People with Disability in the Media

People with disability in the media are stereotyped a lot. In the media they are viewed as individuals who have the same characteristics and attitudes no matter what type of disability they are suffering from. Usually they are viewed as the object of pity. In movies they are the individuals who you feel sorry for. In most movies the character who is suffering from a disability are often in wheelchairs since it is an ironic sign of disability. Also, the actors who play these types of characters are not disabled, and they do not have an idea of how it really feels in being an individual who is suffering from a disability.

Furthermore, another common stereotype against people with disability in the media is the villain. In movies, characters who are suffering from a disability are often the villains. In the media their disabilities are used to support evil. For example pirates who lost their eye, their arms or their legs through an accident often become the villain due to the fact that they try to seek revenge. Therefore, in movies these characters have been driven to commit crime due to the hatred of their disability. But in realty the majority of the people suffering from a disability are most likely to be the victims of the crime and not the ones who commit the crime.



Moreover, another common stereotype against people with disability in the media is the ones who overcome their disability. Although this positive stereotype is a better image than the other stereotypes, it is still a stereotype. For example the movie soul surfer, which is about this teenage girl who lost her arm in a shark attack and had the courage to go back in the ocean and surf again. I think that it is really great that this character has overcome her disability, and there are many people in reality who have overcome their disability as well. But what about those who have not? In the media, it focuses on the individuals who overcame their disability, but not those who have not. Also, it portrays disability as a challenge and individuals who are suffering from it can overcome it if they tried harder, which is not true.

Question:

1. What do you think about people with disability in the media?
2. Do you think that the media should portray people with disability in the ways they do?
3. Do you think that they are being treated equally in the media? Why or Why not?

Learning about Sex before Learning How to Tie Your Shoelaces?

Have you ever been in a health class in elementary school where the teacher starts off like this: “Good Evening students, today we will be discussing homosexual intercourse?" That just might be the case after the revised sex ed. curriculum is implemented. Here are some of the new additions that elementary students will learn about under the revised curriculum:

In grade one, students will learn about the male and female genitalia using the correct terms such as: penis and vagina. In 1998 there was no mention of genitalia in the curriculum. In grade three students will learn of differences with regards to learning abilities, gender identity and sexual orientations. At age six students will learn about masturbation and at age 12 they will learn about oral and anal sex. Teachers will be able to freely discuss issues relating same-sex parents and homosexuality in general.

McGuinty, who supports the curriculum said that it is better to give youngsters the information they need in school programs rather than having them seek information on their own from unreliable sources.

In response, Dr. Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College, offered his opinion by stating, "This is so confusing to an eight-year-old ... these are children in the strongest sense of the word -- they're innocent, they're clean, they're beautiful -- and to corrupt them by imparting a question of gender identity is beyond the pale."

The new curriculum has also angered several parents who believe that children should not be learning such material at such a tender age. Many parents also argue that teaching children about topics such as masturbation and homosexuality is against their religion. Parents feel that they should have a say in terms of what their children are learning about sexuality.

Personally, I do not support the new curriculum for a number of reasons. Firstly, I do not understand what purpose this new curriculum serves. Why would a first or third grader need to know about such material in such detail? 8 year olds should not be worried about such issues. Sex ed should be taught at an age where students can understand the importance of it. A first or third grader would not take such matters seriously and would not understand the importance of the topic. Children are pure and innocent, and they should be able to maintain that innocence without adults having to corrupt their minds at an age where they do not know the ways of the world. Kids are also curious. If we teach children about such topics some will likely try having sex out of curiosity. Because teachers will openly be talking about sexual matters, students may be under the impression that having sex at a young age is acceptable, which can actually increase teen pregnancy. If children learn about concepts such as oral/anal sex, why should there be any viewer discretion when it comes to T.V shows or movies. Also, in most health classes teachers are careful not to preach abstinence; instead they talk about the safest ways to having sex.

