Ellen DeGeneres as we know is gay and has been under tremendous amounts of scrutiny coming out.
The other video that I didn't get to show the class, since we were press for time.
Watch from 5:50 to 7:09
In the we read "What is Gay and Not Gay" we learned that there is a scientific, biological explanation for the sexuality of individuals.
In the article "Compulsory Heterosexuality..." Adrienne Rich, she argues that "lesbian choice is simply an acting-out of bitterness toward men." We started the conversation in class, however it was cut short.
Keeping all of this in mind, do you think that one's sexuality is a choice or is it biologically classified?
Do you guys agree with Rich when she says that women who are homosexual are because they have had bad experiences with men?
In class today we had discussed why the term lifestyle is so offensive when referring
to gay individuals and their sexuality.
For so long, I too had often found myself labeling homosexuality as a lifestyle
than what it really was—a natural sexual preference—not a choice, but
preference that one is born with. I
think part of the reason why this is so is because, like in both the Christian
and the Indian community, there is a strong draw to believe that homosexuality
is some sort of “fad” that because popular culture is condoning it more people are exploring these
possibilities. I recall the numerous
times that my homophobic father would get frustrated with the media, accusing
them of the exponential growth in homosexuality, or so he claims. But he, and other who share his views, fail
to understand and accept is the fact that homosexuality is neither a choice nor
influenced by any formal outlet. If
anything, the media simply gave permission to be more open and truthful to one’s
self, the media simply encouraged individuals to become expressive of their
identities. This logic explains too why
we are seeing a “growth in homosexuality” because as permission has been given
to become more expressive of one’s self, we are seeing more people wanting to
show who they are to the world and not be shy to hide it. My question becomes, however, when did
society begin to permit the media to be the authoritarian of what is acceptable
and what is not? Should sexuality or any
other definitions of an individual be defined or made permissible by the
media? Who then dictates what is
proper? Religion? Politicians?
Who?
Maybe some of you guys have heard of the story or maybe not, the woman in this article Catarina Migliorini sells her virginity for $780,000, but after saying so she pledged to donate the money to a charity.
So the question in mind is, do you guys thin that this woman's actions set women back or do you guys think that she's actually doing women a favor by not putting the topic of virginity in a pedestal? Also take notice in the article how there was also a male selling his virginity, but his virginity was only sold for a few thousand. My second question is why do you think that women's virginity is held more at value than guys virginity?
This piece was published at The New York Times. It fits perfectly the topic we were discussing today about the option vs. biological predisposition to homosexuality. It talks about gay men who went on a "life coaching" to reverse their homosexuality. Since this treatment did not work, some victims are suing the "therapists" across the country. Check it out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/28/us/gay-conversion-therapy-faces-tests-in-courts.html
Given the topic of the upcoming class, I figured this would be fitting. College Humor recently had a comedic video about gay men threatening to marry straight men's girlfriends if their marriage rights weren't given. The video was a pretty big success. In response, Scotch Tape (small internet based media makers, I'm guessing) made this video, where straight men respond to the gay men from that video.
The video is about how straight men encourage gay men to marry their girlfriends, because their girlfriends are huge chores that they just want to get rid of.
The two top comments on youtube praise the video as comedic, telling others that it's meant to be sarcastic and satirical, and that they should therefore not take the video seriously.
Just because something is sarcastic or satirical, does that make it automatically inoffensive?
Does anyone find this video to be unapologetically stereotypical toward straight men, gay men, or women? Or all three?
When we left off class last (last) Wednesday, we were discussing U.S. intervention in other nations, and the cultural imperialism that generally comes along with it. The discussion took a turn at the end, and a couple of people suggested that either the U.S. should never take part in foreign affairs or that we should only intervene when U.S. interests are at stake. Both positions strike me as worrisome, but I especially want to talk about the former.
Becoming more aware of cultural imperialism and the ways in which hegemonic culture asserts dominance should not make us want to drop all involvement with things that are different/not the norm because the rules are blurry! This is actually the opposite of the desired effect, I think. For instance, as the violence and state-sponsored murders in Syria go on, we confront similar questions that were confronted by the international community during the Rwandan genocide and the Holocaust (along with numerous other genocides). Will we really be able to look back and be glad that we simply didn't intervene, regardless of the loss of life?
What we should take, in my personal view, from all that we are studying is that intervention and aid, both financial and diplomatic, are complex issues but also things that are inevitable within the global community. We have to figure out how to navigate this map, not just abandon it completely.
I saw this clip a while ago and it really caught my
attention, I thought of it again after reading part of the articles for this upcoming
week’s discussion. Although this video does not directly relate to “Sexuality” I
did think that it can be somewhat connected since it is sending a message to
young women and what they should strive towards. On Ellen DeGeneres two young
girls were brought on to the show because of the enormous attention they had
gotten from their YouTube video, performing a cover of Nicki Minaj’s song “Super
Bass” (video shown below). The two girls are from England, Sophia-Grace (8
years old) and Rosie (5 years old). Sophia-Grace is the one that sings the song
while Rosie dances along on the side. I
guess Ellen DeGeneres took a liking to them because she has invited them back
numerous times on the show. In the clip DeGeneres surprises the girls with Nicki
Minaj since that is their favorite celebrity artist. The girls are then
interviewed with Nicki, while Nicki gives them some of her own advice. (2
minutes into the clip)
The reason I found this clip disturbing is because I feel
like it is sending the wrong message to young girls in multiple ways. I strongly
believe that Nicki Minaj’s music is very degrading to women. Take for instance
a verse from her song “Super Bass”:
He ain't even gotta
try to put the mac on
He just gotta give me that look, when he give me that look
Then the panties comin' off, off, uh
The fact that these young girls idolize her is pretty crazy.
I am not trying to say that as an artist she is not entertaining, but a lot of
her music is very provocative, and for young girls at the age of 5 and 8 to
know her music word for word (probably not knowing what half of it means) shows
how much power music artists have over young kids. Personally I don’t think
Nicki Minaj represents women in a positive light. Sure, she has money and fame,
but I feel like she has had to stoop down so many levels morally to climb to a
higher level success wise. I think she is the perfect example of how mainstream
media loves to hyper sexualize women. Nicki
Minaj’s image is supposed to be portrayed as multiple personalities, but the portrayal
of this “Barbie” image is one that shows up a lot. In the clip below she tells
the girls that “don’t let anyone tell you, you can’t wear pink, pink will make
you happy and make you strong…” This message to me is not liberating to women,
in my opinion it only furthers the idea that gender is a social construct.
Telling little girls that they should wear pink and be “princesses” is forcing little
girls to think that being feminine is the only way girls will succeed in life.
Questions:
1.Do you think that Nicki Minaj is a good role
model for young girls? And what kind of message is she sending out?
2.Are there any other mainstream women rappers
today that are representing women in a positive light?
