Thursday, June 26, 2008
Maybe I am biased, but this is ridiculous
Have you seen this commercial? Yes, so have I. Just yesterday I was introduced into the new lows of LC from The Hills. Does she ever find a guy that's not a complete pig is what I want to know. Doesn't look like it. Does AT&T condone a man's "right" to look, and a woman's place to show dissatisfaction but not have it addressed or taken seriously?
The male obviously is not paying attention to what the woman is saying. While he not interested in the woman he is obviously with, he is interested in two women who are walking by the couple's table. These girls look no different from the one sitting before him, but they aren't talking, they are just gliding in an attractive manner. He then takes his phone, with a mirrored screen to watch these women walk away. Sleezy at best. When the woman he is with confronts his (LC) he just smirks and laughs it off as if her concern for is actions don't mean anything.
The male has the power in this commercial. He is white, attractive (according to some) and he shows those watching that listening to a woman (his girlfriend or date) is not important. He demonstrates his lack of attention by looking away from LC, looking toward the other woman, watching them as they walk away and then shrugging and smiling when he is caught by the woman he is sitting with.
LC is playing the typical woman. She is talking about something the male is obviously not interested in, applying lipgloss using her phone's handy mirrored face and then showing displeasure with his lack of attention to her and full attention to the other women through an abbreviated message.
Her message can hardly be taken as serious or really angry, the words aren't fully spelled out and regardless of if this is the norm in text messaging or not, it is still not professional or intelligent. The full importance of her message is not found because she can't even find the time to 1)speak to him directly and 2)write using real words. He then challenges her claim with a shrug and a smile to which she is defenseless so she rolls her eyes and continues on.
Is this how we are suppose to be communicating in relationships? What about the bigger problem?
Yes these two people have a back story but not everyone watching this commercial knows that and that's okay. Whether or not the audience know the characters (I refuse to call them people, they've been playing parts for years), they know they dynamic of that kind of relationship.
I find this commercial to go hand in hand with the klondike bar commericals where a man is talking with his wife and a pretty woman walks by and he doesn't look. The commercial then suggests giving the man a reward of a klondike bar because his attention didn't stray from his wife.
I am not the only one with something to say about this commercial.
Jessica from Feministing said: "Many of you have emailed us about this Klondike commercial. And I agree, it's atrocious. Not only does it feed into the sexist idea that men deserve a cookie for being halfway decent human beings, but it also denigrates men by suggesting that they're animals, unable to resist any ass that that happens to pass their way. Thumbs down."
I'll put more of my own reactions later.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
Media is a Neglectful Parent
Cloistering ourselves away in a tiny, subterranean apartment a few steps off of the beaten path, we find a still-resonating cacophony of sexuality invading our respite via the pile of fashion/music magazines on the coffee table, the pop music cd cover art scattered throughout the entertainment cabinet, and the newspapers and TV guide on the back of the toilet.
Having already realized the inescapable nature of socially constructed approaches to sexual propriety (and impropriety) it spawned a conversation concerning what else in life could be said to be as ubiquitous as the media’s presentation of “sex et al.”
Perhaps social order, perhaps politics, perhaps even Christian morality. The discussion resulted in countless tangents and a multitude of experience-based examples but then, taking the entire consideration one step backward, we realized that sex, society, politics and religion are all constituent parts of worldview…something every single person possesses in a subjective manner. Everyone’s worldview is fundamentally singular, pertaining to the accumulation of their own, individual experiences and inspirations. The funny thing is that, while media influences the worldview by presenting profoundly partisan perspectives, parents have the capability of being equally formative with respect to a person’s worldview, only the partisanship is much more obvious.
What with the amount of time children spend with media, it takes on the role of the nanny; The supervisory assistant to which parents are able to surrender their offspring in order that their own lives might be a little freer and less hindering.
This is the case. It’s a commonly occurring method of child rearing.
And yet the question stands: is this a good thing?
With the recent influx of the media mommy/daddy method of parenting, how are children of this new age of maturation being ultimately affected?
