Women & Sex

I was watching Sex and the City a few days ago and the discussion that we had about certain tv shows came to my mind. I was also thinking about the one Ad we watched in class on Tuesday. The people that were talking about the ad were saying that it was a bold move to put a female product like that so other people can see it. I got to thinking about what people were saying about the show Sex and the City and how most people find it too forward, no real woman is like the four that are on the show. I think that this tv show was a bold thing to bring to tv-women and sex, treating their relationships or one night stands into something that would be broadcasted for over five years. How can something like this stay on the air for this long? People dislike this show because it is also a bold statement. Woman are just like men, we have the same animal instincts, but it is wrong for a woman to act like a man. Who gives these double standards? Is it men, woman or both? Woman have come a long way since the begining of history. Now-a-days women are more likely to have jobs that men would have, are able to vote and should be able to have relations or relationships with whoever they please. I think that people have a certain ideal image of what women are, how they should act . That also got me to think about Orientalism and women. Where have these ideas and images of what a women is come from?

The Office

Without a doubt, The Office is one of my favorite television shows. In class we discussed how television programs had to be modified and changed when broadcast in other countries around the world. The first program that came to mind was "The Office". Originally a British sitcom, Americans decided to copy the same idea and aired the show in the U.S. However, many changes were made during the process. To begin with, all the characters were changed into American actors. This is something huge because the entire cast of a successful show was completely changed in order to relate more to their new audience, Americans. Consequently, this modification also changed the cultural references and the accent and dialect of the show. The British accent was no longer there, and local American references began to dominate the entire show. Another drastic change also resulted, and that was the humor of the show. What seemed to be very comical to a British audience may not be as funny for people in the U.S. British comedy is much more dry and satirical in a sense. The American version of "The Office" also deals with an obnoxious manager but the humor has changed to one that accommodates our culture in a better way. The humor has become much more sarcastic, relevant, direct and blunt. It goes to show that while even following the same plot and the same overall theme, different cultures will always see the same thing in different ways.

Basketball Politics

Due to the NBA lockout 48 preseason games have been cancelled so far. The NBA contract between players and owners expired at the end of the 2010-11 season. This means that new agreements have to be formed for both parties. However, players and owners cannot seem to reach upon an agreement before the start of the season. The reason why an agreement has not been reached comes down to money. Owners are not putting forth the pay players are asking. Instead they are proposing a hard salary cap and that players basketball related income(BRI) be sliced by 57- 46 percent while the owners BRI proposal goes up by 48 percent. If we analyzing this issue through and Marxist lens we can argue that everything down to sports is shaped by an economic system in society. The idea here is that the power of the ruling class stretches so far to what we consider some of the most basic things in life, like enjoying a basketball game. The owners in other words are those who create the politics of basketball. Even the players whom earn millions themselves arent part of the ruling class that decide whether the agreement is suitable for the continuance of the season. What i find most disturbing about this issue is the obvious position of the ruling class and the people like us the fans. Ultimately we the fans are the ones missing out on the basketball season because of the decisions that are made for us. These decisions extend from the most complex like capitalistic ideologies down to decisions on sports.

Reality Television - Big Brother

Our talk in class last week about reality telelvision and how it has become a widely accepted form of entertainment made me think of how out of hand it is getting. It started out as a great idea; the writers were on strike and the easiest solution was to let television write itself. Now a days it has turned into a cultural phenomenom. Reality stars are literally everywhere and it is crazy how attached the viewers are becomin to these programs. For example, I was in Texas this summer visiting one of my best friends and got a glimpse at a very popular reality television show I had never seen before - Big Brother. Her and her mom used to be obsessed with it and just had to turn it on. Never seeing it before I had no idea what was going on but they filled me in on the characters. Turns out one of them, Shelley, had been playing the game very two faced. To me, it's not that big of deal, it's just a silly game on television but to its loyal viewers I soon learned it's much more than that. During an elimination she had voted out someone that she was supposed to have been on a team with saying he stood in the way of her winnings for her and her daughter. I didn't think twice of it until a few hours after the show I started scrolling through a news app on my phone. To my surprise I saw that Big Brother fans were so outraged that they had been sending death threats to Shelley and her daughter as well as calling her place of employment demanding they fire her. I was shocked to say the least. This was really happening over a game on T.V.? It absolutely blew my mind but I guess that proves how sucked into reality telelvision people can get.

