Honestly, there are many things wrong with the lyrics and video of the painfully catchy song, "Blurred Lines," that I'm not quite sure where to begin. Being sensitive on the topic, I strongly favor with categorizing "Blurred Lines" as "rapey."
We can begin with the title: "Blurred Lines." My interpretation is that the "blurred lines" he so evidently hates is the idea of what is, or isn't, consensual sex. What if she's "leading him on" or "teasing him" versus just saying yes or no?
My answer to that question is that if you're about to have consensual sex, YOU WILL KNOW. If you have any doubts about the consent, then you should NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT PERSON. Simple? Maybe not for Robin Thicke. This song explains how the girl is not all gung-ho for having sex, so Robin Thicke tries to convince her with the insistent "I know you want it, I know you want it!" What Thicke must understand is that these lines are not blurred. No means no, and "no" certainly does not mean "convince me." It's a violation of respect and trust for the other person. Trying to make have sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex is 100% rapey.
Secondly, the way he portrays women in his video is fairly obviously problematic... He uses the women in his video as decoration as he establishes dominance by being fully clothed in a suit while the girls wear next to nothing. He continues by blowing smoke in girls' faces and having them prance around him; the video is clearly for male enjoyment and benefit.
Jennifer Lai's standpoint on "Blurred Lines" not being rapey was justified by the fact that he wasn't literally saying "I want to have forced sex with you." But in my opinion--and I think I speak for many women when I say this-- is that when a man in constantly pushing and pressuring you to have sex it is deeply discomforting and extremely violating of our personal rights.
All in all, "Blurred Lines," although ridiculously catchy, has crossed many boundaries and has breached the comfort and respect of many women.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Autobiography of a Face
I chose to read Autobiography of a Face by Lucy Grealy. I'm not particularly sure why I chose to read this book, other than the situation sounded sad, yet very interesting and I was very curious to read how she dealt with cancer in her childhood, all while trying to maintain friendships, relationships, and living life as a normal kid.
"Normal" didn't seem like so much of an option for Lucy Grealy, a young tomboy living in New York. This is because at around 9 years old she was diagnosed with Ewings sarcoma cancer in her jaw that gave her a 5% survival rate. Lucy underwent chemotherapy, radiation, and procedures to get rid of the cancer. Lucy spent 5 years eradicating her body of cancer, but the physical scarring took a toll on her emotions more than her own body. Coming to terms with her appearance was, in her opinion, an even greater struggle than having the cancer itself. Dealing with harassment from both boys and girls wilted her self-esteem, but she coped with it by working at a horse stable where she would have "pony parties." Lucy moves on to go to college and at first wants to be a doctor, but decides to write poetry.
Lucy had to change her idea of beauty in order to feel human again. As anybody can relate, it hurts to be singled out or made fun of based on your physical features-- what you can't help. This is what makes Lucy's story so uplifting, how she is able to take such pain and allow it to be something beautiful. She has a strong spirit, and hardly felt bad for herself, which was truly inspiring.
Thursday, August 28, 2014
"The Great Lawsuit" and "If Men Could Menstruate"
As a feminist, I have a huge soft-spot for social justice and, obviously, women's rights. Needless to say I was pretty enthused to have these excerpts as part of our summer assignment! Many people believe that oppression against women is a thing of the past and that women suffragists fixed everything, which is far from the truth. Wage gaps, systematic patriarchy, and rape culture are just a glimpse of current persecutions undergone by women in the United States. Both articles, from 1843 and 1986, come to show that sex-based oppression, though in different ways, still holds great relevance.
Admittedly, I struggled reading "The Great Lawsuit" by Margaret Fuller due mostly to the older style of writing, but I found portions that are still heavily relatable now in the 21st century. One that particularly struck me was when she mentioned the "frequent remark that 'You can not reason with a woman.'" This is an excuse people still use to this very day to avoid placement of a woman in authority. Absurd claims that she is "irrational" and "stubborn" while on her period, etc. Fuller also makes a point by identifying that having the same rights as men is NOT equivalent to justice. This is true regarding women and Black-Americans (as she also points out) and is still very relevant today. Yes, women can vote, but that is far from saying we live at the same standards of men.
I absolutely adored our next reading, "If Men Could Menstruate" by Gloria Steinem, for its hilarious accuracy. Steinem made ludicrous examples of how men would use menstruation to their advantage, but use women's menstruation to their deficit. In one paragraph I found utterly eloquent and perfect, she points out that "logic has nothing to do with oppression" and provides examples of "superior" groups will use anything to justify their "superiority." Like Fuller, Steinem made terrific connections between the oppression against women to the oppression against Black-Americans.
