Commitment Ceremony

Don't know if anyone's seen this, but I think it's awesome. It's also one of the pieces from She Likes Girls 3.

5. Rose: Interview with NPR and Time

Tricia Rose in her interview with NPR talks about women in Hip-Hop and how women have to do more to prove themselves credible as MCs and lyricists, while defending their sexuality. Rose says, "women have to address in hip-hop, at some point, their relationship to sexuality"; whether they take the Lil' Kim route to be "a rhyming stripper" or Queen Latifah who is "the tough gangster girl" and has her sexuality questioned. Rose says to make it in hip-hop you pretty much have to be hypersexual or hypertough and in commercial hip-hop women have become further marginalized and under appreciated women.

Her interview with Time Magazine on the other hand is about her book The Hip Hop Wars and how mainstream hip-hop is dead. She discusses hip-hop artists that don't sell as well as the more mainstream ones do; there's "this idea that a certain kind of sexual deviance or violent behavior defines black culture has had a huge market in commercial mainstream culture for at least 200 years. Also, sexist images, which hip-hop has a lot of, seem to do very well across the cultural spectrum. So sexuality and sexual domination sell. Racial stereotypes sell". Artists like Mos Def, Common, and Talib Kweli don't fit into these stereotypes that other hip-hop artists accept. Rose says that hip-hop hasn't always been so commercial; instead, "it was mostly for fun and for play. It wasn't primarly [sic] an economic industry, where people got involved more for money than for creativity. It had live community origins". In these interviews Rose discusses how Hip-Hop has changed from the beginning and how women rappers are forced into roles and if an artist wants to be successful, according to mainstream, s/he needs to fill the stereotypes.

Listening to this interview, I had no idea who most of the hip-hop artists she listed were. She talked about Roxanne Shante, who she said was one of the earliest female rappers to break the ice.



I also don't understand why these women will try to break out in this industry that has limited their movement and makes them fit into one of two categories. Or at least, why they don't try to do more, or aren't more vocal about trying, to break these molds.

The Time Magazine interview relates to the assumption that media matters. The media play a critical role in teaching us about the world. It seems that mainstream Hip-Hop today is a misleading form of media because everything that gets played on the radio and that people listen to is the stereotypical Hip-Hop "where people are just rhyming about killing everybody who gets in their way and never caring about a woman". There are rappers that are doing it just to sell. "Even [Jay-Z] has acknowledged that he's "dumbed his music down" so that he can sell records". I don't think listeners realize this though or that what they are hearing is only a small selection of what counts as Hip-Hop.

After reading her interview with Time, I decided to look up Mos Def on YouTube and found an interesting rock the vote campaign with him in it. After watching this, I see how different he is from 50 Cent and other similar artists. It's probably just based on what music I primarily listen to, but I never hear anything about Mos Def, and I feel like there should be a lot more interest taken in him.



EDIT: After class yesterday, I came up with a question/something I don't understand... What on earth is a tip drill? What does that even mean?

Sex Ed

I'm doing research for my gender and sexuality project and found an interesting sex ed video from the 50s. Thought I'd share.

4. Prensky: "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants"

Marc Prensky begins his piece, "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants", by saying the cause of the decline of U.S. education is ignored; "Our students have  changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system  was designed to teach" (1).    Prensky goes on to say that technology has created a gap between generations; he calls it "a 'singularity' – an event which changes things so fundamentally that there is absolutely no going back" (1).  The introduction of technology, such as television, computers, video games, cell phones, etc., has dramatically changed the lives of students (K through college), who are the first generation to grow up with this technology.  As a result being constantly surrounded by technology "today's students think and process information fundamentally  differently from their predecessors" (Prensky 1).  

Prensky refers to this generation as Digital Natives because "students today are all "native speakers" of the digital language" (1).   On the other hand, those people who are not from this generation, but are interested in technology and have come to use it are known as Digital Immigrants.  He says that while they may learn to use technology, these Digital Immigrants, like real immigrants, retain an accent, that using technology doesn't come naturally to them.  According to Prensky, this remains an issue because "the single biggest problem facing education today is that our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language" (2).  He says that teachers need to change the way they present material because students today can't deal with the slow paced way they currently do.  If something worked for the teacher when they were a student, it will not by any means be guaranteed to work for this new generation of students, and teachers need to be the ones to adapt because technology is such an integral part of the lives of their students.