Here’s an answer for you: children are learning more, experimenting more, and practicing more…sex.
And not safely.
At the beginning of our class readings, Brown’s article on Mass Media Influences on Sexuality discussed Cultivation theory in relation to television viewing and specifically cited an example involving high school students and how long-term media exposure resulted in a “shared set of conceptions and expectations about reality.”
In previous settings where media was not in as profuse availability as it is today, the idea of a shared mentality was a threatening and “Anti-American” issue (Communism, Nazism, etc).
And yet now it’s a fresh, lucrative market thirsty for youngsters and their cash.
However, business aside, there are larger, less finite consequences in store for the children whose parents have left them with the TV as a babysitter. Especially where sex is concerned.
It’s interesting how children are hailed for their avid curiosity and amazing learning abilities and yet we anticipate their innocence to remain intact no matter how many formats of sex-saturated media they’re allowed to indulge in on a consistent basis.
Parents’ expectations for their children’s asexuality are easy to see in such encouragements as virginity pledges and faith in the “sexual education” (or miseducation) of public academic institutions.
And yet look what kinds of influences these children are receiving…
Children see these kinds of examples as normal and then culture into themselves a necessity to assimilate.
And it’s because they’re not taught critical thinking skills by the parents who allowed and even encouraged them to intake more and more television, internet, and print.
It’s like sending a child to gather mushrooms without instructing them on how to pick the edible from the poisonous.
Media is crafted to suit its audience; it’s made to order where tweens and teens are concerned. Funny how the very domains created to allow the younger generation an outlet simultaneously provide the media moguls tools to craft even more directly impacting and infiltrating artifacts.
Enter Tila Tequila. Her fame stems from her explosive popularity on Myspace.com whose major membership is composed of elementary to high school age boys and girls. The fact is that these students had to click on the “approve friend request” icon after perusing the requested friend’s page. In that act alone they were doubtlessly exposed to a barrage of Tila’s images not to mention the images of her litany of lascivious friends.
Tila’s presence on such a site presents the youthful explorers with an inappropriate role model both for femininity and sexual action.
Tila is celebrated as a sexual pioneer and her reality turned dating and sexuality into a trend and game.
GOSSIP GIRL
Myspace has promoted this television show to an invasive degree. It’s seasonal appearance is hailed to every single subscriber with each login. It looked at first glance like any other teen soap opera. The difference came in the fact that it’s featured high school age characters are played by college age actors (much like shows like The OC) presenting the intended teen audience with not only an unrealistic physical example of what their bodies ought to look like but an equally implausible notion of the availability and frequency of sex without true emotional relevance and/or consequence.
When teenage boys and girls encounter these types of paradoxes the response, as noted above, is to struggle to become what they ought not and all because they truly don’t know the difference between television and reality other than soundtracks and unlimited costuming.
And with “reality shows” like The Hills to bridge the gap between scripted and unscripted television the idea of honest example is even more clouded. This makes way for even more confusion on the part of children who depend on the media with equivalence to gospel.
In consideration of the whole process of maturing from innocent child to sexually aware teen to independent adult, the primary examples for teens these days are the female pop idols whose entire lives are smattered across the covers of countless tabloids and music mags.
And now...
...the much anticipated Rolling Stone Downfall of Three Female Icons of Pop.
Britney Spears
"Make me a baby, one more time"
Miley Cyrus
"Nobody's Perfect...just naked"
Christina Aguilera
"I want your genie in my bottle"
These three divas have all gone through the same evolution from innocence to sexual extraversion and have done so entirely publicly. They set a precedent for young ladies of today which is the proverbial road map for arguably the hardest time period in young life: adolescence.
Then comes the final point of example where the ultimate goal of maturity is seen. Girls are shown by the images of magazines, specifically of the fashion and style nature, that they need to be marketable. They need to fulfill the desires of and be worth something monetary to affluent men.
No parent would instruct their child to goal themselves to be of higher sexual worth as a positive means of growth.