Steinem also made some very valid points on penis envy. Penis envy is not so much about wanting to "be a man" and "have a penis" as it is to enjoy the same rights and privileges as men. She also points out the illogicality of penis envy over "womb envy." Think about it-- vaginas are marked with the stigma of being weak (despite being able to birth an infant), and male genitalia is honored as how "strong" or "tough" a man is. When in reality male genitalia can endure far, far less pain than the vagina... Ironic, huh? This is a totally modern example of how logic has nothing to do with oppression; it is literally a (made up) idea to establish dominance and inferiority within the sexes.
Admittedly, I struggled reading "The Great Lawsuit" by Margaret Fuller due mostly to the older style of writing, but I found portions that are still heavily relatable now in the 21st century. One that particularly struck me was when she mentioned the "frequent remark that 'You can not reason with a woman.'" This is an excuse people still use to this very day to avoid placement of a woman in authority. Absurd claims that she is "irrational" and "stubborn" while on her period, etc. Fuller also makes a point by identifying that having the same rights as men is NOT equivalent to justice. This is true regarding women and Black-Americans (as she also points out) and is still very relevant today. Yes, women can vote, but that is far from saying we live at the same standards of men.
I absolutely adored our next reading, "If Men Could Menstruate" by Gloria Steinem, for its hilarious accuracy. Steinem made ludicrous examples of how men would use menstruation to their advantage, but use women's menstruation to their deficit. In one paragraph I found utterly eloquent and perfect, she points out that "logic has nothing to do with oppression" and provides examples of "superior" groups will use anything to justify their "superiority." Like Fuller, Steinem made terrific connections between the oppression against women to the oppression against Black-Americans.
Steinem also made some very valid points on penis envy. Penis envy is not so much about wanting to "be a man" and "have a penis" as it is to enjoy the same rights and privileges as men. She also points out the illogicality of penis envy over "womb envy." Think about it-- vaginas are marked with the stigma of being weak (despite being able to birth an infant), and male genitalia is honored as how "strong" or "tough" a man is. When in reality male genitalia can endure far, far less pain than the vagina... Ironic, huh? This is a totally modern example of how logic has nothing to do with oppression; it is literally a (made up) idea to establish dominance and inferiority within the sexes.
"Is Google Making Us Stupid?"
--An excellent question. For a long time I've pondered this question, and it really has me at a loss. "Stupid" may be putting it too harshly-- but it's not far from the truth.
Nicholas Carr spoke heavily on the psychological effect the greatest search engine has on us. He believes that having answers to infinite questions at our fingertips with merely the stroke of a few keys harms our thought process and how we seek and absorb information. We expect "efficiency and immediacy" in answering all of our questions, which greatly hinders our ability to read deeply. We are constantly looking for reassurance and information, but don't allow ourselves to dwell on an idea or process our own ideas. Skimming articles and picking out large ideas seems to be our main goal when reading, rather than reading between the lines and leaving greater ideas. (Unfortunately) I genuinely feel that my own reading skills have deteriorated over time, and my own experiences matched what Carr described as the negative effects from search engines.
This article made me think less of search engines and more of technology as a whole. Carr mentions how it serves as a distraction, and this is a personal issue of mine. I honestly do believe that technology greatly affects my ability to pay attention and has contributed to me being a chronic procrastinator. But who can I really blame that on?
I think technology is very tricky and should be taken with a grain of salt. But this is not to say that I am "anti-technology" by any means. I wholeheartedly recognize the wondrous and endless possibilities that we are blessed with technologically, and how these have the potential to connect people, teach, and save lives. It'd be flat out ignorant to say that technology is "bad." As I mentioned, our experiences with technology greatly weighs on how we utilize it.
Nicholas Carr spoke heavily on the psychological effect the greatest search engine has on us. He believes that having answers to infinite questions at our fingertips with merely the stroke of a few keys harms our thought process and how we seek and absorb information. We expect "efficiency and immediacy" in answering all of our questions, which greatly hinders our ability to read deeply. We are constantly looking for reassurance and information, but don't allow ourselves to dwell on an idea or process our own ideas. Skimming articles and picking out large ideas seems to be our main goal when reading, rather than reading between the lines and leaving greater ideas. (Unfortunately) I genuinely feel that my own reading skills have deteriorated over time, and my own experiences matched what Carr described as the negative effects from search engines.
This article made me think less of search engines and more of technology as a whole. Carr mentions how it serves as a distraction, and this is a personal issue of mine. I honestly do believe that technology greatly affects my ability to pay attention and has contributed to me being a chronic procrastinator. But who can I really blame that on?
I think technology is very tricky and should be taken with a grain of salt. But this is not to say that I am "anti-technology" by any means. I wholeheartedly recognize the wondrous and endless possibilities that we are blessed with technologically, and how these have the potential to connect people, teach, and save lives. It'd be flat out ignorant to say that technology is "bad." As I mentioned, our experiences with technology greatly weighs on how we utilize it.