While reading this, I was wondering who it was supposed to be geared to.  Is it for the immigrant or the native?  Shouldn't the students take some responsibility for paying attention in class, even if it is boring?  I feel like teachers used to not care if students liked the material or not, they had to learn it anyway.

This piece was more about educating students of all ages, than teenagers.  It dealt with the reasons students learn differently due to technology and how teachers tend to resist this.  It relates to the third course assumption that media matters.  Popular culture shapes lives of all Americans whether or not they accept or resist it.  Prensky was saying that students learn differently due to the influence of computers, television, and video games and while the natives celebrate these forms, the immigrants are more hesitant to do so and abandon the methods on which they were raised.

"Digital Immigrants don't believe their students can learn successfully while watching TV  or listening to music, because they (the Immigrants) can't.  Of course not – they didn't  practice this skill constantly for all of their formative years" (3).  I think this is awesome, because my mom was always on my case when I was younger, and even my sister's now, not to do homework or study while watching t.v./listening to music, but I never had any issue with it that she assumed I did, simply because she would never be able to do it.  

3. Hine: The Rise and Fall of the American Teenager

Thomas Hine prefaces his book The Rise and Fall of the American Teenager, by telling a story of how as a teenager he had already started writing this book; the thoughts he had as a high school senior were validated in some ways by many studies he read later in life. In the introduction, Hine states what this book is about: "it's about people in their teens throughout American history - what adults expected of them, how they fit into the world they found, and how they helped shape it as well" (3). Hine says the book isn't supposed to be nostalgic and reminiscent of his teen years, that the only reason he mentioned his 16-year-old self was as a reminder that teenagers are real and that everyone was one at some point.

The first chapter is "The Teenage Mystique" and about contemporary teenagers in general and what they face in terms of laws and rules and how it differs from those in the baby boomers' generation nearly 40 years ago. Adults are both envious of teenagers and afraid of them; "the very qualities that adults find exciting and attractive about teenagers are entangled with those we find terrifying" (Hine 11). Age is seen as the only way to define and classify people; using age as the only factor is the way lawmakers and society give rights equally.

Hine says, "Europeans observed that Americans grew quickly in every way, taking on responsibilities and vices much sooner than their European counterparts" (5). If this is true, how come most European countries have a lower drinking age than America if Americans have to take on more responsibilities earlier? I also didn't understand why, if "adults envy teens for their energy, their freshness, their passion, and they seek to imitate them" (21), teenagers are given such a hard time.

Hine's mentioning of his teenage self relates to the second assumption this class is grounded in - that teenagers are not some alien life form. Hine says he introduced his teenage persona because "his role is to keep reminding me that while this is largely a history of roles and expectations, the teenagers I'm discussing aren't some exotic species - they're real people" (3).

Hine mentions that he doesn't have any teenagers, but "had plenty of offer of help from people who are. 'You can have mine to study' they say, adding that they'll take the kid back in three or four years" (3). I've heard my mom and other people joke about that, but I don't think it's funny. I think it's just another way parents/adults are mean and like to put down their kids. They knew going into it that eventually their children would be teenagers, so they should just deal with it if their kid isn't perfect.

Teenagers who want so desperately to be treated as adults, are given all these rules and laws that try to prevent them from having sex, or smoking and drinking. Teenagers know these things are associated with being an adult, so of course they do them to rebel or to be older. Parents try to stop their kids from having sex, even though they are in their prime and hormones are surging within them. No matter what, teenagers will have sex if they want to, and parents need to accept this and talk to their teens so they do it responsibly.

2. Media Literacy

Article - Got to this one through Media Lit. I found it to be an interesting article; I have certainly noticed a lot of people smoke in movies, and I know from experience that when I see people smoking in movies I want a cigarette really bad (and it really sucks because I quit a month ago).

Media Literacy - This one is chock full of links regarding all different types of topics and issues surrounding the media and helpful information for teachers. And who doesn't like free stuff?

