Archive by Author

“Real” roles

11 Mar

While writing these blogs I’ve really noticed more and more gender specific roles in the media, television, music etc. Everything has stood out more because that’s what we’ve had to look for, but it happens when I’m just watching tv now. I notice that women are in stereotypical roles and I also notice when they are displayed as overly aggressive and violent and even when they arent played in either and seen as professionally natured. It’s very interesting to notice all these things before I just was ignorant to the fact that it was occurring. The blame gets thrown on Hollywood and these major labels and companies and conglomerates, but the blame should be on the consumer us. Just like we blame government officials for policies but we put them into office, we fuel these stereotypical huge films. We want to see the sexy women the ripped guys, even though public opinion say’s there’s an outcry for change it doesn’t occur.

Gender roles have changed over time but the inequality between simply men and women is still evident. Just take a look at the highest grossing films out they mainly include men and women in stereotypical roles. Every now and then a major movie comes out where these roles or avoided, but it doesnt happen enough. It will be interesting to see what happens and how long it may take for these “real” roles to become the norm.

Doug and Brad: 21 Jump Street

1 Mar

http://www.21jumpstreet-movie.com/?hs308=JMP6186

Summary: I was lucky and got a few screening passes to go see 21 jump street last night, and loved it. I recently saw the movie Project X and while not as epic of a movie 21 Jump Street was flat out hilarious. Stars two under achieving cops, Jenko (Brad) and Schmidt (Doug) who are sent to a special undercover unit where they have to infiltrate a high school drug ring and stops the spread of the new “hit” drug HFS. There ridiculous antics throughout are hilarious as you wait and see what new mishaps they get themselves into while in highschool. Eventually they befriend a few students who have ties to the drugs and after failing miserably ultimately stopping the supplier and the core of the drug ring.

 

Analysis: In this movie gender issues are the clear and evident issues prevalent. Doug as the stereotypical short chubby guy, was very smart and shy, while Brad was physically gifted and handsome but dumb, like a dumb jock. Each reinforced those stereotypes in the beginning of the movie but due to their undercover work there became a role reversal. In high school the cool kids weren’t the athletes and ppl doing nothing now being gay is accepted and their environmentally friendly this breaks stereotypes. Even specifically Brad his stereotypical tool character befriends and enjoys the science geek crew, while Doug the chubby shy character is befriended by the “cool kids” again breaking male gender stereotypes. I believe the stereotypes are exact examples of social cognitive theory and that when they broke them were in a way an example of it to because of the common denominator, drugs.

I believe that the view that is most visible is that of the undercover cops because you are essentially following their story and its relate-able to the 18-30 audience members. I think most real is the high school kids because in reality that is how a lot of suburban high schools are. Intelligent kids, but very experimental with drugs and alcohol younger and younger. I saw this somewhat while in high school but then once I returned after three years it had grown a lot worse.

The most common view seen were the gender stereotypical roles of Jenko and Schmidt as the tool and the geek and how their characters attempt to align with a stereotype rather the one that was them or the one they are undercover being. The most powerful is that of the stereotypical motorcycle gang who beat up cops, chase them down etc. They were the most powerful i believe because they were the only group to stay within there one specific stereotype throughout the movie.

I feel from the representation displayed that this movie best benefits the younger generation and freedom. Freedom of gender restraints, (homosexuality, tool, geek) and also freedom of choice, drugs, alcohol and partying this confirms the current trend of embracing all these things. These same things were embraced as to be cool and ok so it would best benefit those who enjoy that.

I believe the design is set up so that audiences 18-30 will think its hilarious and audiences 40-above will think its dumb. It embraces breaking norms and creating awkward situations that make it even funnier. Our generation enjoys seeing someone “tripping” on a drug and their adventures and “ragers” of parties. Since these things are true I believe that the audience in the 18-30 age rang will understand the design of hilarity.

Male hegemony dominates this movie from the typical white tool and nerds to the fact that their cops. I believe that white male hegemony is what pervades the movie while not a prevalent and announced it is clear and evident.

