consumption of pornography in public libraries. As a class activity, on Tuesday September 14th, David, Ben and I interviewed six people about this summer's incident and the idea of a policy in public libraries. We asked their opinion on a policy, what they would do if they found someone viewing pornography in the library, and if they had been previously informed of this summer's incident. This is what we found from the six people:

1. Female, second year Grad student in Education:  She had not previously heard about the occurrence from this summer. She believes that there should be restrictions- just as in public schools people should have to log on to the computer to be held accountable for their actions because viewing pornography is not appropriate to do in public. She said if she witnessed someone viewing pornography in the library that she would approach them and let it known that it is not appropriate and then inform a librarian.
2. Male, Senior in Forestry: He had not previously heard of the occurrence from this summer. He does not believe there should be any limits in censoring the consumption of pornography, except in the case of child pornography. He said if he witnessed someone viewing pornography in the library he would find it amusing and just laugh it off.
3. Male, Professor of Philosophy: He had not heard of the occurrence from this summer. He believes in free speech and would frown upon policies that would restrict the consumption of pornography, stating that restrictions don't work well and it would be overprotection. He said if he witnessed someone viewing pornography in the library he wasn't sure what he would do. He may report it to a librarian if it is child pornography but says it is hard to tell what is pornography unless it is very offensive.
4. Female, State Senator (re-running): She had previous knowledge of the event from this summer. She stated that the creation of a policy restricting or limiting the consumption of pornography in public libraries is a slippery slope and doesn't believe in it, but maybe a policy for child pornography.
5. Female, Sophomore in Women's Studies & Social Work: She did not know about the occurrence from this summer. She believes there should be a policy restricting all forms of pornography in any public space. She said if she witnessed someone viewing pornography in the library she would inform a librarian and secretly unplug their computer if she could.
6. Male, 5th year Senior in Mathematics & Philosophy: He did not know of the occurrence from this summer. He does not believe there should be any restrictions or limitations on the consumption of pornography in public libraries, even adult magazines, except in the case of child pornography. He said he would not do anything if he witnessed someone viewing pornography in the library, unless it was child pornography, then he would report it to a librarian.

To sum up this mini-research project, only one person had heard of the event that happened this summer, two people believe there should be restrictions on viewing all pornography in public libraries, five people mentioned some kind of policy restricting consumption of child pornography, one person said they would approach a person seen viewing pornography in the library, two people said they would inform a librarian if they witnessed someone viewing any kind of pornography, four people said they would inform a librarian if they witnessed someone viewing child pornography, one person said they would do nothing at all if they witnessed someone viewing any kind of pornography in the library.

Conclusion & reaction: Just the fact that only one person out of six people (including a grad student and a professor!) had heard about what happened this summer is disheartening, although not hard to believe. I know the student personally who witnessed the man viewing the child pornography and she informed me that everyone involved in the situation--including any students, faculty, and staff--were asked not to talk about the incident to reporters of any kind--including TNH, our university's own newspaper! Now all I can ask is why this should be kept a secret? I think our campus has the right to know that viewing child pornography in the library (or anywhere really) is not okay and you will be arrested. University administration is way too concerned about their appearance and public opinion of the university. Shouldn't the well-being of the students be one of the administration's top priorities? Well, you would think so.

Four of those people do not believe there should be a policy restricting the consumption of pornography in our public library and four people said they would not inform a librarian if they witnessed someone viewing pornography in the library, except in cases of child pornography. Okay, so what if a person walked into the children's section on the fourth floor, opened a laptop and started watching adult pornography with children present in the room? Would someone care then? What if it was your children who were there trying to read? Or your younger brother or sister? People need to start asking questions and reflect on why certain acts or behaviors are considered okay in our society. So many people just give into the patriarchal way of living without ever thinking twice about it because nobody asks questions. The patriarchy tells us that it is okay for women to feel they have no choice but to participate in the production of pornography in order to guarantee they will get a pay check at the end of the day. Then the patriarchy tells us that it is okay for pornography to normalize violence against women and make women of color look like animals and inform us that all women are objects--sex objects--conveniently here for the sole purpose of pleasuring men. Lastly, the patriarchy tells us that is okay for people (as long as you're over 18...) to consume these messages--even in the comfort of your university's public library!

And I just wanted to add that another man was in the library and had seen the man viewing the child pornography. He seemed to have felt uncomfortable so he got up and moved to the other side of the table so he could no longer see the man's computer screen. Then, when questioned by the police whether or not he had seen a man viewing child pornography he denied it! I was taken aback when I heard this because it didn't make any sense to me. The man clearly did not support the consumption of child pornography as it made him uncomfortable enough to move, yet he was reluctant to tell police that he had witnessed the man watching it. I mean, really? Maybe he thought he was going to get in trouble for witnessing it and not doing anything about it, but what about that man he is now trying to let go free? He was doing more harm than good in lying to the police. It turned out that the man from Exeter had a previous charge on him and is a registered sex offender. Maybe if he wasn't caught he'd spend tomorrow on a bench at the public playground watching your children play together in the sand.

WS798: Technology vs. Sustainability

How often are people really sick? I guess it depends on our definition of “sick”. In the introduction of Gender Circuits (pp.29-31), Eve Shapiro makes the point that we, as humans, only acknowledge that we are sick because technology says so, not simply because our bodies say so. Think about it. We have a multitude of new tests and body scans to tell us what is wrong with our bodies and we have plenty of pills, liquid medicine, lotions, and gels to aid us when we are sick. None of which are natural to the human body. Shapiro describes an article written by Donna Haraway, who argues that humans have become cyborgs because of all of the technology we put into our bodies. She talks about many intentional modifications that we make to our bodies, including tattoos, tanning salons, and hair dyes, but what about the unintentional modifications?

