Future material

I know Dr. Lambiase said she is always looking for new material and I have an idea I don't think we covered in class.

Daytime talk shows, especially the Maury Povich show because it portrays minorities in a negative light.

Paternity testing and sex confessions make up most of the Maury show and black people make up most of those episodes. These people are shown as irresponsible players, sluts and cheaters. The women don't know who their babies fathers are and the men hope the lie detector test doesn't bust them for sleeping around.

This perpetuates the stereotype that black women are careless with sex and black men are untrustworthy.

Other programs that could be looked at include court t.v. shows that portray white trash stereotypes.

Rejecting gender stereotypes

I've never the seen the Horse Whisperer, but I understand what Bell Hooks is saying. Many movies and books send the message that women think they can be happy with a successful career and no husband until they fall in love with a man and realize they were wrong.

I don't appreciate these portrayals because it perpetuates the theory that if a woman is frigid, she just needs a good man and a good romp in bed with that man. I know guys who believe sex is just the solution to ease what they see as an "uptight" woman.

Hooks also goes on to say that media portrays feminism to be negative and culpable for women straying from traditional gender roles. This "blame feminism" phenomenon is something I've been frustrated with for a while now. Feminism is the notion that women are people, and therefore, equal to men. It's not about refusing to shave my armpits or hating men, it's about ensuring that I get paid as much as my male counterpart; or speaking out about horrendous crimes against women such as rape and domestic violence.

We've also discussed how the media portrays situations to have no happy medium or gray areas. A female is a career woman, or a mom. She's either good at her job or good at taking care of her family. The media tell us there can't be both. I know this to be untrue because my mom is valued at work and at home.

Dads who can't do anything right

Wow. How frustrating. I can't imagine being a competent father who lives in a society that stereotypes as incompetent because I am male.

This is a HUGE stereotype because of shows with premises about husbands and dads who just can't do anything right and the wives and kids who love them anyway.

The stereotype is that men just can't be as efficient at taking care of children because men are not naturally nurturing, unlike women. I know this is untrue because of experience-- I've met men who are very sensitive and nurturing and plenty of women who aren't.

This view of dads is damaging because if a couple has a child and the father makes a mistake about taking care of the child (i.e. the formula in the bottle is too cold) it could be dismissed because he is a man and the woman gets into the practice of not holding the dad accountable for mistakes later on because he is male.

I've also seen first-hand some even more negative consequences because of the incompetent dad stereotype. I've known a couple of friends whose moms made all the decisions with regards to the child's upbringing against the father's wishes because these moms assumed they knew more about child-rearing because they are women. I had a friend in middle school, for example, whose mother allowed her to dress provocatively and let boyfriends spend the night against her dad's wishes because she insisted she knew more about what was good for her daughter because she is, afterall, her mother. The mother would undermine her husband's authority in front of my friend and gave her permission to do things she wanted secretely after her father said 'no.'

"Okay, just don't tell your father."

As a result my friend felt her father's word was not valuable, and definitely not final.

This stereotype is especially frustrating to me because my dad is very competent, both in taking care of us physically and emotionally.

Just like with any other stereotype, all I can do is not perpuate this one.

Black female experience

I am curious as to why black women are more likely to die from breast cancer than white women, by a lot. I am even more curious as to why they receive less help. I'm sure that lack of financing is a factor-- but it can't be the entire reason.

"In South Carolina, black women made up nearly 30 percent of all democratic primary voters in 2004. This year, polls show a significant number are undecided, torn between choosing the first African-American or first female Presidential candidate."

This may be slightly off topic but why, when voting, do people sometimes only consider which candidate is most like them in color, gender or religion? This is commonplace and really pisses me off. A black woman should not be torn between two presidential candidates because one is black and one is a woman, the only reason she should be torn is if there are two candidates that both closely reflect her political values.

But I guess they do have more of an excuse to vote for someone like them because they're a minority. I can't really speak about what that's experience is like. Although I am a minority because I'm a woman, I don't feel like one. Is it because I'm white?

The article read that the lack of blacks in higher education and business causes racial disparity and effects the construct of the black family. It goes on to say that interracial marriage between black females and white males had jumped by 39,000 marriages in just five years. Is it possible that the lack of blacks in education and business cause black woman to seek a life partner in a white man since he is statistically more likely to have an education and have a white collar job, or have people just become open-minded? The former thought is surely a pessimistic one but I can't help but wonder if there is a connection.