Response: I thought the movie was hilarious I liked that their stereotypical roles were reversed in the movie. Seeing movies like this and Project X might me excited to see what’s in store for the summer. Jonah Hill was as funny as usual and its sad to say but I thoroughly enjoy seeing him get hit by cars the visual from this movie and Superbad getting hit by the car instantly will make me laugh for minutes.  One thing that I have noticed more and more in comedies these days that Cocaine and acid like drugs are becoming a lot more prevalent in films these days, marijuana is almost a norm like a cigarette. Don’t know if that’s a good thing or a bad thing but its funny to note.

Across the Line (2010)

24 Feb

Summary: In this movie investment banker Charlie Wright is in trouble and under FBI watch for heading a scheme embezzling over $11 billion. Weeks later Charlie shows up in Tijuana Mexico living commonly and searching for his long lost daughter Isabella who he fathered while in a sexual relationship with her prostitute mother. Charlie has many enemies after him the Garza family a Mexican crime family in debt and wanting to use his money and then David a hired gun sent after Charlie. The Garza family finds Charlie and while under their supervision is ambushed by David and his team, Charlie escapes. While in hiding Charlie learns his daughter had illegally went to the USA. Wanting only to see his daughter Charlie calls the FBI to turn himself in. Charlie waits for the FBI but is spotted by one of Garza’s man, eventually becomes a standoff with the FBI escaping with him. Seeing a new man the FBI agent lets Charlie go in exchange for the $1.2 billion dollars uncollected by the government.

Analysis: I believe the underlying story line that was most relevant in this movie was Charlie and his search for his daughter at the end of the day people can relate to that connection. Most visible I believe is that of the FBI because everyone else but them crossed the line of good and bad several times throughout but consistently until the end of the movie they were the most visible known presence. The most common story line is that of the Garza family in the movie they are in debt searching for a way to free themselves of their debt through capturing Charlie. The most powerful story line in this movie though is the FBI agent who is out searching for him independently agreed to let him go because he saw he was a changed man and that he just wanted to be with his daughter. This movie would benefit young adults to older couples since its set in a corporate/rugged setting it has adult concepts such as white collar crimes, guns, debt etc. I believe married couples would benefit as well as father-daughter relations. I believe that the audience would generally interpret this movie about white collar crimes but the underlying story is that of a father wanting redemption and to find his daughter.

Through week 2 collin’s reading all finding ring true once again. Women in this movie except for Charlie’s lawyer were all prostitutes, seen as over-sexual, under dressed, needy. Men were seen as professional, clean cut, aggressive and  for the most part bad and violent. Men were either white collar thief’s, cops are gangsters, which re-confirms stereotypes and women being under-represented and not seen in a good light.

 

Response: Overall a good movie but there was just so many ppl and all on different sides trying to get Charlie and his money. I think that there was too much going on to really understand and embrace the daughter aspect and even all his crimes they never went into detail about them. I thought this movie was rushed had a few good twists but overall attempted to do too much in too little time.

Undersupervised on Archer with some Law and Order

17 Feb

Summary: Undersupervised is a comedy about two kids essentially raising themselves and their many adventures in life through school, family, and what ever else they can get themselves into.

In this episode the two kids and one another wanted to see a spray can blow up, they end up creating a fire at a park. The park burns down and becomes big news in the town, feeling guilty they go to the fire house to own up to the fire. While there they meet their real life heroes “fire fighters” who were happy about the fire gave them a feeling of being needed that they feel they had lost post 9/11. The kids want to help their heroes again and decide to burn down a run-down old building, they end up engulfed by the flames and need rescued by the firefighters. They are saved admit their mischievous act, and admit lying about it was wrong.

Archer- Is a show about ISIS, an international spy agency, where global crises are merely opportunities for its highly trained employees to confuse, undermine, betray and royally screw each other.