Ads on Wheels

I take the CTA every day. I either am taking it to school or to work. Lately I have been noticing that the amount of advertisements on both trains and buses has exploded. Before there would only be ads on the inside of the bus and train in certain locations. The ads have made it to the outside of the bus on bulletins as well as becoming huge stickers that nearly cover the entire bus; the same thing with the trains. I feel as though CTA is like an 8 year old that just discovered stickers. They are fascinated with them and they want to put the damn things everywhere they can. On the ceiling, doors, floors and even glass dividers. You can’t look anywhere and not be able to see an ad. The ads I hate the most are the ones for CTA. I am already on your smelly bus/train, leave me the hell alone! I really don’t know how to take this explosion of ads. Is it a good sign because companies have money to generate these advertisements or is it a bad sign because it might be a last ditch effort to get some customers. Either way it bothers me. I can’t look anywhere because there will be some company trying to get me to spend the money I don’t have on crap they are trying to sell. It works most of the time, hence my huge credit card bills. I sometimes wonder if there weren’t as many ads would I still buy the things I buy? Like, if I were to pass by the product in the store, would I stop check it out and buy it if I didn’t see the ad for it every day on the bus? I wonder how it felt before ads were invented! I bet that was awesome, you only buy what you need because ads weren’t shoved down your throat every day. But then again, if there weren’t any ads then most of the companies out here today would be out of business. The only thing keeping them alive is their marketing team forcing us to believe that their product is better than someone else’s. I just wish I could get to school/work one day and not be visually attacked with ads along the way. That would be super.

Universally Understood

Being a huge fan of anime, like many others I have watched Naruto. But having a huge dislike for English dubbing I tend to watch animes in Japanese with English subtitles. In the Japanese version of Naruto, the lead character has this catch phrase "Dattebayo" which isn't really a word. It is a vocal tic that has a universal understanding amongst it's audience. Such as mhhmm can be understood as "Yes I understand". If you still don't understand what I'm saying, an example can be given by this Arab American comedian at 5:19

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KD1CHF9Ub4

So when they dubbed the anime Naruto into English they needed to change the leads catch phrase into something that could be understood by their new English speaking audience and they choose to replace it with the words "Believe it!" So that every time he made a promise he would say "Believe it!" in place of "Dattebayo". Which highly annoys me but it was the best they could come up with which is understandable.

SOUNDGARDEN & ORIENTALISM

These past couple of months have marked a variety of really important music history moments, especially in the grunge universe. This past Saturday, Nirvana's Nevermind came into focus again with their 20th anniversary of the album and the super-deluxe version re-issue that came out just yesterday. Over Labor Day weekend, Seattle's Pearl Jam also marked their 20th anniversary as a band with PJ20, a huge festival in Wisconsin's Alpine Valley - complete with a new book release, a soundtrack release of the band's most defining moments, as well as a documentary release with select screenings in cities all across America. We also saw Soundgarden this summer tour for the first time in 14 years (I was lucky enough to go and see them play live - IT WAS AWESOME!). However, with all of the listening and research that I've done over the past couple of years to fulfill my grunge interest and correspond to my 90's alternative/grunge radio show, I've noticed something quite interesting about the bands that exploded in the early 90's and the racial makeup and distinction of the bands related to early generation X alternative.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the genre, grunge exploded in the Pacific Northwest of this nation (late 80's), creating new directions for alternative music as we see it today. However, most of grunge music began specifically in Seattle, which had previously been a hotbed for metal acts before the explosion of sludge rock. When metal was popular, bands like Metal Church, Queensryche, etc. contributed as the main pull of the scene and these bands were predominantly white males. Females were barely included in the metal scene, and men of different racial makeup were hardly regarded as real musicians in the very racist, very white-dominant, metal society. This is why when Soundgarden first started creating music in Seattle in 1988, where the metal scene was still prominent - white power and all, audiences sort of freaked out in a way. Not only because Soundgarden ended up sounding so similar to Led Zeppelin without trying (none of the guys in the band even liked OR listened to Led Zeppelin!) and people began to associate them as posers, but more so because the racial makeup was very interesting. Soundgarden proved that regardless of race in a scene with dominant orientalist attitudes against both Asians and people of the Middle East, they could still rock out and gain appreciation - even from the metal guys that only accepted white musicians. The racial makeup for the original band members of Soundgarden include Kim Thayil (Indian American), Hiro Yamamato (Japanese American), and Chris Cornell (Eastern European-American) and Matt Cameron (Irish American).