I'm GLAAD to be open-minded

Gay or lesbian relationships are not immoral.

Not allowing gays and lesbians in the military to be open about their sexuality because it could make others uncomfortable is immoral.

I agree with all the liberal beliefs about homosexuality: being gay is not a choice, any two consenting adults ought to be able to marry, gay couples should be able to adopt children.

This is my favorite commonly used conservative statement:

"If two people of the same sex are allowed to marry, we will soon be allowing people to marry animals."

This "logic" implies that there is no difference between two consenting adults and an animal.
Ridiculous.


Another harmful stereotype I've noted is that many people believe gay men are very likely to be pedophiles and they should be kept away from children. Some stereotypes are true, this one is not. Its been proven that heterosexual men, who are often married, are more likely to commit acts of pedophilia.

David Sedaris has a great essay in Dress Your Family in Cordouroy and Denim where he talks about listening to a radio show in which the callers and the DJ are discussing pedophilia. They begin interchanging the titles "pedophilia" and "homosexual" as if they are one in the same.

I sympathize for the stereotypes that many gay people must face all the time. Just like any other preventive measure, people just need to be aware of these stereotypes and I think GLAAD is going about that the right way. I hope people get the message.

Enough is Enough

I think it's positive that "Enough is Enough" are sending a message that rappers and what goes on in their music videos is not a reflection on nonwhite minorities.

I've heard from some black people that modern rap and its accompying images paints the American black race in a negative light. I think that rap videos further common black stereotypes such as they are more likely to commit crimes and degrade women because these are common things in just about EVERY rap video.

A rep. even stated that the campaign is not "anti-hip hop" or "anti-BET" but rather an attack on the stereotypes they perpetuate. This makes me think even more so that it's a sensible and much-needed camapign.

A protestor said that "rap just isn't rap anymore." I agree for the most part. I miss Run DMC.

I wasn't even aware that William and Rosalie Schiff were speaking at UNT but I now plan to go.

Two summers ago I wrote for the NTDaily as an intern and had the privilege of interviewing Craig Hanley, who won the NT Mayborn institute grant for his book William and Rosalie: A Holocaust Testimony about the Schiff's experience during the Holocaust.

I was really moved by their story. It's an unbelievable one. The fact that they even survived their time at the camps and found each other afterward is remarkable enough, but that they share their story so openly is a privilege for the rest of us.

Sarah Walker case

As an admitted obsessive viewer of Law & Order, there's no way I would have accepted that someone other than a jealous lover or a money-hungry family member murdered Sarah Walker until it was proven otherwise.

This just proves the cultivation theory. Media infiltrates us and in order to avoid making assumptions, I think we have to make a conscious effort. I know I have been trying to be aware of media messages ever since class started.

Floyd is correct in her explanation that we are drawn in to crimes involving interesting people as victims. But the act of doing this and becoming obsessive because we want the story to be fascinating seems animal-like, like we're all a part of a morbid circus. And seems even more so when her story is cast aside because her murderer wasn't who we expected.

I think highly of Floyd for admiting error and bringing to light an issue we all don't realize we have.

I'm never really quite sure what term to use when referring to black people. African-American seems to be "safe" because it's hard to take offense to that but I've seen some roll their eyes before and tell me to "just say black."

It is a dilemma because calling someone African-American can seem like an exaggerated effort to make sure no one is offended. Then again, calling someone black can seem like you're not taking care to be sensitive enough. It depends on who is listening.

Since black people feel differently on the subject, I think I'm just going to say black unless someone indicates a preference before or after the fact.

I'm a little pissed

I'm completely appalled that DOVE and AXE are owned by the same corporation. As a firm believer that advertising negatively affects body image, especially for women, I thought Dove's campaign for real beauty was revolutionary. Now I am disappointed and no longer applaud that campaign. Considering I watched the Bom Chicka Wah Wah video with my jaw dropped, I couldn't believe that DOVE company could advocate such oppossing ideas. The fact that the company allows this ruins the campaign for real beauty for me. The BCWW campaign furthers the stereotype that a woman is either a highly sexualized wild seductress or a frail, domesticated wife who has ironing on the brain. It promotes a thought that there is no such thing as a wife who does more than just chores, one who can still be sexual and respectable.

I understand why the Latin community put pressure on Ken Burns and PBS to include the sacrifices Latinos made for WWII. It is important, it's a part of our history. I think it's quite overlooked, I know I didn't learn about it specifically in my past History classes.