On this episode it is Archer the shows lead character’s birthday and he wanders what everyone will do for him. When he arrives at the office no one shows him any special attention or recognizes its his birthday. Just as it looked like he had enough they surprised him and gave him a new muscle spy car. His mother explicitly says dont lose it. He takes it home when he arrives the next morning it is gone. Archer aims to steal back the car before his mother had found out. Him and other co-workers invade the yakuza underground car ring hoping to find it. They get discovered a shoot out occurs his mother saves the day admits that she stole the car to teach him  a lesson to take care of his stuff. (he had left the car unlocked)

Law and Order SVU Season aired last friday

A mother, a drinking father and daughter are watching tv, the door bell rings and a masked man answers the door and shoots them all only the daughter survives buts in critical condition. The detectives question the daughters boyfriend and father, an ex maid, her brother, the dads bookie all about their whereabouts and any possible connection. After following a connection with the bookie they soon realize they didnt kill the parents. The daughter wakes up from her wounds suffered and they learn she had gen herpes and the dad was the cause (he raped her). They question the ex-maid and her brother again after realizing how close and how much they cared about the girl and had known what the father was doing. Detectives get them to admit they planned it this leads them to discovering that the daughter too had helped planned it but wasnt supposed to be there and be shot.

Analysis/Response: Each show is incredibly different from the other one is for teens another for teens and adults but topics are different and SVU which deals with special victims usually (rape or cases dealing with discrimination). Emotional Competency Theory is evident here because these two boys raise them selves and have to learn through their environment. In Unsupervised the kids are a break on the mold of an avg teenage boy of being athletic which to the producers of the show makes them real because it shows were not all perfect. they are very raw but in general good kids. I believe most visible would have to be the fire fighters because we understand thats their job and what they need to do, its easily understood. Most powerful would have to be their school teacher or principal because they have the most control over the kids in their daily life. During the show they curse heavily showing signs of male aggression weve spoke about. They show a sign of hostile expectation bias with the fires they caused not truly understanding what they had done by creating two fires.  At the fire house the fire fighters were a. male and their heroes, and b. italian I wondered why they couldnt have been female? This plays along the title lines that a man is supposed to do certain jobs. This show plays off breaking the mold of others and in their cast but it always comes back to similar goals such as this episode about lying and fire safety, which was subliminally within the episode through edutainment. I believe this benefits teenagers, adults because the same lessons still need to be learned. Also to the kids who watch the show and feel different a show like this allows them to connect. One part of the episode speaks about an internet cafe as being where men come to fantasize about not being married. Plays on men being over sexual beings instead of saying some people rather than men. Men in this show are portrayed as smart but somethings wrong with them and if not that slower more raw. Women on the show from the principal to their friend display higher intelligence more so playing in the stereotype as guys being tools and women hard workers and smart. I believe that the producers want people who watched this show to laugh, connect and take away the lesson learned in each episode. I believe that this is achieved here solely because it isnt as obvious to notice something similar to captain america as we talked about in class it becomes a way your educated and connect through the entertainment. Culturally this show i feel doesnt have an impact on gender roles but more so on class, and racial roles as it helps people identify more realistically than other tv cartoons might.

In Archer the lead role is an egotistical male who see’s women as an object which is doubtlessly showed through his romantic escapades and things he says. One thing that stood out with this episode was his car it was a black muscle spy car. Playing on the stereotype of guys loving muscle cars, power and sex and it also included a girl  voice assistant that again displays women as oversexual beings. In the show itself the includes a stereotypical alpha male in archer and a “weak” co worker male who’s gay this shows the stereotypes with homosexuals as being weak and acting just like a girl. An example of this is when a fire bell goes off he jumps into archers hands like a child.  Women on this show are known for action, sex and “ditsyness” even the women who has power Archers mom who is the head of ISIS she is oversexualized. Intelligence difference between men and women is evident especially when they plan stuff, males like archer think simple and go in guns blazing the women think more analytical.  I believe the most real is the men in this show there are more egotistical men who are tools than oversexualized action packed women who are also ditsy. This shows the downplay of women even in the descriptions of their stereotypical characters.  I believe what is most visible are the stereotypical characters an over testosterone male and over sexualized females. This is most visible because this is noted within every scene testosterone and sex are heavily used throughout. I think it is interesting on this show that they include the oversexualized male with an opposite the character agent zero is smart, mild mannered but is seen as too good and too weak. This is culturally evident showing that being a good guy isnt enough ladies like the “Archers”. This show benefits no one realistically but if you’re an egotistical spy who has sexual escapades then it benefits you but really 0nly laughs can come from this show. Archers producers are very clear in their message playing on stereotypes and over exposing some. I believe the audience interprets it just as its given there is no gray area of understanding needed this is cut and dry a comedy playing off of stereotypes.