If anyone's interested in hearing more about Soundgarden or the Seattle Sound, you guys can check out my radio show and website @ http://rockethype.net

Blonde with Big Tits

In horror movies we always see a hot naked girl running and screaming for her life. It’s only a movie. But in reality it’s so much more than that. Women starting with the first classic horror movies: Dracula, Frankenstein, the Mummy, and the Werewolf, all have that female role in which they are exploited and used for entertainment. Before they used to be about love but now it’s how many people get cut the f*** up.

In the original SCREAM we have the killer call Sidney and ask her why she doesn’t like horror movies and she replies:

“What’s the point? There all the same: some stupid killer stalking some big breasted girl, who can’t act, who’s always running up the stairs when she should be going out the front door, it’s insulting!”

This is very true. Women are just exploited for fun and as we can see in the opening scenes of all SCREAM movies all the cast is female and they all end up being ‘cut’ from the movie. http://youtu.be/rBPgEMfkx5c

I don’t really know why women are always used as the girl that ends up with the worse deaths but they are always, well almost always with exceptions to some horror movies, the heroine of the movie and end up outsmarting the killer. Just look at Friday the 13^th, Nightmare on elm street, Chainsaw Massacre. These movies always have a female beat the killer and survive.

From me watching every horror movie on the planet, I think that the reason why is because it’s awesome! Just look at Aliens. That chick was bad ass! And even though all horror movies are the same now we all just want to see how the virgin innocent girl will kill the killer.

There is so much more in depth to go into. Why has society made women this object of death to use for the entertainment. And why is it okay for us to watch this happen? what do you guys think? Watch the clip that i post up with this and see what i mean.

Americanized Reality in Dancing

I am going to inform everyone at this moment that I truly hate reality television. I had my doubts before, but after being in a reality tv course and having to watch different shows for homework, I have learned that I truly need a good-ol' cup of intelligence after watching even half an hour of something. But that's not what I'm here to write about.

After reading the article about The Simpsons and discussing what all television producers needed to do to make shows appeal to different cultures, I considered what all I watch and what has been changed for American viewing as well as what would be changed for other countries. Take Dancing with the Stars for example. This show came to American minds after a British show called Strictly Come Dancing. The exact same thing would occur: Professional dancers were paired up with a wide range of celebrities and they would compete on television. There would be judges who give scores and the viewers at home could vote on who their favorite pairing were. What all did the producers have to change for Americans to enjoy the show? Obviously, they would have to choose American celebrities to make them even remotely care about who they were voting for. Strictly Come Dancing strictly focused on ballroom dancing -- Americans wouldn't be interested in that. We need something new and different each every time! So, they added the contestants doing the Cha-Cha, the Jive, or Quick-Step. Lastly, and what they have learned from the American Idol transfer, three quirky judges: Two that seem much more upbeat with one that will give honest criticism that the audience will boo even though the judge is absolutely correct.