I do not encourage that adults keep sexuality a “secret” from children, however, it should be taught an age where students are mature enough to understand the importance. In my previous health classes, none of the teachers really talked about homosexuality. The focus was mostly on sexual relations between heterosexual couples. I feel that teachers should teach about homosexuality because it eliminates ignorance and can help make homosexuals feel more integrated within society. Furthermore, parents should have a limited involvement in the curriculum. They should be able to voice their opinion, but should not be allowed to dictate what will or will not be taught. Sex ed should be treated like any other subject taught in school, and just like other subjects, it should be taught when students are mature enough to understand it.

(1) Are you in favor of curriculum that is being proposed? Why or why not?
(2) Do you believe that teachers should talk about homosexuality in health classes?
(3) Should parents have control over what children learn in terms of sexuality or should health classes be treated as any other subject taught in school?

Kims - No Kims no Joy

Here is a commercial of two different stereotype groups.
I think one group is the typical straight group (or cool group) where they eat junk foods like chips which the commercial is trying to sell KiMs chips
The other group is the typical gay groups who eats vegetable where one of the guy makes a gesture that is stereotype to be feminist.
I actually found the commercial funny, I was laughing at the part where the first group started screaming when they see the vegetables.
Well, I laugh at things very easily though.

Questions:
1)What was your first reaction from watching the video?
2)What do you think about the two different groups in the commercial? (Compare them)
3)Do you think one group is necessary better than the other group?
4)Which group do you think you belong to? (You can say neither)

Freedom of Choice: every woman's right

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWJRam64dQY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

In France, the law imposes a fine of €150 (£132) fine and/or citizenship course as a punishment for wearing a niqab or a face-covering veil. Is it not ironic that France, which claims to promote freedom of rights, is now snatching away the same rights from its own citizens? Clearly, this is a violation of women’s right and is restricting women from practicing their own religious beliefs. The law is presented under the auspice of “protecting” Muslim women and liberating them from oppression.

The banning of niqab law is based on misconceptions about Islam being inherently oppressive to women. Unfortunately, Muslims are partly to blame for such misconceptions. In some Muslim-majority countries women are mistreated and abused due to sexist cultural practices that are in violation of Islamic teachings. Muslims need to practice Islam correctly by understanding and applying truthful Islamic principles and eliminating all the unjust and oppressive practices. Moreover, Muslim in western/European countries need to explain and demonstrate the true teachings of Islam and explain the difference between backwards cultural practices and religious rituals by always referring to the holy book, the Qu’ran.

According to statistics, there are 2,000 Muslim converts in France that voluntarily chose to wear the niqab. Most of them lost their jobs because they refused to remove the veil at work. From their perspective, they feel that they are preventing themselves from being objectified and sexualized. They want their sexuality to be in their control. They do not want people to judge them based on their body appearances but rather deal with their intelligence. I find it very hypocritical when western governments and human rights groups rush to defend women’s right when some governments (such as government of Afghanistan) force women to wear a certain dress code, yet, these same “freedom fighters” look the other way when women are deprived of their rights to freedom of choice, to practice religion and to work, just because they chose to exercise their right to wear the niqab. Many women, such as Hibah Ahmed, believe that they are fighting against a systematic oppression against women in which women's bodies are sexualized and objectified. “…if we want to really talk about the oppressive situation of women lets talk about all the eating disorders, the plastic surgeries, all of the unhealthy diets that are being done all in the name of having the perfect body. To me this (niqab) is liberating and this is empowering."

I never looked at oppression in this way because media usually shows oppression as women being forced to wear the hijab/niqab but it never shows women being forced to remove it. For clarification, the niqab is not mandatory; however, the hijab is in Islam. I am against the banning of the niqab because it violates democracy, basic human rights and it oppresses women . However, if it is a matter of safety, and the woman has to prove her identity, for example in airports, courtrooms etc, than I strongly believe that the woman must remove her veil to prove her identity. After all, why should she be any special than anyone else. The law is justice to everyone which is why she should remove the veil if safety becomes a concern or if identity needs to be proven.

