Final Project: Cultivating Racism

Also, here's a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL8IpO3xoGE&feature=youtu.be

Still Have A Long Way To Go: Boondock Saints Two

Despite the small strides made towards gender equality in the media, there is still a long way to go. A prime example of this can be seen in Special Agent Eunice Bloom of Boondock Saints Two: All Saints Day.

Eunice Bloom was the new FBI agent in charge of investigating the Saints, twin brothers who believe that they are under the orders of God to kill all of the evil people in the world. Eunice is both smart and sexy, though she never sacrifices being smart in order to be feminine or being feminine in order to be smart. She is the leader of a team of three male investigators in charge of the Saints' case.  Eunice often bests the male officers in the investigations, noticing the crucial elements that the others investigators don't.

However, the character of Eunice Bloom has several pitfalls. When things eventually go wrong, the older male officer has to swoop in and save the day because the situation is "bigger than Eunice can handle". Also, Eunice has a very sparse range of emotions. She is either strong, smart, and confident, completely untouchable by any situation or she is the wilting flower, weepy and unable to deal with the big, scary world around her.

Despite the fact that Eunice's presence was a welcomed change to the franchise, the character was often lacking in the field of combating the traditional female stereotypes. If anything, Eunice reaffirmed the dominant ideology more than she disproved them. Though there have been advances in the re-framing of gender in the media, we as a society have a long way to go.

Making Strives: A Study in Sherlock

While reading the articles on Geek Culture, I found that not enough attention was given to the more progressive depictions of women in media. Despite the truth that these depictions are often few and far between, I think that it is important to at least acknowledge them. For this task, I have chosen to examine BBC's Sherlock.

Contrary to the article that touted females as having only one dimension, the females of Sherlock excel in their multidimensional portrayals. The first example is Irene Adler. Irene is a villain who matches wits with Sherlock Holmes clear to the end of her episode. She is both smart and sexy, using her attractiveness and skills to get when she wants. She, unlike most female characters, is also incredibly dynamic. She is allowed to be ruthless, vain, creative, controlling, and is able to show her vulnerability only to strike back with the same ferociousness. Irene is far from the traditional female portrayal.

Second is Molly Hooper, the mortician at the Saint Bartholomew's Hospital that often interacts with Sherlock and Dr. Watson. Molly is quirky and sweet, swooning over the emotionless Sherlock. However, Molly has a backbone that rivals that of the main male characters. She is fiercely loyal, standing up for herself, what she believes, and those she cares about, not in a dominating, "male" way, but in her own means of support.

Third is Mrs. Hudson, Sherlock and Dr. Watson's landlady. Mrs. Hudson is the epitome of the sweet, older lady who helps Dr. Watson and Sherlock by bringing them tea and helping out with whatever they need. However, Mrs. Hudson is also as cunning as she is motherly and is the queen of sass with her witty retorts and subtle innuendo.

Finally, there is Kitty Riley, a reporter that approaches Sherlock in order to interview him. Kitty Riley begins as a sweet, naive fan, but quickly transforms into a crafty, story-hungry journalist who will do anything for the next scoop. Her intentions were proved to be somewhat altruistic when she believed she was revealing Sherlock for a fraud.

There are countless other examples of dynamic female characters in Sherlock such as Sergeant Sally Donovan who works for the police force, Soo Lin Yao, the reformed smuggler turned art curator, Shan, the leader of the group of smugglers, and Ella Thompson, Dr. Watson's therapist, that also make appearances throughout the series.

It just goes to show that, those these shows are few and far between, there is hope for gender equality in the media.

The First Superheroes

Our discussion about superheroes has allowed me to delve into the possibility of another subset of heroes that has had an enduring effect on our culture: the American cowboys.

With the exceptions of such texts as Brokeback Mountain, cowboys are often portrayed as the ultimate heroes. They are typically incredibly strong, but simple men with a job to do. They never belong anywhere, roaming from one town to the next. They are incredibly isolated, often alone with nothing but their herd and their horse, looking longingly up at the midnight sky while huddled around a fire for warmth or simply weathering the cold. They have no time for homes or families. The ones who do manage to have a family end up losing them through disease, raids, or other misfortunes. They are forever alone.

These men bury their feelings, often in cheap alcohol and loose women.They only talk about their feelings in one of two scenarios. In the first scenario, they have been injured and are dying, wanting someone to remember them, even if it is by the last words that they speak. In the second scenario, they are pining for a lost love. Other than that, they are tough, cold, and stoic, wandering the earth in search of a new wilderness.