It seems as though it is much easier to transfer other countries' shows to American cultures. The Simpsons article expressed many issues in trying to make the secondary characters relatable to different cultures that one would imagine it would be just as difficult to change their shows for American viewing. I'm trying to figure out if it is because of the fact that we like to make fun of everybody else or are we just that easy to entertain.

Orientalism's Sibling: Cultural Appropriation

I looked on Urban Outfitters' site after reading a lot about how popular and trendy cultural appropriation is this season. To get a glimpse of how real this trend is, just type in "navajo" in the search bar and you get this.

Orientalism is the simplification and glamorization of elements of a culture to the point of misrepresentation. The trend of simplifying all Native American cultures into a few iconic patterns (as well as dream catchers and headdresses) is another example of what Said talks about, looking at other cultures through a self-serving and egocentric lens. It is a way of looking at a culture and trying to take what is useful to you (or in this case Urban Outfitters) and disposing of the context as well as the real people they are (mis)representing. Cultural appropriation happens when Orientalism meets capitalism. Anything that can be sold will be sold, regardless of context and erasure.

Many defend the freedom to make and sell and buy whatever they like, however, they should also be made aware of the implications and context of their actions. The people appropriating symbols from Native American culture (fabricated symbols as well as real), in this case must be able to afford a 169 dollar purse, an 80 dollar jacket, a 50 dollar shirt, or 30 dollar shoes. Juxtapose that with the fact that "American Indians and Native Alaskans number 4.5 million. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, these Americans earn a median annual income of $33,627. One in every four (25.3 percent) lives in poverty and nearly a third (29.9 percent) are without health insurance coverage." (spotlightonpoverty.org ) The proceeds from Urban Outfitters' products do not go to Native Americans, they go to owner Richard Hayne. Basically, these articles of clothing represent in every way, stealing a culture for the gain of someone who historically and socially has immense privilege over the people being stolen from. 

Even before considering the cultural insensitivity to items that are sacred to many Native American nations, cultural appropriations represent intellectual property theft.

ah yes stereotyping.

Ok, well I know I talked about this in the the last post but the more I think about it, the more I see it everywhere. Its insane. One of my favorite show's is Entourage on HBO. Its hilarious and doesn't ever make fun other races which I like, but the other day I was watching an old episode and I noticed the the maid working in Ari's house was hispanic, which I didnt think twice till I took as second to think about what was going on. The maid only appeared for a short time. I was fustrated at first but then I began to think about the reality of the it. Is the media really putting things in our heads and making as think certain things should be the way they are, or are they really that way and we just don't want to accept it and blame someone else. The maid isnt just a stereotype, its a reality. When my mother came to America on a visa to go to school and work she cleaned houses for the wealthy. Not only that but I have friends whos mothers have done the same. When we see a crip or a blood on T.V. they are always black. Whether on t.v. or not thats what crips and bloods are, in reality. When T.V. shows a redneck from Lousinana living in the country with big trucks, cowboy hats and confederate flags, they're actually showing they way things really are, and I lived in Georgia for a while and I saw a ton of that. This could all be things that we can brush off and laugh at and its funny, but then we have the negative stereotypes that we won't laugh about. I'm not going to lie, when I get on a plane I look around to see if there are any middeleastern men that would and could potentially, in my eyes, be terrorist. Thats such a horrible stereotype, but we all do it and its grown to be a part of everyday life. A funny story, I was at work one day(construction), and as I was putting up drywall and a white, american electrician walked up to me and started speaking spanish to me. It wasnt clear and I could tell he was trying to make fun of the language. I just sat there stared at him and when he was done I responded and in english, I said "Do you electricians have anything better to do then walk around". He stood there kind of in shock that I knew english. I wasnt offended at all because I knew it wasnt suppose to really be a offensive situation. So with that said, maybe some of what we see in the media is reality. I was talked to in spanish from a man who dint think a knew any enlglish because thats that way things are portrayed.