1. What is your opinion about the banning of niqab? Do you support it? why or why not?
2. Do you think France will ever change its law about the banning of niqab?
4. Do you believe there is such thing as "Islamophobia?" If yes, do you think Islamophobia is the most underlying reason/factor to the banning of niqab?

Homosexual parents?

In today’s society most children are usually well-mannered, sophisticated and have valuable strengths, but where do we derive these traits from? One possible answer to that question is the way we are brought up by our parents; in other words their ‘parenting’. But what do you think might happen if your parents are of the same sex? Will you still turn out the way you did now? A justice department study has solemnly concluded that parenting by same sex families is equally good for children when compared with heterosexual families. The study was commissioned by the Liberal government in 2003. The study concluded that children who are raised by same-sex parents tend to be as competitive as parents from opposite-sex parents. Few studies also gave astonishing results that children raised by two lesbian mothers do better in social competence rather than children in ‘traditional nuclear families’. Nonetheless, almost every study on same-sex parenting has been only done on lesbian mothers because they spend the most time with their children, the report also mentions that there is too little research in particular about gay male parents to determine any terminal conclusion.

Virginia West, a lesbian mother, who is raising two-year old Rowan with her partner Cheryl Reid in Toronto, said that the study validates that lesbians are better at parenting than gays. She also said that she is very content that the government organized this research because it gives a direct message that homosexuals can be good parents, this process by the government might help most homosexual’s by letting them live a normal life. According to her, she thinks if she lived in USA then she would not get these rights. She is also deeply saddened that people think that homosexual parents are detrimental to their children. I’m very aware that people think that way but you know spend a little time with us and you won’t think that way.”

Personally, homosexuals model a poor view of marriage to children. I think that they cannot make good parents and they’re detrimental to their children because; firstly the child’s future is insecure because he/she has been raised by only one type of gender so therefore it will be a problem for the child to trust the opposite gender in future as they are not used to them. This may not happen that often but sometimes both parents face too much of discrimination by the society and they may displace their anger on each other or their child, and seeing this the child might develop a negative image about the concept of homosexuality and this may also drift the child away from his/her parents. These children will face discrimination at school and from many other places; therefore they might be unable to make friends as no one would want to be with them.

Questions:

1) If you’re parents are homosexual then how would you feel? Would you just ignore this and move on with your life OR Are you going to think about it and curse yourself for being born in this family?
2) How do you think would the results of the study differ if it was done on gay’s (males) and not lesbians (females)?
3) In general the relationship between the two partners who are homosexual, do you think is it true love or is it just sexual attraction? How does this affect their children?

Conan O'Brien

1. What did you think of the video/joke? Did you find it funny or rude and why?
2. Do you think Conan O'Brien's idea that Artistic people are "gay" is true?

A Jihad For Love

Today in class we discussed the dominant discourse surrounding portrayals of homosexuality in the media.  We came to some agreement that the typical homosexual in popular media is:

- male
- white
- fashionable
- flamboyant
- Western

By depicting homosexuals in such a narrow way, we remain ignorant about the diversity among homosexuals.  For instance, the documentary A Jihad For Love follows the lives of a number of gay and lesbian Muslims who live in countries where homosexuality can be punishable by death.  I urge you to finish watching this film (now with subtitles!) and leave your comments on this post.  What is your reaction to a Muslim man who also identifies himself as gay?  How does it challenge your previous view of homosexuality?

A Jihad for Love

The filmmaker interviewed on The Hour

P.S. On a side note, here is a short animated film about homosexuality from another great documentary called For the Bible Tells me so about Western, Christian families who find out their sons/daughers are homosexual. 

Homosexuality: Is it a Choice?

Where is the “equality”?

Justin Bieber, Rebecca Black, Miley Cyrus, Willow Smith, all these young “children” start acting like grown-ups the second the enter the industry. I remember the time Justin Bieber’s One Time came out. Every site I went on, had hate comments for him. Now, when I go on youtube you know what I see? Hate comments for Rebecca Black’s Friday. Hate comments for Rebecca just don’t seem to be stopping. I wouldn’t be surprised if in the next couple of years, she’s the next Katy Perry or Lady Gaga or Any other female superstar!