 

Law & Order: SVU

This episode played off a stereotype of an alcoholic father and his gambling addiction and its demise on his family and a gay rights activist who cared to much about the struggle then her daughter. Gender issues are evident in this because of the male and female issues then homosexual issues. Male cops are aggressive natures playing off male stereotypical aggression. The mother was submissive to her husband and never stood up for her daughter playing along stereotypes of male hegemony and dominance. Male dominance is showed with the cops, the bookie, and the father who was sexually abusing his daughter. This is an example of social cognitive theory because the characters are models to their viewers because its seen as realistic.

 

Each show stereotypes are evident throughout especially in archer and unsupervised I believe because they are cartoons and Law & Order less because of the seriousness of the show and episode. Pro social effects are evident throughout the three shows even though they are used as a sense to understand them. Such as acceptance of others and acceptance of diversity each show had homosexuals in them displaying this.

 

Shameless- A true representation of Middle America?

3 Feb

Summary: An alcoholic man who is stuck in a stupor and his six children as they try to cope with life in a dysfunctionally functioning household. The oldest daughter is a psuedo mom since there real mom split. The oldest boy is a womanizer, who trys to get his ex girlfriends boyfriened to cheat. Then a gay son, two kids and a daughter thats 11 going on 16 mixed with step kids makes for a funny show and lots of drama. On this show the dad deals with the step mom trying to leave the house but hes afraid something will happen to her. The oldest daughter is caught up in a love triangle. The youngest daughter trys to become popular with a sleepover with friends. The oldest boy gets his ex girlfriend pregnant who he had tried to break her relationship up.

Analysis: The kids in this family were seen as most real because their story happens all the time dysfunctional or absentee parents where the kids raise themselves usually by an older sister occurs. This also makes it easier to reason with the kids and adapt to the show becuase you or someone you know probably has been like one of these kids. One thing that stood out the most visible was thatone of the older boys is homosexual but they never treat him any different if anything they try to understand him better. Also boys and girls dealing with emotions and hormones. The daughter who had the sleepover tried to dress “sexy”so that the guy who she invited would notice her more, this plays along the stereotype of infantialization of women and seen as sexual objects. Also the guys in this show even though werent aggressive and confindant in nature tried to display what stereotypically guys do to get women. Show was interesting though becuase other than the family stereotypes discusseed most common stereotypes werent immediately evident. What I mean is for example the typical hot male is an athlete on this show it more so may be a punk rocker. Even when the oldest brother tried to get his ex girlfriends boyfriend to cheat he through a girl at him expecting him to react. This shows the stereotype as men overly sexual and just wanting nothing but sex. He doesnt react sexually to her breaking the stereotype in this episode. It breaks out of common stereotypes and in a sense replaces it with an alternative view on the stereotype.  With this show women have more power, but not overly powerful its shown with an assumed weak husband and a family ran by an older sister.

I believe this benefits middle america, shows that everything isnt all perfect, that families deal with real problems. Also I think theres a character on this show that relates to everyone out there. Women especially could see this show as empowering to them as well as minorities of their portrayal here because the white male is the one who is seen as weak.

This show was designed to show even dysfunctinally functioning a family at the end of the day is family and all you have. They want to show the same thing the Cosby’s and all other shows did but with a more “realistic”take showing more drama and things that happen in everyday american households, dealing with alcoholism, absentee parents, low income etc. Its to show the familiarity of this family, to update the true american family, not rich and only dealing with easy problems.

Response:

One thing I was glad to see was that the character roles are so unique but at the same time familiar. Im glad its not so stereotypical like the video games characters we read of that were very stereotypical as men as gangsters, killers, aggressive and women just as sexual. Here on this show men are more lovers, women are agressive natured but still seen as emotional even though more powerful. I believe that just shows the males plight against women even more, just like that article when it said whats more interesting to look at in womans emancipation is mens fight against it, still is evident in tv today. At first I didnt think that the txt and my post woul coincide because I didnt think there would be that country music on this show, because of its vast opposition of most cornerstones of country, (strong man, conservative etc). In shameless the father in a sense is seen as weak an alcoholic, not a strong man like in most country songs and even the idea of family is missed with this show it seems. Towards the end of the show though after everything bad happened and they dealt with it they played a country song in the background as some of the family came together. So it showed that those values are still evident even in a show like shameless. Also unlike other shows weve read about  like friends this one incorporated a diverse cast of races, sexual orientation etc. They havent yet dealt with racial issues but the fact that they are there and not portrayed in stereotypical light is a start.

see what they just did there?