A.STEIL "The Simpsons" and Global Media

"The Simpsons" is a show that we all find familiar, yet through the analysis there is so much more to this simple TV show than we see. While reading the article I found many discrepancies between American culture and what we export to international levels. The use of secondary characters, regional stereotypes, and cultural differences is much more than just global media outlook, but something we find within the media we see every day. It is within this commercial intake that we base our ideas, beliefs, and familiar cases upon what we see in the media every day. While I watch TV I try to keep in mind what I truly see happening within the culture and society we thrive in today. The reality of such TV shows gives a sense of the commercialism and establishment of capitalism that we are "brainwashed" to believe and accept in a regular basis. We all play a critical role in how we relay the information that we discuss and see daily. I may not watch TV on a regular schedule, but I still fall victim to the advertisements and societal claims that we are reinforced with every day. There is so more to this simple TV show than we see. It is these differences that we understand who we are and how we are different from the many cultures that are also influenced by the media we export.

Orientalism today

This weeks class discussion really had me thinking more about Orientalism. I took a class last year for my Sophomore seminar which was all about multiculturism primarily in the Middle East. After watching the video it brought back many memories of discussions in the class. Many Americans don't understand that not all Muslims are Hindu. Right there is a misconception of people from the Middle East. Also many Muslim Americans are considered terrorists, or are considered from a third world country. In America any Muslim Americans are taunted and harassed for sticking to their culture. For example a woman may choose to wear her traditional attire, and be questioned and pulled aside at an airport because of the way she is dressed. Not knowing or being blind to the fact that this is simply because of her culture. Also many are harassed for going to their places of worship, and have been accused of being in a cult, or plotting terrorist attacks. We claim to be a nation that accepts every culture and all sorts of diversity, but yet we still today might take a second look at a Muslim American because of recent events after 9/11.

I also thought about the show that used to be on TV called Outsourced. It was a show about Indian's who live in Dubai which are working for a company in America, but everything is outsourced to them. We put shows on TV such as this, but is it stereotyping? Just like we discussed in class in some TV shows or even movies we portray the Muslim as a convenient store clerk, or a Subway worker, or owning a Dunkin' Donuts. The media constantly puts this out there I believe without any question. We see these Muslim Americans as extremists and not people. After learning more about this issue it really gets to me that in America we aren't really as accepting as we say.

Office Relocated

The other day I decided that I would watch the U.K. Office and try and note all of the differences that had to go on to make the show appealing for an English audience. I chose the first episode of the first season to view. Of course the location of the show changed and the offices are now in Slough England. This helps to create a real and relatable place for the audience. When I began watching I noticed that the plotline was almost identical to that of its American counterpart. Many of the same jokes were made, but the dialogue for the joke was completely different. In the American office Michael gets a fax from headquarters and says to Pam “We have a special filing cabinet for faxes, it’s the garbage” while in the U.K. version Bent calls it “the waste paper basket.” Another joke was when Jim, or this version Tim puts Dwight’s, or Garrett’s stapler in Jell-O. Garrett from this version of the Office calls it Jellies. It is very clear that for the jokes to make sense they need to change the slang. Other words that were different from our dialect were “redundancies” (down-sizing) “slag,” “mental” and “twat.” Another thing that I was noticing was that the language used was much more blunt because they swore more freely saying things like “shitty” or “cock.” The thing that I found to be the most interesting is that the ideas or characteristics of the characters will still similar Dawn, the Pam character remained a soft spoken moderately pretty receptionist. Ricky, the Oscar of this series was still a different ethnicity only this time he was Indian. And lastly the Kevin of this show was again a fat dull man.