A cowboy is never idle. They always have some evil to face, whether it be greedy bank managers wanting to take away the small patch of land the cowboy has carved out for himself or rustlers trying to steal away the livestock that make up the cowboy's livelihood. A cowboy fights for what is theirs no matter the cost.

Because of the images that the cowboy brings forth, I believe that we should study them with just as much scrutiny as we would other heroes. I believe that these images could have the same effect on a young boy as Batman or Ironman could.

Princess For Life

During the readings and in our class on Wednesday, we discussed the danger of family members and friends referring to a girl as a princess and how such behavior can foster narcissistic tendencies and other nasty side effects in said girl. However, this caused me to wonder how much these behaviors would be escalated in a girl who was branded "princess" for life?

Many individuals value the meanings that names have especially when it comes to naming their children. Some even choose to name said children based more on the name's meaning rather than a liking for the name itself. This can often benefit the child when their name has a "good meaning". A boy named Alexander may consider the meaning of "Defender of the People" as an empowering title while a girl named Andrea may consider the meaning of "Manly" as embarrassing or even insulting.

Now, how would a little girl be affected if the meaning of her name was "Princess". This would literally leave said girl branded as a princess and, unless she changed her name, she would remain a princess, at least in this sense, for the rest of her life.

Though this is a bit of a stretch, it would be interesting to discover whether or not such a permanent label of "princess" would have any adverse effects on the child. Could being labeled a princess from the day a person was born plunge said person into princess culture the moment they are out of the womb?

*All name meanings were provided by babynames.com*

Give Disney Some Slack

When people look at princess culture and gender stereotypes, many immediately look to the Walt Disney Company for its less than stellar representations of both males and females. However, old Walt was far from the first person to present these tales. Many of them, especially the more well known of these stories, can be traced back long before Walt Disney began making films.

According to imdb.com, Walt Disney began work on Snow White, the first full-length animated film, in 1934. However,  according to flavorwire.com, the original story of Snow White by the Grimm brothers appeared in 1812, a full eighty-nine years before Walt Disney was even born.

Later, also from imdb.com, Walt Disney fronted the production of Sleeping Beauty which was released into theaters in 1959. According to flavorwire.com, the original story of Sleeping Beauty, entitled Sun, Moon, and Talia, was published in 1634, a full two hundred and sixty-seven years before Walt was born and three hundred and twenty-five years before the release of the film.

Lastly, according to imdb.com, Beauty and the Beast was released in 1991, twenty-five years after Walt's death. According to suite101.com, the original story of the Beauty and the Beast can be traced back to the second century A.D. by author Apuleius. That would put Beauty and the Beast close to seventeen hundred years older than Walt Disney.

Seems silly to put so much blame on one man who wasn't even around for the creation of the stories he has allegedly used to brainwash children for years. Maybe, one should look both at the original stories and the Walt Disney Company rather than placing the blame all on the shoulders of Walt Disney himself.

Practicing What You Preach

While I was reading "Is Pink Necessary?", I couldn't help but get annoyed with the author. When Paul was talking about Peggy Orenstein, she started out talking about how valid Orenstein's work was and how she focused on the child pageant circuit which is a valid area of study. However, throughout the article, Paul would back pedal, making a strong point, but then immediately began backing off.

For example, in the fifth paragraph, Paul discussed Orenstein's turn to the child pageant circuit and how Orenstein wanted to discover a different take on this medium rather than the traditional "blame the parents" approach.

However, in the sixth paragraph, Paul begins to almost apologize for Orenstein's research. Paul says that Orenstein "argues with herself, questions her own assumptions, ...and then has second thoughts". By doing this, it seems that Paul presents Orenstein as a stereotypical "hysterical woman", one who can't make up her mind and has to apologize when her theories are more speculative rather than concrete. Paul cheapens Orenstein in this way, turning Orenstein from a competent journalist to an uncertain mother who dabbles in writing and wonders from behind her Redbook and ginger ale whether child pageants are good or bad.

By creating uncertainty about Orenstein, Paul seems to reinforce the stereotype that women must be submissive and that their opinions don't mean as much as a man's. After observing Paul at work, I must ask myself whether or not Paul is part of the problem by not sticking to her convictions.