But I don't think that documentary makers disclude races purposely. I'm thinking they just get focused on showing the American experience in general even though the Latin American, African American, Asian American and Native American experience is somewhat different although they are contributing in the same way, by fighting a war.

The fact that a Native American vet's perspective was included as well as a Latin Americans is a positive outcome. It means that Mr. Burns and PBS got the point that the documentary needed more diversity in general.

In the follow up letter to PBS, the organization mentions that the members were pleased that a Native American was included and that this was part of the groups agenda- to promote all diversity.

Maybe I'm a cynic but I think though that if only more Latino perspectives were included they would have been just fine. I read the 1st letter to PBS and didn't see anywhere about asking for other ethnicities being shown aside from their own.

The 'Jena 6' story leaves me torn.

A student was severely beaten and that deserves punishment. Nooses were hung on a tree after a couple of black students sat beneath it and that deserves punishment.

I understand what injustice is going on here but I'm not sure what the solution is. The white students should have been expelled from school. I believe 3 day suspension is showing that a racially motivated act like will be only slightly intolerated.

But 'free the Jena 6'? Am I missing something here? It seems as if people are chanting this because the vandals of the most recent incident have not been brought to justice. What if everyone is brought to justice? Maybe the Jena 6 should not endure the charges against them, but people are suggesting that nothing happen.

Well it was really a treat to have Karen come talk to us about her observations from attending a demonstration in Jena. She told us about the happenings, but she did it like a reporter. I wonder what her opinions are of the incident.

I don't believe that I caught any stereotypes from the news media coverage, but I've missed them before. Then again, I was distracted by all the crap going on about OJ.

I never realized that people with disabilities are often used as subjects, as "Supercrips" but it makes quite a bit of sense. I think I understand why.

When most people think of what would happen if they were permanently disabled i.e with paralysis, blindness, or a mental disorder such as tourettes syndrome, they probably believe that it would be unbearable, unfortunate and that they would be highly inhibited from many normal activities. Like the article said, people probably file these kind of "what if?" thoughts away because they are too upsetting. So when someone with a disability accomplishes anything that requires hardwork and dedication, it is deemed newsworthy. "Look, she is overcoming her disability."

But I can't help but be interested in these stories. On Monday, in Journalism 2310 we read an article that ran in the DRC about a NT grad student who lost his sight while in college- he now paints and is pursuing an Art Degree. It was fascinating, an enjoyable article to read. It ended with the subject making a point about how a handicap is just something a person can't do, so everyone is handicapped. I agree. We all have advantages over one another but the severity of the disadvantages are what we label as "handicap."

I couldn't find the link to the DRC article but here is an NTDaily one on the same student:

http://media.www.ntdaily.com/media/storage/paper877/news/2005/01/18/UndefinedSection/Blind.Artist.Paints.With.Perfect.Precision-1892515.shtml

In response to the 2006 article about the declining numbers of blacks in journalism, I can understand the concern. Without diversity in media there is no dispersement of varied ideas through media viewers. I'm sure that fewer stereotypes are caught by people in the newsroom without the African-Americans working alongside them whose race will be affected by it.

What the article didn't address was why there was decline. It is stated that maybe blacks are not being hired because the hiring coordinators for these jobs are diversifying with other demographics, maybe other races but it didn't seem like that point was solid. I didn't see any statistics about the ratio of blacks applying for media jobs and actually being hired.

The articles two years previously showed a promising increase of minorities and women in the newsrooms and a decline of what's been the norm in newsrooms- white older males. Although the increase of diversity is in small steps, they are steps nonetheless.

I also must add that I think it's weird there are minority quotas every year to reach some sort of masterplan in 2025. I understand it's important to have realistic representation but it seems more reasonable just to make sure that no one is violating anyone's rights when hiring/not hiring.

The only real solution is one already being attempted which is to spread awareness to media companies and potential African-American journalists.

Internet Journalism is a Godsend. I retrieve news daily, or almost daily from the internet. I'll check the websites of DRC, NTDaily, CNN and DMN. I don't scrutinize current events but it's important to me get the vital details of an incident and the gist. I really need to start breaking out of the stereotypical American rut of having no clue about global events. I will start paying more attention to world news on CNN or BBC.
I think that the media contributes to stereotypes because many readers subconsciously file them away and add them to their perceptions of certain groups of people.