It’s been like a trend. Every artist that comes up without any famous family background goes through this phase in which they have to listen to all the hated comments. For some reason, female artists have to listen more of this criticism. What I am trying to get here at is that, no matter how brave or talented you are, there will always be people criticising you at everywhere step you take, especially if you’re a female.

Let’s take William and Kate’s royal for example. I was just watching a documentary on T.V. about their up-coming marriage, and there was this particular line said by one of the former bridesmaid of Princess Diana. She said “The paparazzi were just waiting for Diana to make a fool of herself”. The question that is been bothering is that why wasn’t the paparazzi waiting for Prince Charles to make a fool of himself? Why was it just princess Diana? Yes I know because she’s a new addition to the Royal family, but that doesn’t give the media to follow her on every step she takes.

My point befemale artists, knowingly or unknowingly, are pressurized more than men to become these so called “idols”, which every female should be looking up too. Female artist make one wrong move, and it’s all over the internet.

My question to everybody is:

Is it okay to young artists to go through the same experience that the adult artists are going through? Is it possible for these young artists to get a negative impression of their talent or themselves after reading the hateful comments?

Why is the female artist always the centre of attraction? Why is the spotlight always on the female artists and barely ever on the male artist? When we say that everybody is equal, then why differentiate between male and females?

Heroism shadowed

What makes a hero? Were are so used to seeing what a hero is suppose to look like or how they should act, but to be one is truly another story. It made me think of females as heroes, and why is it that their now shown saving the day, yet still hidden in the shadows. Of course there always is superwoman, but without even knowing what she really does, even I just assumed she is just a symbol for an attractive hero in tights. Were not always exposed to such heroic stories, especially with women sadly, but recently I read a book that fiction it may be, A thousand splendid suns simply blew me away!

The story of 2 remarkable strong women named Mariam and Laila living in Afghanistan who are brought together under unfortunate desperate circumstances. With Mariam being nineteen years older than Laila, they both are sister wives of a man who takes them in during a war. Both of their pasts are completely different. Mariam, being a poor woman who grew up in a small house abandoned by her father, and Laila a financially stable girl with a passion for education. The story reveals two women, Laila actively allowed to speak her mind and encouraged to be a strong woman in the Afghan society, and Mariam not allowed to be educated what so over. When both of them are forced into marrying a man they don’t desire neither of them can understand why they are brought into this situation. But both women begin to realize that they have more in common than just an inhumane manipulative husband Rasheed, whom they were both forced to marry in their teens. During the bloody wars in Afghanistan, as women they are taken away all their rights. The Tailban makes sure that women know what their place is in the country.

You will not, under any circumstances, show your face. You will cover with burqa when outside. If you do not, you will be severely beaten.

You will not wear charming clothes.

You will not speak unless spoken to.

You will not make eye contact with men.

You will not laugh in public. If you do, you will be beaten.

You will not paint your nails. If you do, you will lose a finger.

Girls are forbidden from attending school. All schools for girls will be closed immediately

Women are forbidden from working.

If you are found guilty of adultery, you will be stoned to death.

Listen. Listen well. Obey.

Until one day when Rasheed’s physical abuse went a little too far and came close to taking away Laila’s life. It was than when Mariam did perhaps the only right thing to do when someone’s life is at risk. Mariam saved Laila by killing Rasheed with a shovel before he could kill the young girl. And of course, she was the hero and stopped such a violent action being taken place in such a misogynistic society. Ofcourse, due to her saving another WOMAN and killing a MAN, she had to be put to death. What is sad is that religion is used and manipulated in an entirely wrong way. That due to “religion” Matriam had to be put to justice. It’s not even about gender at this point, is simply about saving an innocent life. I truly believe we live in a society where both woman and men are acknowledged fairly for their heroic acts, but this doesn’t happen in all parts of the world.