27 Jan

summary: the three magz i reviewed were AARP, O magazine, and Golf digest. In each article gender relations are represented differently. Women are more sexual in the O mag, Women and men are physically fit and sporty in golf digest. In the AARP magazine they showed men and women alike as classy or professional

Analysis: over the three readings i noticed particular strategies in all three. In the AARP mag both genders are represented as normal not a sex figure. men are professional, smart and same for women. One thing that set this magazine apart is there isnt a dominant gender represented. Most ads included couples together and products for both. So both are seen as dominant and visible even though “whiteness” is evident by minimal represenation of other racial genders.  This helps minimize the gap between

genders but perpetuates the whiteness gap. I believe ithelps show the gap of included and excluded

Golf digest: men are dominant women are almost seen asathletic yet sexy

where guys are just athletic. men are the most visible here unlike the other two magz

O magazine: here women are presented in all sizes and colors and shpwn as classy. women are dominant because men are essentially non existent.because of simply the gitle of each magazine you realize who the audience is intended for. golf digest the readers are mostly male in O is dominant of women and AARP was a combination because its intended for older couples.

I believe that the benefit is to those of the reader for eac magazine since they are all so specific they each cater to specific auiences. Men and athletic women for Golf Digest, Older couples for AARP, and wome of all ages for the O magazine.

I believe the design of each artice is to gain thier target audience attention soley I dont believe any magazine I read here cared about the other audiences left such as women for golf digest, younger people for AARP and men and women for the O magazine. Ads are set up even for that paticular audience in a sense other than golf digest gender is represented well. The only reaon not golf digst is becuase of the showing of women only as athletic and sexual.

Its hard to compare readings of race to gender but is shown within these magazines because of the gap created between racial lines represented in these magazines. Although there is a gap noticeable in the O magazie not raially but gender wise there are rarely any males shown.

 

Reaction: One article shoed a man in a farmers outfit saying “we need to protect our land” and a women in a business suit saying “We need to protect our economy” This shows in a sense of a gender gap where mens thinking lies and where women thinking lies At the same time though its almost seen as empowering women becaue she is in a busines suit and all. Other than this im glad i selected three completely different magazines with three dffernt audiences. These magazines represent many of the things weve talked about in class regarding gender. Dominant strong, aggressive men are shown in the sports magazine as expected, women are all througout the O magazine showing women as sexy but classy and powerful. The magazine that stood out the most to me was the AARP magazine becuse neithe geder is shown as truly being dominant but rather sharing the spot light and this allow both women and men audience of this magazine to relate and thus keep interesed in the magazine.

Red Tails

21 Jan

Sorry but i just left the movie and i have to react….Ill make this movie like the show and the previews like the commercials/ advertisement. The movie red tails is supposed to be about the tuskegee airmen who fought in ww2 they were an all black air crew who were treated like the bottom of the bottom. Until their supervisor got permission to allow them to fight in the air instead of just “clean up the trash”. The movie shows the “Red tails” as proven fighters and a determined enemy against the germans.

 

Response: This is the summary i have for the movie simply because this is all the movie showed. There wasnt a true showing of the trials and tribulations the tuskegee airmen really went through. There was terrible acting minimal dialogue and even the action seemed cheap. Which is surprising to me because this is a George Lucas film and the budget was 58 million dollars which Im still trying to figure out where the money went??? Even the credits were a “cheap” font and the opening scene set the movie up for even more failure.