The Stereotypical View of Telivision

This past Sunday, the premiere of one of my favorite shows, Family Guy, had me tuning into Fox’s Animation Domination lineup. The new season certainly proved that the show has come a long way since its creation because it was funnier than ever. Though, at the same time, I was thinking about the readings that were assigned for this class because they related directly to it. It made me view the show in a way that I never had before. Although we, as Americans, find the show completely hilarious because of its sexual jokes and stereotypical comedy, how do other counties and nationalities really view the risky humor that the show contains? Even though Family also pokes fun at the American lifestyle, we seem to look beyond it and find more hilarity in the jokes that involve other races or nationalities. For example, Peter Griffin portrays an obese American father that is completely idiotic and is somewhat of an alcoholic too. While we seem to ignore the fact that this is attacking the American lifestyle, we find humor in Consuela, the Mexican housemaid that refuses to do work, or Mort Goldman, who is a Jewish pharmacy owner and has bad bouts of anxiety. These are the typical stereotypes that the show bases most of its humor on. While I believe the situations and the dialogue are definitely some of the most comedic I have ever seen, looking at the whole picture makes you truly think about what you are watching. Still, whether or not Family Guy is friendly for all audiences, it is a show that has won over our views and it will surely prevail into the future.

Mean (Powerful) Girls Around the World

Mean Girls is one of those movies that is played on television all the time. I recently watched it for what seemed like the 100th time and realized that this film relates to the topics we discussed in class last week and this week.
First of all, it directly relates to political economy and Marxist views. The main “mean girls” have all the power. They are beautiful and wealthy, why wouldn’t they be powerful? They are the ruling class, and in the film we can see how they make everyone else follow them. For example, two girls want to embarrass Regina George, the most popular girl, by cutting holes into her shirt to expose her bra. This does not work because she just wears the shirt and everyone copies her. Eventually, every girl in school wears a shirt with holes.
Means Girls also relates to this week’s discussion on culture. There are many things about this movie that would have to change in order to play in different countries. Here in the U.S., it is played often because people easily understand and relate to it. One thing I noticed that might have to be changed is when Cady is first introduced to the class. The teacher says they have a new student from Africa and automatically everyone assumes it is the black girl, but she says, “I’m from Michigan.” This is very funny to us, but for some parts of Africa, they may not understand it because white people live there. There are so many other parts that would not be acceptable for other countries such as the explanation of Halloween in the “girl world” or the parties with alcohol. Overall, a lot of scenes in this movie can be applied to all different topics discussed in class.

As seen on T.V.

My roommate and I were watching T.V. and a commercial for DePaul came on. I just ignored it and started to make my dinner. It did not seem like a big deal to me. On the other hand, my roommate freaked out in a negative way. She was extremely shocked that DePaul was advertising on the television. She said that in Connecticut (where she is from) only “bad” schools, online schools, and private high schools that weren’t worth the money have commercials. By “bad” school, she explained that it was a college that people would assume you didn’t do well in high school or couldn’t get into any other college if you went there. She was appalled because as we all know DePaul is a good school and has a lot to offer. In her eyes good colleges did NOT have many public advertisements. I want to relate this to stereotyping. To her if a school has a commercial it is looked-down upon, not reaching status approval. If people from her hometown saw this commercial they would automatically judge her for not being well educated or wasting her money. For most people this commercial is so simple and normal, it’s just a way of advertising! But the stereotype of a “higher education” or even a “higher class” results in not having to advertise on T.V. because excellent colleges are as “always” well known.

Reality vs. Reality TV

I have a big list of things I probably should be ashamed of, one of them being my love for Scott Disick. For those who are unaware and probably better, more well rounded people than I am, he's Kourtney Kardashian's baby daddy, frequent pot-stirrer, and questionable alcoholic on Keeping Up With The Kardashians. He's also a pretty terrible person. He's almost cartoonishly arrogant and short tempered, always strutting on screen in ridiculous, flamboyant outfits and causing problems. He's the source of a lot of the conflict on the show, which is mainly where the love comes from. I'm sure if I actually had to interact with him, or anyone on the show if I'm being honest, I'd feel very different about it. But then I'm sure the Scott we see on tv has very little in common with Real Scott. But that's the thing. TV Scott isn't a real person. He's a character and I love/hate him just like I love/hate all of the ridiculous villains on the scripted shows I watch. In my mind, there's not really a difference to me as a viewer. Reality TV, it turns out, isn't very real at all. There's a lot that's controlled and directed in order to create interesting plots and story lines. I don't think any modern viewer would deny that, but it's easy to forget how much of what we're watching is manufactured when it's presented as reality. This means that we still have to take into consideration the motives of the people and corporations behind the show as if it were completely fictional. It also means we're allowed to love Scott Disick and still sleep okay at night.

