Switching characteristics

In the past, the media has always attributed certain characteristics with specific genders. During the early years of mass media, women were represented as inferior to men. Men were viewed as the breadwinners, and work all day to come home to the woman who had been cleaning the house and preparing the food and awaiting her husbands arrival.  Now, however, the media has been changing the characteristics around. In more recent movies, such as The Proposal or What Happens In Vegas, the woman is viewed as a workaholic or more dominating than the man. In response, the men are viewed as slobs or inferior to the power-hungry, over controlling woman. Is this switch in response to the advances in women's rights? Is this switch good? The characteristics that are being given to both the man and woman in the "If your Husband ever finds out" ad below are negative. The man is seen as aggressive and the woman is seen as inferior and lives only to please her husband. However, in "The Proposal" cover below, the characteristics are simply switched, the man is inferior and the woman is dominating. Some may view this as an extreme advancement by women, that the media is changing their representation of women and men. However, these characteristics are not good, they're only different. Women don't want to be viewed as icy and unfeminine and men don't want to be seen as "unmanly" because they don't work or lead the house hold. Media may be changing it's stereotyping, but that doesn't mean it's changing for the better.

Father's Day 

Considering this past weekend was Father's Day, I thought it appropriate to write about the stereotypes of fathers in the media, what repercussions fathers day may have on kids' attitudes towards fathers, and the various other issues linked with Fathers Day. Father's Day seems like a pretty simple day in theory. It's a day  set aside to appreciate fathers and let them know how much they are loved. However, when the day actually rolls around, many factors hinder it from being that simple day. First of all, there is the obvious factor of people who's fathers are absent. This day brings more hostility, anger, nostalgia, and or fear than expected. Then there is the whole issue of gay and lesbian couples. Preceding Father's Day, the media floods us with ads and messages about the "perfect gift for the perfect dad", or "#1 Dad" which insinuate that the family has one dad, and one mom and is quite insensitive to gays/lesbians. Also, I have noticed, that because our society is one that doesn't want to insult anyone, we extend father's day to all men. For example, a church wouldn't want to be insensitive to a man who can't have children, or whose child is absent, so would give out gifts to all men on Father's day, so that they dont offend anyone. In addition, is Father's Day actually beneficial to Fathers? By this I mean, is fathers day actually celebrated to show appreciation to fathers, or is it viewed more as a day to be nice to your father, to make up for the other 364 days when you're not nice. Lastly, the media has stereotyped Father's Day, in order to make a profit off of the day. I have noticed, especially on Father's Day, that the cards produced only enhance the stereotypes. All this is just a comment on the different aspects and factors that make Father's Day more complex than it is in theory.
Here is an article on stereotyping Fathers on Father's Day with a few examples:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/15/fathers-day-cards_n_1601282.html#s=1102371

Latley, I've noticed that so many of the hollywood movies that come out have not been that good. By this I mean that they all have similar plot lines, humour and or love story. Having grown up abroad, I have been fortunate to see and experience different cultures. Because of this, I have seen, and come to appreciate different styles of film and music. I can understand that a 3 hour Hindi movie is considered short, that 4 song and dance routines including wardrobe changes, is the minimum number, and that subtitles must be read quickly in order to catch all the words. Since being back in Canada, I have noticed that, while there have been some really good, intricitley plotted movies that have come out, the diversity and availability for international movies to be seen is very limited. This, in my opinion, is a shame, because films from other nations have so much cultural, historical and artistic expertise to offer. On the weekend I watched the film Mongol: The Rise of Genghis Khan, and I was blown away by the storyline, as well as the artistic filming and effects. While watching The House of the Flying Dagors, I was also surprised by the directing and producing expertise and the quality of the film, while keeping the richness of the culture. When people watch films from other countries, however, they often forget the culture backgrounds and how developed or undeveloped the country is. If you want a great change, it's nice to watch films based elsewhere, however, don't forget that it will be different from hollywoods films. Basically this rant is just to shed light on films, as well as music, that is refreshingly different from the overdone hollywood style.