1. Do you think that in a situation like this that perhaps it’s males who fear the capability of women, that they failed to recognize what the male in this situation tried to do , over what the female tried to stop?

How do you think heroism and gender differ? That even till today, is a male hero seen “saving the day”, far superior than a female saving the day?

Inluding the situation with Mariam, and today’s society, is male heroism hailed and females hidden?

Equality?

Fire brigade relaxes strength and fitness test to make entry easier for women   

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375381/Fire-service-strength-fitness-tests-relaxed-allow-women-firefighters.html#ixzz1KPiMi4QO

Equality between men and women is a worthwhile thing to strive for. However, we must not confuse equality with being the same. There are biological differences between men and women, differences which give advantages towards strength and stamina. As the article points out the physical requirements to become a firefighter were lowered because it was found that "the old test used to discriminate against women".

I think it's is a mistake to lower standards in order to pander to a politically correct agenda, especially when those standards address life and death situations. The equality we as a society strive for is undermined if the standards are lowered just to make it easier for women to become firefighters.

1) You are in a burning building. Who would you rather be saved by? A person who passed the old test, which requires greater physical strength and endurance, or by a person who passed the second test?
2) Is it discrimination if women find it more difficult than men to pass a physical test?

Christina Aguilera - Beautiful

1)Do you accept the characters shown in the video?

2)What do you think about the characters in the video?

3)Do you think it is fair for these people for how they are being treated in society?

4)How would you feel if you were being discriminated by the society?

Reversal of "Attraction-Expression" Forces

You know the action-reaction forces, which is a physical science concept perceived by Sir Isaac Newton initially. The concept is that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This advertisement rightly proves it. It is a known fact that whether most men admit it or not, they check women out. This does not seem or sound awkward, in fact, it is quite normal. What if it is vice-versa though? The institution of media is so powerful that it can quickly force the general public to alternate their beliefs and opinions. A common stereotype associated with men is how they have the "freedom" in public to actually almost glance at women and comment about their physical appearance. This attribute, possibly, is one of the aspects shaping up their sexual orientation of heterosexuality. Can you imagine women doing the same with men? How would the media portray that change?

 From the lens of heterosexual men, women are underlings in the male-dominated world. When men socialize in institutions such as offices, women are more often than not left out from the ongoing casual discourse. The gender role for men enables them to live a life of superiority as we have become accustomed to it as the norm. In the corporate world, women are not at the top of the ladder in most cases. Why is this? It is simple; women are to manage households than industries no matter the wealth of talent they would possess. Thanks to changing times and technology, women are better off than yesteryear, but still have a long way to go before true equity and equilibrium of power is reached. Unfortunately, we know that is never going to happen in our lifetime, at least for now. 

Why are we shocked when women express themselves in public? My first reaction when I had viewed this advertisement for the first time last summer was like - "Wow...this is awesome"! I loved how both the women use their authoritative power to check Roger Federer out (He is the best tennis player ever - no discussion). This commercial not only sells the Lindor chocolate, but beats the stereotypes related to how women are often drawn back and stay low key. Some people can consume and interpret the portrayal of women in the commercial quite differently, but I guess that would be natural. Media texts and messages are open-ended as people might have varying opinions about the same piece. As a matter of fact, the commercial could be looked upon from an angle where one might find the "ladies" atrocious as of their audacity to express themselves. Personally, attraction is inevitable when someone is good-looking, and I am saying this in the most holistic way possible; you would gaze at the attractive person for a minimum of once. It is infatuation.

We are missing out on something big here as well. What if they had homosexuals in the commercial? Bisexuals? Why did the makers of the commercial choose not to put them instead of two women and one man? The reason, as we all know, homosexuals or bisexuals are indirectly ostracized from the global community, although some countries have legislated the marriage of homosexuals as legal.

A few questions to be addressed :

1) What is your first reaction to the commercial? What do you think about the women?
2) How effective is the commercial in opposing the stereotypes related to men and women as women are the dominant ones here?
3) How would you feel, if you see homosexuals or bisexuals in the commercial?