90210, Cultural Adaption, and Orientalism

As a religious watcher of the series "90210" the new version, I was always curious about the way the character "Navid's" family is portrayed. They are clearly middle eastern, although Navid seems to look and act more "western" than the rest of his family. His father is in the porn industry, secretly, and is seen as a dangerous liar. Navid's uncles are also seen this way, and cheat Navid to get his money and run a car theft business behind his back. They make his family criminals, and its interesting that they chose to portray the middle eastern family this way instead of a white family. With all the negativity and generalizations about middle eastern men the show just emphasises the orientalism going on in media today.

If this show were to be aired in another country a lot of things would need to be changed. First, not everyone in other countries can recognize the zip code 90210 as a prestigious area in southern California. Changing it to the name of a city like Los Angeles would be a better representation. Also jokes, cultural references and signs would also need to be changed in order to understand the context of the show and the young peoples lives, where they live, and where they are coming from. Naomi's character in particular is extremely sarcastic and inherited money off her parents, but over all means well. Some countries people may not be able to pick up on her sarcastic tone or some of her actions.

While doing laundry with a few friends last night, the boredom of staring at the dryer topple my clothes became too much. We quickly turned to the one and only YouTube to provide a bit of entertainment during our wait. In the mood to laugh, we immediately looked up the oh so adorable Simon’s Cat. For background purposes, Simon’s Cat is an animated series on YouTube chronicling the day-to-day life of Simon and his mischievous cat. Very G rated and appealing to children, as well as those looking for some good, clean entertainment. Upon clicking on the video, as with all YouTube videos now, we were prompted to watch an ad before getting to enjoy our selection. What we were bombarded with next I did not have words for. Let’s just say if there wasn’t text telling me what the product was at the end of the ad I would have never known. The commercial was for a new Dolce & Gabbana perfume, yet there was no perfume in sight. There was, however, quite a bit of strategic near-nudity, an explicit sexual situation, and overall naughtiness that I was not expecting before such an innocent cartoon.

Now I am in no way a prude or opposed to sexuality in media, but this event did bring up an important question in my mind. What exactly is the media marketing to children in this day and age? If YouTube insists on showing advertisements before their hosted videos why can’t they use commercials that are similar, either in subject or appropriateness, to the video the viewer is anticipating? Everything has it’s time and place, but sexy perfume commercials, in my book, do not have a place before Simon's Cat.

If you ever go missing - you better make sure your attractive.