Here are a few songs from my favourite Hindi movies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCKaYcdufwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLuMqLxR0r4

While researching my media summative, I came acrosss this article about Anthony Weiner, a married, U.S representative, who sent a "scandalous" picture to a 21 year old college student. As I watched more videos and read more articles about this scandal, I realized the bias of some news reporters. At first when I was researching this story, my understanding, based on the biased information was that Anthony Weiner was a married U.S representative, who sent a revealing picture to a young college student and that he lied about his twitter being hacked and that the picture was his. Later, when I watched some other videos on t and the issue specifically these two: Daily Show with Jon Stewart and.., I was informed about the other side of the issue, and the ways that the news reporters identified the young women and made the photo seem more revealing than it was. I know that I already wrote about media bias especially in news reports, but this was a tangible example when I personally experienced the bias of news reporters and how easy it is to believe that the information is valid or unbiased.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O4sh2y0I7Q

Bias: Pro or Con
It is impossible to relay any information whether in conversation or through the media without it being tainted by bias. Bias is inevitable so why don't we embrace it. Mediums such as Newspapers and Newscasts whose single most important goal is to spew information about the community and the world that affects and interests the masses, should, in an idealistic world, have no bias as they are only relay a story not picking sides. However, we all know that this does not occur and different newspapers and newscasts are known to be left winged or right winged and therefore taint their news based on their political opinion. This isn't a good thing, however as I've already stated, bias is unavoidable and so we should use it for our benefit instead. These mediums should advertise their biases so that the general masses know how to compensate for the slanted news reports. Also if these mediums allow the people to know what their biases are, people can watch two opposing news reports and then compare the two and try to filter the bias from the factual information. Bias can teach people to -as the cliche goes- "not listen to everything everyone tells you". Maybe, with news reports being upfront about their biases, people will listen or read the news, however also analyse the information and decide for themselves what their opinions are on the subject. News reports would become more of an interactive morning or evening exercise with the readers, instead of getting the news, taking it for what is being presented and then flipping the page or channel.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/12/newt-gingrich-complains-fox-news
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States#Bias_in_entertainment_media

Motivated Youth?

                                Motivated Youth?                                              
            A few days ago Mr. O'Connor was talking about the media theory tests that we wrote and He was debating with some students about the reason why many of us did so poorly. Anyways, He said that we should get angry and want to prove him wrong and do well on the next test or project. When I heard him say this I couldn't help wondering why he had used this method as motivation for us to work harder. Is it not obvious that we are a generation that are used to having everything at our fingertips, that we have never had to work hard to get any of your necessities and so really have no concept of what working hard is or what it will get us. From what I have observed we are also a generation that will settle. By this I don't mean we don't strive to have the next best technology because we definitely do that, voraciously. I mean that when people (mostly parents and teachers) imply or blatantly tell us that we can't do something, my observation is that most of us are willing to accept that and respond by not caring in the least. Therefore this means of "motivation" actually back-fires with our generation. We are not, in fact we are drastically different, from our parents generation who could stop wars because they cared enough to protest and demand that things change. They were angry and because of this many issues were addressed and progress occurred. We simply don't care enough to get angry or try harder. Why? I don't know. Maybe it is media and technology that have made us used to getting what we want easily and so if what we want requires some (heaven forbid)...work it must not be worth it. Right?

Media Monster

      A true feminist’s goal is to bring about equality between the sexes. Most feminists, however, aim to bring males down as a means to equalize the playing field. Many women believe that it is men that are restricting their advances to have equal status; however I believe that the media is the true monster behind the way that both women and men are mistreated, misrepresented and therefore misjudged. The media portrays both a stereotypical woman and man. Both sexes, although in different ways and to different degrees, have been limited by the media’s standards of feminine and masculine qualities. Men and women can’t physically look like each other, however the media has also emphasized that some traits such as nurturing, caring, loving are feminine traits and any male who portrays those characteristics is less manly. It is neither males nor females who are solely to blame for the misrepresentation of the opposite sex, because both males and females are being mistreated. These limitations have severe consequences. Women are still being portrayed as objects; submissive, silent and sexualized and men are being portrayed as violent, powerful and strong. The media is still representing women and men in these ways despite the progress and awareness being made about the misrepresentation of both males and females in the media. Will there come a time when a man can be caring, sentimental or emotional without being called “feminine”? Will the media ever portray women in powerful, self-confident roles? And if the media does change, will our society accept the new representation of both men and women?