Since we first learned that chemicals had the power to kill insects and weeds, we have been spraying them as insecticides and herbicides over farms and gardens to kill the insects and weeds to maximize fresh fruits and vegetables for crop. To make a point, Ester Hernandez's Sun Mad Raisins illustrates a box of Sun Maid Raisins modified to read “Sun Mad Raisins unnaturally grown with insecticides, miticides, herbicides, and fungicides” with the maid portrayed as a skeleton holding the basket. This image symbolizes the harm that we are doing to our bodies by consuming the crop or meat from animals that have been exposed to harmful chemicals. This is a vicious cycle brought on by technology. We have so many ideas for new technology that is supposed to save us time and make our lives easier and more efficient, but it is not at all healthy. What good is having an easy, stress-free life if we're all sick and dying?

Chemicals from the insecticides and herbicides that remain on the food we eat are digested in our bodies. Human bodies today are filled with too many unnatural substances that were never meant to be there, hence Haraway's term “cyborgs”. We are a technology centered society that favors convenience and efficiency over health and sustainability. We cannot sustain ourselves or our earth if we keep producing new technologies that not only create unnatural changes, but that cause harm to us and the environment as well.

 

Eve Shapiro's Gender Circuits
Preview: Gendered Bodies and Identities in a Technological Age
Biomedical Technology as Mediator between Physical and Mental Life (pp.29-31)

WS798: Human evolution has gone digital. What's next?

In his latest book and YouTube video, Mark Bauerlein claims that the current generation of young Americans is the "dumbest generation". Are we the dumbest generation? Or are we just doing what people have been doing for years? I will have to disagree with Bauerlein and say that we are trying to survive in this new world of technology, and we need to learn and keep up with the hype in order to survive. It's the latest form of human evolution and, evidently, survival of the fittest.

There is no doubt that people who are equipped with computer skills entering the competitive job market are going to get hired over people who have yet to face a computer screen. Questions related to computer knowledge are showing up on an increasing number of job applications and sought out on resumes. Some jobs even require specific computer skills that a person must have to be hired or that they be extensively trained on as soon as they are hired. This may mean that the concept of “intelligence” is also changing. While reading classical novels may have been an indication of intelligence in the past, people are now more impressed with skills such as creating websites, maintaining online databases, using basic word processing or record keeping software, and handling new forms of communication. All of this is a result of a new culture forming—cyberculture—and fusing with existing American culture to become the norm for younger generations.

Then people may ask: Will digital communication be the only communication? New generations are becoming addicted to the ever-growing technological hype. Texting, social networking websites, instant messaging, Skype, and yes, blogging have become the norm for communication among youth. Verbal and written communications have been sideswiped by this new wave of technology. While Bauerlein may see these advances as distractions for youth, they are becoming necessary to learn. From a young age if people are effectively taught time management skills, they can learn to get their work done and still be able to learn and play with the new technology. Honestly, can you imagine not using or learning these new forms of technology and still being able to keep up with your friends, family, school and work? I think not. At my age, my friends expect me to write on their Facebook wall when it’s their birthday, they expect me to reply to their text messages within the hour, and they were even surprised that I didn’t have a webcam on my computer up until last year. Most professors require that papers be typed and printed, jobs require that a resume be typed and printed, and when I become a professional photographer I will need Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom skills to enhance my photos!

In the end, I can’t agree with Bauerlein and say that I am growing up as a member of the dumbest generation. I don’t think that being easily distracted detracts from a person’s intelligence—it is how the distraction is handled. With new technology comes new responsibilities and the younger generations need to learn to adapt given the new and advancing resources.

This post was supposed to be a quickie.

So I just wanted to make a quick update and let everyone know who I am and the purpose of this blog.

My name is Dani and I am a 5th year senior at the University of New Hampshire, dual majoring in Sociology and Women's Studies with minors in Justice Studies, Computer and Information Technology, Business Administration and possibly Queer Studies. Now that's a mouthful! During the semester I spend most of my time in class or working. My current courses are Sustainability and Spirituality, Cyberbodies, Family, Sociological Analysis, and Sociological Theory. I work in the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs as well as the Women's Studies Office, both on campus. I also can't live without social contact so I'm currently living in an apartment with four other amazing people, all of which I consider to be my closest friends.

I wanted to create this blog for several reasons.
  (1) It is a required part of one of my courses this semester.
  (2) I believe I am going to learn a lot of valuable information throughout this semester that I will probably analyze and want to record my thoughts about.

It is required for my Cyberbodies course to submit one blog post a week reflecting and analyzing the topics covered for that week, so I will be doing that here! Most posts (if not all) will be for class assignments but just to differentiate, class assignment posts will be denoted as such in the title and a label will be attached (which means from my home page if you scroll to the bottom and click "Cyberbodies" all of my posts for the class will show up).

I am also working on learning and seeing the world through a feminist lens, so I am looking to reflect that in this blog. Some of it may not be perfect, but I am still learning so be easy on me. Any comments are always welcome so feel free to leave them.

Peace & love. Namaste.

How do I wrap my head around this?

This is not my first blog.

It will, however, be my first active blog and probably my first blog in which I post things that are meaningful. By meaningful I mean things that I am interested in expressing my opinions on and things that are relevant to my life. Me, me, me. Isn't that what blogging is all about anyway? It's personal. It's all about me. It's also a bit nerve racking and I hear people go insane from becoming addicted to blogging. I can't imagine having a 'craving' to submit a post. Who knows. Maybe it comes in time?

So for whoever is out there is reading this, that's what you'll get if you continue reading. My interests, my opinions, my view of this intriguing world. Enjoy it while I'm still sane. Or enjoy watching me go insane.

Namaste.