 

Gender issues males were shown as smart or aggresive or emotional there was no gray area for characters. Dominant roles that existed were the smart over achiever and the aggressive ego driven male. Females arent seen as submissive or non dominate simply because there werent that many in the movie. One thing that really stood out was action and shoot em up style wasnt necessarily used here to attract the male audience. Sex wasnt used either neither was emotional appeal. Honestly without trying to use to much personal opinion the movie didnt do enough of anything to lead one way or the other. Who is to benefit is even in question….at first going to see this historical movie you think that the african american audience is who is to benefit, but this is wrong. This movie tried to be so many things that it lost its original goal to portray an accurate example of history. I believe that the directors and people behind this movie wanted to create black heroes but they lost this with trying to make it another Top Gun when it just couldnt be. I dont want to get away from my original point that this movie tried so many things that their was a loss of established roles therfore its hard for me to rate that. From the readings i couldnt necessarily compare anything from there to the movie except that i watched this as if it was a game a terrible version of grand theft auto. Objects just blew up without any apparent reason. I believe that they wanted to en-capture so many audiences this being a major black film backed by hollywood (eventually) that they just couldnt follow the original purpose for the movie, to showcase the tuskegee airmen

 

Watching the previews they were clearly marketed for a minority audience sex, color and love were the themes of each movie. There was a tyler perry movie a cheesy romance movie and a movie starring eva mendez another minority actress. Minority celebration was the theme of the night its just too sad it was done so poorly. Each movie fed on stereotypes of genders males being doctors and females being waitresses. If i was a black woman this movie fed every stereotype of a movie id watch….but im not. I hope i wasnt too blunt

Men get raped too?

13 Jan

Summary: Earlier today I watched an episode of Law and Order SVU and the main subject of the episode was rape and the situation and require surrounding it. In the episode a young woman claimed a young man in college of raping her. He says it was consensual but because she was drunk, therefore could not consent he was charged with rape. The young man was a womanizer and had several partners while in school, his accuser however wasn’t and they made it seem as if she was either a sad case who needed help or mad he hadnt dated her. A pretty simple case of rape but just needed more evidence to further prove he committed the crime. The police and D.A. all wanted to put the kid away before finding out all the facts, even though the evidence against him was not substantial enough, they let their emotions get in the way.

Analysis/Application: I believe that the accuser would see it as most real and vivid, a woman, raped and finding justice, also terrified and scared, all real for victims of such acts. The law its the most visible concrete, black and white and upfront part of the story. Whether this is the police or court system. I believe overall everything/everyone in the story is common sadly this type of incident has become the norm in society even if a swept under the rug norm. Depending how you look at it the power can be shifted depending, from the victims viewpoint the young man has the power as do most men generally speaking. If you are looking from the young mans point of view the court and women in general who claim rape have automatic power over their accused rapists. This is true because the way the law is set up rapists are guilty until proven innocent instead of the other away around as usual.

This representation benefits women everywhere who have been victimized by rape, and have not yet gotten justice. Also could benefit men who are wrongfully convicted of consensual sex not rape.

Depending on the audience the design for the story varies. If the audience is females then they emotionally connect with the victim and want to see justice brought to the young rapist. Males could watch it however and get angry at the way rape cases are handled when forceful entry isn’t obvious, as well the cops and da role in this could anger men as well.

Response: This episode stood out to me because of one reason, the law saying that a person under the influence can not consent to sex. I just find it hard to believe that its so black and white of a subject. Basically if i “hook” up with a girl in a drunken escapade, even if i was more drunk, if she woke up and wanted to claim rape she could, even if she was the one who forced herself on me. Only way I could get out of it would be if people saw us or knew of her “want” for me. What if she got me drunk and we had sex and she was sober? dod she rape me? did i consent? is it all just gender oriented? can men be raped?

I feel each situation should be evaluated but doesnt have to be done so out in the open i think it would better be handled behind the scenes. Why so? because it keeps the victim safe from the media but also keeps the person accused safe too. Only reason i say this is because our court systems are set up that you are innocent until proven guilty whereas in most rape cases ive witnessed through tv or heard about say the accused is guilty until proven innocent. Why does the courts focus change when on the rape subject? is it mainly because its a gender issue or is this crime over any other? To me i believe its the gender issue as well as emotional pull, No one wants to see their mother,daughter or sister raped and the courts agree at the end of the day lets make sure there’s a rape before we lock and throw away the key…