And yet here we are seeing example of upon example of girls-barely-women fulfilling the roles laid out by Brooks’ Centerfold Syndrome: voyeurism, objectification, validation, trophyism, and fear of true intimacy. Attwood and Krassas concur with their noting of the new view of sex where maturity is concerned; adulthood is hedonism and women are the sex that men do.
As far as parenting goes, leaving the role of protector and provider to what has been demonstrated as an incredibly destructive source, media would definitely earn itself the title of “neglectful.”
By definition, neglectful parenting involves carelessness and a lacking in respect and attention. The parents who remain aloof on the topic of sex in expectation of their children learning from the available media are being careless and lacking in attention. The media itself is intended for mass ingestion and therefore does not pay particular attention to respecting the receivers who are under its care.
It would seem appropriate to close with a question: What must change in order to allow young women to see sexuality and maturity as explorations independent of a mass presented advertisement?
In offering of a few starting options, quit attempting the all or nothing approach to sexuality. Children will find sex in the media, whether prohibited or encouraged. However the likelihood of that exposure being comprehensive and clear enough to provide any sense of holistic truth or absolute is veritably nil without the assistance of influence from a non-mediated example: parents, real life role models, older siblings, teachers, the list goes on.
The media’s presentation of sex is not necessarily inherently and totally bad, it’s just that there’s little to no framing assistance for the children who see it. They must be given the tools with which to unpackage the truth behind the photo shoots, the camera angles, and catchy lyrics.
It’s not just parents who are skipping the beat, it’s any and all of us involved in this commercial environment.
Having already realized the inescapable nature of socially constructed approaches to sexual propriety (and impropriety) it spawned a conversation concerning what else in life could be said to be as ubiquitous as the media’s presentation of “sex et al.”
Perhaps social order, perhaps politics, perhaps even Christian morality. The discussion resulted in countless tangents and a multitude of experience-based examples but then, taking the entire consideration one step backward, we realized that sex, society, politics and religion are all constituent parts of worldview…something every single person possesses in a subjective manner. Everyone’s worldview is fundamentally singular, pertaining to the accumulation of their own, individual experiences and inspirations. The funny thing is that, while media influences the worldview by presenting profoundly partisan perspectives, parents have the capability of being equally formative with respect to a person’s worldview, only the partisanship is much more obvious.
What with the amount of time children spend with media, it takes on the role of the nanny; The supervisory assistant to which parents are able to surrender their offspring in order that their own lives might be a little freer and less hindering.
This is the case. It’s a commonly occurring method of child rearing.
And yet the question stands: is this a good thing?
With the recent influx of the media mommy/daddy method of parenting, how are children of this new age of maturation being ultimately affected?
Here’s an answer for you: children are learning more, experimenting more, and practicing more…sex.
And not safely.
At the beginning of our class readings, Brown’s article on Mass Media Influences on Sexuality discussed Cultivation theory in relation to television viewing and specifically cited an example involving high school students and how long-term media exposure resulted in a “shared set of conceptions and expectations about reality.”
In previous settings where media was not in as profuse availability as it is today, the idea of a shared mentality was a threatening and “Anti-American” issue (Communism, Nazism, etc).
And yet now it’s a fresh, lucrative market thirsty for youngsters and their cash.
However, business aside, there are larger, less finite consequences in store for the children whose parents have left them with the TV as a babysitter. Especially where sex is concerned.
It’s interesting how children are hailed for their avid curiosity and amazing learning abilities and yet we anticipate their innocence to remain intact no matter how many formats of sex-saturated media they’re allowed to indulge in on a consistent basis.
Parents’ expectations for their children’s asexuality are easy to see in such encouragements as virginity pledges and faith in the “sexual education” (or miseducation) of public academic institutions.
And yet look what kinds of influences these children are receiving…
Children see these kinds of examples as normal and then culture into themselves a necessity to assimilate.
And it’s because they’re not taught critical thinking skills by the parents who allowed and even encouraged them to intake more and more television, internet, and print.
It’s like sending a child to gather mushrooms without instructing them on how to pick the edible from the poisonous.