P.S. - I hope all of you liked the commercial!

'Thank God for Dead Soldiers'

Justices Rule for Protesters at Military Funerals

Terry Z

The U.S Supreme court has ruled in favour of the protesters who attend the funerals of deceased military officers. The first amendment apparently protects hateful protests at military funerals. The protests are a result of the U.S military's tolerance towards homosexual individuals. As a result, various religious groups have attended funerals of dead military officers in a form of protest. They bring hateful signs such as the ones depicted in the image above.

It is extremely disrespectful to attend a person's funeral and spread a message of hate in the presence of their family members. It is equally disappointing that the U.S Supreme Court condones this sort of behaviour. I do not believe that this is a matter of free speech. These soldiers gave their lives to preserve our rights and freedoms. Ironically, the same rights and freedoms now allow these religious groups to slander and disrespect these fallen soldiers. These kinds of protests are a response to the U.S governments earlier repeal of the 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' policy. To my knowledge, homosexual individuals are now allowed to openly serve in the military. However, many people still suffer with homophobia.

Personally, I feel angry and ashamed to live in a society that is intolerant of a person's sexual orientation. I believe that an individual has the freedom to choose their partner. In addition, these sorts of protests are a negative influence on children. This image above shows children participating in these hateful actions. These children do not fully understand the consequences of their actions however, they will be influenced from a young age to be discriminant of homosexuals.

1.) Do you think that these people have the right to protest at military funerals? Or do you think that this exceeds the definition of 'free speech'?

2.)Do you think that homophobia is a problem within our society?

China Owns the United States?

China Owns the United States?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlkLhVo3PbY

Terry Z

Recently, I came across the above linked commercial while watching CNN. I found the media text to be extremely inappropriate and demonstrated a form of propaganda typically seen during the cold war era. The advertisement was sponsored by Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW). This association claims to be a non-partisan, non-profit organization with a mission to advocate the elimination of waste and government inefficiency through non-partisan public education programs. I found it very convenient that this commercial was aired in the midst of the government shutdown a few weeks ago. As we know, the debate and controversy was centralized on the Federal budget. The Republican party's platform focused on budget cuts and eliminating wasteful spending. These similarities between the GOP and CAGW seem more than just a coincidence.

Furthermore, the CAGW sponsored advertisement has the intent to impose a sense of fear into the consumers of the media text. It's intent is to make the American public afraid of the looming Chinese threat against America. In the process, they misrepresent Asians and focus on stereotypes. The commercial takes place in a lecture hall with a Professor dictating the flaws which led to the fall of America. The Asian students were portrayed as cynical, evil, and content with the fact that "They now work for us." In my opinion, this is a dangerous misrepresentation of a race and culture. It appears that as a nation we have not learned from our prior mistakes. During World War Two, Japanese-Americans were taken into internment camps because Americans saw them as a threat to national security. Similarly, Muslim-Americans are also generalized into a stereotype of being 'terrorists' due to the media's generalization and depiction of Muslims. The CAGW is attempting to evoke American patriotism in an effort to stop wasteful government spending which is leading the United States into bankruptcy. However, they have falsely accused and labeled the Chinese as the antagonists. Fear is a powerful weapon used in propaganda. I do not think that it belongs within our Western media. Innocent people fall victim to generalizations created by the media.

1.) If you were to view the media text through an Asian American lens how would you feel about this commercial?

2.) Do you think the media creates too many misleading generalizations/stereotypes about different races?

3.) Do you know anyone who has been a victim of racism?

Males Dominate & Females Tolerate?

See anything strange? If you need an explanation, this image is a gross depiction of five men overpowering one woman which is of course so...."manly." This picture is a perfect example of the power dynamics that the media would like us to believe in. This image and media in general, portrays women as being preys and men as being the predators. The men are clearly more powerful than the only woman in this D&G ad. Women are seen as commodities or objects of use and disposal in many advertisements such as this one. Such images reinforce the notion that women in society should be submissive. It also implies that being compliant is what will attract men and acting otherwise will not. Such images have a crucial impact on young female teenagers who feel may feel the need to be sexually attractive for young men to notice them. Also, it gives the message to male youth that it is acceptable to treat women as though they were items of trade.