Over the summer I started following the story about a missing Indiana University student named Lauren Spierer.  Lauren Spierer, of Greenburgh New York, was just 20 years old when she disappeared June 3 after a night of partying with friends.  There have been a lot of conspiracy theories that she either diagnosed on coke and her boyfriend/friends hid the body or that she was, sadly, abducted.  While following this story over the summer, I became intrigued by how the media was dealing with the story and how the public was reacting.  Many people believed that Lauren Sperier was receiving more attention because she was a beautiful, wealthy, white, blue eyed girl.  The public also persisted to say that there was another girl that went missing four months ago and she did not even get nearly as much attention as Lauren Sperier was receiving. She was African American, not as attractive, and had no education. But why do any of those stop her from receiving the same attention as Lauren Spierer did?  She is still human and missing - but the media decided not to pay any attention to the story.  Throughout the case, I kept a clear head and just listened to people's opinions rather than agree with them.  I denied the fact that Lauren Sperier received all of this attention because of her looks up until last week.  Almost two weeks ago a 19 year old girl named Amanda Bach, from Indiana, went missing. Like Spierer, she white, goodlooking and wealthy. She was found a few days ago, near rail road traicks, with a gun shot wound to her throat.  Her ex-boyfriend is currently being charged with murdering her.  Simliar to Spierer, many Facebook pages were created in memory of Amanda Bach.  Many of the posts said, "How could someone murder someone so beautiful?" or "She was too beautiful to leave. I will miss her beautiful smile " or the worst, "Why couldn't he kill someone ugly?" Why must society soley focus on just her physical appearance?  What about the fact that her family will never see her again or that she will never be able to finish college?  Or that she will never be able to grow into an adult and live out her dreams? The fact that the media is able to pick and choose what missing person case they want to focus on is like choosing life or death for someone they never even met.  It is pathetic.  People need to start taking notice of this and see that every missing person that is reported on the news is either attractive or the family has a lot of money.  The media is ignoring missing-person cases involving men or people of certain ethnicities - it is like they want people to rescue the "damsel in distress" from the villian. Open your eyes and see the missing person cases that the media reports on. It's shocking, disgusting and it's all for ratings.

Dance Mom's

I've recently gotten very into a show called Dance Mom's, it is a show about these little girls who are trained for beauty pageants by this large miserable woman who treats the girls like they are 25 years old instead of 6 years old. Although this woman is terribly mean to these young girls the mothers do nothing about it and continue to let their children be treated like prisoners. I find this show interesting because these little 6 years old are taught very provocative dances where they look very inappropriate for their ages. I know that it is wrong of myself to be watching the show, but I watch it almost because I feel sorry for these little girls. This show teaches people that it is okay for their young children to be acting slutty and that its okay for parents to force their kids into these pageants and dance classes, even when it is obvious that these girls are completely uninterested and very upset by how their teacher treats them. She tells them that they "suck" and that they won't do anything with their lives if they don't do every dance step correctly. It is sickening that this show is even on television because it gives America an image that is disgusting and cruel. That is what entertainment has come to now a days on TV. As we saw in class last Thursday when we watched Real Housewives, people like to see other people upset and act ridiculous. I, myself watch the show because it breaks my heart and I feel for these young girls and I find myself talking with my friends during the show judging the dance teacher and the horrible mothers. It is strange what is now considered entertainment in our world and I find myself repulsed as well as intrigued by these heart wrenching shows. It makes me scared for what might come out next as a big TV series.

Generation Flashback

Last week NBC premiered the new anticipated drama 'The Playboy Club'. There has been a lot of buzz about this show in the press, with some making the remarks that it is sexist and is not sending the right message to younger audiences. When I first heard that some were calling the show sexist I thought "duh", because it is about the Playboy Club. The corporation that is Playboy is one of the most well known names around the world and it is known for the attractive women who pose either naked or nearly naked, and also it supposedly has "great articles". I am not sure what these critics were expecting to see from this program.

What I find to be most interesting is that this is not a completely fictional story, it is based off of a real place in Chicago and real people. The Playboy Club is based off of the former club in Chicago that was indeed called the Playboy Club, and was in Chicago because the Playboy Mansion used to also be in Chicago. It is set in the 1960's at the rise of the Playboy empire, and is portraying a version of what really happened decades ago. In the 1960's being a playmate or a Playboy bunny was looked at being a loose girl, or someone who had made it to the top. I do not believe that women were looked at as being exploited or sexualized as the critics are now saying the show is portraying them, but just not respected because they were not being classy women. I find it so interesting how so much can change in a relatively short period of time. We live in a world that is so politically correct that something that was somewhat accept in the 1960's is being looked at as a horrible thing in some people's eyes.

I watched the show myself and to be perfectly honest was surprised at how good the show really was. I was expecting a show that was going to be solely based on scantily clad women, but instead found myself watching a show with depth and an interesting story line. Are there women in small, little outfits? Yes. But they are no worse than any other programs that are on television.