Media is crafted to suit its audience; it’s made to order where tweens and teens are concerned. Funny how the very domains created to allow the younger generation an outlet simultaneously provide the media moguls tools to craft even more directly impacting and infiltrating artifacts.
Enter Tila Tequila. Her fame stems from her explosive popularity on Myspace.com whose major membership is composed of elementary to high school age boys and girls. The fact is that these students had to click on the “approve friend request” icon after perusing the requested friend’s page. In that act alone they were doubtlessly exposed to a barrage of Tila’s images not to mention the images of her litany of lascivious friends.
Tila’s presence on such a site presents the youthful explorers with an inappropriate role model both for femininity and sexual action.
Tila is celebrated as a sexual pioneer and her reality turned dating and sexuality into a trend and game.
GOSSIP GIRL
Myspace has promoted this television show to an invasive degree. It’s seasonal appearance is hailed to every single subscriber with each login. It looked at first glance like any other teen soap opera. The difference came in the fact that it’s featured high school age characters are played by college age actors (much like shows like The OC) presenting the intended teen audience with not only an unrealistic physical example of what their bodies ought to look like but an equally implausible notion of the availability and frequency of sex without true emotional relevance and/or consequence.
When teenage boys and girls encounter these types of paradoxes the response, as noted above, is to struggle to become what they ought not and all because they truly don’t know the difference between television and reality other than soundtracks and unlimited costuming.
And with “reality shows” like The Hills to bridge the gap between scripted and unscripted television the idea of honest example is even more clouded. This makes way for even more confusion on the part of children who depend on the media with equivalence to gospel.
In consideration of the whole process of maturing from innocent child to sexually aware teen to independent adult, the primary examples for teens these days are the female pop idols whose entire lives are smattered across the covers of countless tabloids and music mags.
And now...
...the much anticipated Rolling Stone Downfall of Three Female Icons of Pop.
Britney Spears
"Make me a baby, one more time"
Miley Cyrus
"Nobody's Perfect...just naked"
Christina Aguilera
"I want your genie in my bottle"
These three divas have all gone through the same evolution from innocence to sexual extraversion and have done so entirely publicly. They set a precedent for young ladies of today which is the proverbial road map for arguably the hardest time period in young life: adolescence.
Then comes the final point of example where the ultimate goal of maturity is seen. Girls are shown by the images of magazines, specifically of the fashion and style nature, that they need to be marketable. They need to fulfill the desires of and be worth something monetary to affluent men.
No parent would instruct their child to goal themselves to be of higher sexual worth as a positive means of growth.
And yet here we are seeing example of upon example of girls-barely-women fulfilling the roles laid out by Brooks’ Centerfold Syndrome: voyeurism, objectification, validation, trophyism, and fear of true intimacy. Attwood and Krassas concur with their noting of the new view of sex where maturity is concerned; adulthood is hedonism and women are the sex that men do.
As far as parenting goes, leaving the role of protector and provider to what has been demonstrated as an incredibly destructive source, media would definitely earn itself the title of “neglectful.”
By definition, neglectful parenting involves carelessness and a lacking in respect and attention. The parents who remain aloof on the topic of sex in expectation of their children learning from the available media are being careless and lacking in attention. The media itself is intended for mass ingestion and therefore does not pay particular attention to respecting the receivers who are under its care.
It would seem appropriate to close with a question: What must change in order to allow young women to see sexuality and maturity as explorations independent of a mass presented advertisement?
In offering of a few starting options, quit attempting the all or nothing approach to sexuality. Children will find sex in the media, whether prohibited or encouraged. However the likelihood of that exposure being comprehensive and clear enough to provide any sense of holistic truth or absolute is veritably nil without the assistance of influence from a non-mediated example: parents, real life role models, older siblings, teachers, the list goes on.
The media’s presentation of sex is not necessarily inherently and totally bad, it’s just that there’s little to no framing assistance for the children who see it. They must be given the tools with which to unpackage the truth behind the photo shoots, the camera angles, and catchy lyrics.
It’s not just parents who are skipping the beat, it’s any and all of us involved in this commercial environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)