While searching for stereotypical images of women I came across a site which talked about women and dating. It mentioned a book called You Lost Him at Hello, where the author says if you want men to fall head over heals for you, approach dating as if you were in sale, and looking for customers. She encourages women to “fill their funnel” with not just one, but lots of customers. Hence, ladies, your boyfriends are only customers…so I guess that makes us wickedly scheming sellers?... yet another stereotype. As much as men objectify women in the media, women do no favor to themselves by reinforcing these messages in the media. In my opinion, until more influential women actually start opposing these views and acting contrary to what we are known for, e.g. passivity, these stereotypes will go no where. Women are partially to be blamed for the image they get in the media. The reason I believe that influential women will help eliminate stereotypes is because such women are often the focus of media; women who have power, status and credibility. It’s time that society learns that you can look sexy and appear dignified at the same time.

There are two ways in which we can strike a more or less equal balance between the portrayal of men and women in media. Either we discourage the objectification of women OR to be at par, we can objectify men to the extent where objectification of both genders are equally portrayed in the media. Of course the harder path would be the first option since we’ve been bombarded with so many images that companies would find it almost impossible to sell certain products without the use of skinny models wearing revealing clothing for sex appeal.


Questions:

(1) Do you think degrading women really makes men appear superior?
(2) Do you think there will ever be a, more or less, balance of power between men and women in terms of their depiction in the media? Or will women ever appear superior?
(3) What is the better method of establishing a balance between the portrayal of men and women in society? Discouraging the objectification of women, or is it easier to objectify men to the point where both, men and women, are equally objectified?

Nike: Next Level (full version)

FYI

Hi everyone,

I know there is still some confusion over what should be on the blog.  Take a look at the blog that my previous class wrote last semester. 

Gauche Grads

male vs female in social media

~..-- Sadaf --.. ~

()__() (+__+) O.(V__V) u u

Something to get you started...

On Tuesday we discussed the five concepts of Media Literacy:

1. All Media are constructions.
2. Media texts contain beliefs and value messages.
3. Each person interprets media texts and their messages differently.
4. Media texts reflect special interests (commercial, ideological, political).
5. Each medium has its own language, style, forms, techniques, conventions and aesthetics.

To whet your appetite for deconstruction, take a look at the following YouTube clips and comment in the comments section on the explicit/implicit messages these clips contain.  Some questions to ask yourself: What meanings are intended? What lifestyles, values and points of view are represented? Who or what is included, omitted and/or misrepresented? How may other people's perception of the media be different? Who benefits if the message is accepted? What techniques are used and for what purposes?

Old Spice Commercial
Venus!
Mazda Commercial: What do you drive?
Ford F150
Love Hurts

Welcome!

Hello grade 12s!  Welcome to your new home!  As we discussed in class, you will be responsible for contributing to our class blog throughout the Media Studies unit.  Our class blog will focus on issues (mis)representations of ability, sexuality, gender and race, as they appear in media.  Just a few quick reminders:

• You have to manage your own blog string: 
• this includes the creation of a catchy title, first post that relates to the media unit, and regular replies that spark more discussion.

• You also have to reply to your classmates' blog string: 
• You must reply to a minimum of 5 different blog strings, AND offer a minimum of 10 comments overall that are meaningful and relate to the media texts/concepts.

• Your post should explicitly deal with concepts and texts we are learning about in our media unit.  Some topics to consider are: representations of females/males/homosexuals/heterosexuals in the media, the nature of dynamics between men and women (or men and men, women and women), the power distribution among men and women, and the dominant discourse regarding gender identity in the media.

Keep comments respectful and critical.  It's okay to politely disagree, but it's not okay to attack someone personally for their opinion!  Have fun and good luck!