About-Face - This one was good. It's about harmful media messages, aimed at women and girls, and the influence they have on self esteem and body image. I particularly enjoyed the Gallery of Offenders; I haven't seen have the ads they have listed and they are outrageous (especially #9). On the other side of it, they have a Gallery of Winners, showing the ads that have taken the right approach (a winner!). They also have a place for readers to send in their own thoughts and images they have found (positive and negative).

Found this (along with others) through the about-face site [Other Links]
Media Watch - "Our goal is to challenge abusive stereotypes and other biased images commonly found in the media. Media Watch, which began in 1984, distributes educational videos, media literacy information and newsletters to help create more informed consumers of the mass media. We do not believe in any form of censorship, especially the silencing of marginalized groups. We believe education will help create a more active citizenry who will take action against commercial media saturation." They also provide a list of links to check out. [Resources]

Women in Media - "Women In Media & News, a media analysis, education and advocacy group, works to increase women's presence and power in the public debate. WIMN's POWER Sources Project provides journalists with a diverse network of female experts. "

Women's Media Center - "The Women’s Media Center makes women visible and powerful in the media. Led by our president, the Emmy-winning journalist, writer, and producer Carol Jenkins, the WMC works with the media to ensure that women’s stories are told and women’s voices are heard. We do this in three ways: through our media advocacy campaigns; by creating our own media; and by training women to participate directly in media. We are directly engaged with the media at all levels to ensure that a diverse group of women is present in newsrooms, on air, in print and online, as sources and subjects." [about]

Safety Net - This comes from the American Academy of Pediatrics website. It's a resource for parents on how to keep their children (teens too) safe on the internet. Like the others it's full of links for them to click on to learn more. The AAP also has a campaign called Media Matters that works to make parents, children, and even pediatricians aware of the influence the media has on adolescent health.

1. Christensen: "Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us"

In "Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us," Christensen writes of her own experiences and issues with American media, along with teaching her students to view it critically. She "wants [her] students to question [the] accepted knowledge and the secret education delivered by cartoons as well as by the traditional literary canon" (127). Disney movies and Saturday morning cartoons are not being critically assessed by children; they unknowingly accept the subtle (or not so subtle) stereotypes and grow up believing them to be true. Girls start believing women cannot have brains and beauty, Ursula is the evil sea witch from The Little Mermaid and while she's smart, she's ugly (130), and if a girl wants to be happy, it "means getting a man, and transformation from wretched conditions can be achieved through consumption - in their case, through new clothes and a new hairstyle" (133). On the same token, boys learn that "men must be virile and wield power or be old and the object of 'good-natured' humor" (131).

Christensen also makes a point to say that people should not just make note of and realize these stereotypes are in place, but should try to enact change. She does not think it is enough to teach the students "that it's enough to be critical without taking action[.] That we can quietly rebel in the privacy of the classroom while we practice our writing skills, but we don't really have to do anything about the problems we uncover, nor do we need to create anything to take the place of what we've expelled" (134). As a teacher, her goal is to mold her students' critical thinking skills, while using it to incite them into action and strive for change.

I didn't really have any issues comprehending this reading. I suppose I don't really understand how people can honestly take cartoons or Disney movies for example so seriously, especially the outdated ones Christensen was writing about. Peter Pan is from the early 1900s and Walt Disney's version is from 1953, obviously Wendy is viewed as the mother and it's the only role she has to fill. Even her examples of newer cartoons - Aladdin, Pocahontas, and Mulan are 10 years old. Now everything has to be so politically correct that kids watch animals, or even inanimate objects (like cars), fall in love and what sexist or racist lesson could kids possibly learn from cars?

This reading relates to the 3rd assumption the course is shaped by, that media matters. She says, "many students don't want to believe that they have been manipulated by children's media or advertising...they assure me that they make their own choices and the media has no power over them - as they sit with Fubu, Nike, Timberlands or whatever the latest fashion rage might be" (128). Teenagers and youth are ruled by the norms presented by the media; whether they accept or reject them, their lives are still being dictated.

I grew up watching Winnie the Pooh, Barney, and Sesame Street, all popular children's shows, but Christensen doesn't address them. Instead she discusses now outdated programs; some of which are no longer on television, yet Sesame Street has been on the air for 40 years. I guess it must be doing something right or she would've mentioned it as being detrimental to the psyche of growing children.