Saturday, July 19, 2014
"The Ethics of Living Jim Crow"
I found this autobiographical sketch to be very intriguing on a personal level due to my personal interest in current and past social issues around the world. The format of this article was highly effective in giving a chronological life-story and showing how growing up during the days of the active Jim Crow laws took a toll on a black man's mindset and personality.
In the first story, where Richard Wright would throw cinders in his backyard, it was already evident that the Jim Crow laws had taken a toll on his perception of Black Americans. He would intentionally hurl cinders at passing black folk, which is obviously not a safe or kind thing to do. This indicated that it had already been instilled in his mind that Africans were less of a person, thus he treated them inhumanely. Later, after an unfair brawl between some neighborhood white kids and Wright's friends, leaving him with three stitches behind his ear, Richard questioned the injustice. He knew that the white kids had taken it too far and should be reprimanded. Upon telling his mother, and assuming she'd take his side, he was told that he was then beaten and punished for white action.
Still as a child, Wright got his first job working with white people. Upon questioning authority with the intent of trying to improve himself as an employee, he was ostracized, and eventually beaten and forced to quit his job. This reaction from his coworkers demonstrated to Wright that even the idea of a black man working at the status of a white man was offensive and unthinkable. Simply trying to be a better employee was taken as an insult to white people.
A reoccurring theme in this autobiographical sketch was the notion that black people must feel grateful, even in terrible events. Continuously, after seeing blacks (and being) beaten, harassed, and in one case castrated, Wright would hear others and himself being referred to as "lucky bastards" and that they should be "thankful" they were not killed-- as if not simply not killing a Black American was seen as a noble and honorable deed.
As Wright's life went on and he learned his "Jim Crow lessons," you could see his self-worth deteriorate as he questioned the injustice done by whites less and less. He grew up being told that white people were never in the wrong and that they held a natural place in authority.
In the first story, where Richard Wright would throw cinders in his backyard, it was already evident that the Jim Crow laws had taken a toll on his perception of Black Americans. He would intentionally hurl cinders at passing black folk, which is obviously not a safe or kind thing to do. This indicated that it had already been instilled in his mind that Africans were less of a person, thus he treated them inhumanely. Later, after an unfair brawl between some neighborhood white kids and Wright's friends, leaving him with three stitches behind his ear, Richard questioned the injustice. He knew that the white kids had taken it too far and should be reprimanded. Upon telling his mother, and assuming she'd take his side, he was told that he was then beaten and punished for white action.
Still as a child, Wright got his first job working with white people. Upon questioning authority with the intent of trying to improve himself as an employee, he was ostracized, and eventually beaten and forced to quit his job. This reaction from his coworkers demonstrated to Wright that even the idea of a black man working at the status of a white man was offensive and unthinkable. Simply trying to be a better employee was taken as an insult to white people.
A reoccurring theme in this autobiographical sketch was the notion that black people must feel grateful, even in terrible events. Continuously, after seeing blacks (and being) beaten, harassed, and in one case castrated, Wright would hear others and himself being referred to as "lucky bastards" and that they should be "thankful" they were not killed-- as if not simply not killing a Black American was seen as a noble and honorable deed.
As Wright's life went on and he learned his "Jim Crow lessons," you could see his self-worth deteriorate as he questioned the injustice done by whites less and less. He grew up being told that white people were never in the wrong and that they held a natural place in authority.
Friday, July 4, 2014
"Talk of the Town"
The destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 is arguably the most infamous terrorist attack on the United States in history. This event was distinguishing and memorable to nearly all who were alive to witness the fear that coincided with the attacks. I, myself, can not remember the day of the attacks because I was too young. Growing up in post-9/11 America, I experienced firsthand the measures our nation took on security (particularly in airports). I feel greatly lucky that these are the only repercussions I experienced after the attacks on 9/11, because many lost their lives or a life of a loved one. Each person recalls and interprets September 11th differently, which was clearly evident while reading both articles from "Talk of the Town." Authors, John Updike and Susan Sontag, gave their personal New-Yorker insight to their experiences and reflection on the attacks.
Updike viewed the attacks from a mere mile away, and captured the awe and terrifying image of the collapsing towers. As he and his wife viewed the death of thousands, Updike expressed more of a feeling of unison with not only New Yorkers, but Americans as a whole. He also expressed concern for the country's freedom of motion, feeling that this attack would limit some of our country's accessibility and ease to certain privileges-- and it did regarding flying procedures. Updike's article also hinted hope. His conclusion expressed an uplifting tone, while still acknowledging the pain the attacks took on Americans.
On the other hand, it seemed that Susan Sontag took on a more political viewing of these attacks. She certainly recognized the heartache and severity of the situation, but she sought out change in our country. She believed that change in our international relations with the Middle East would change our country's future, and ideally to prevent affairs such as 9/11 from occurring again. Sontag explains that this is not a fight between men, but among countries. In addition, she cynically analyzes the notion that "America is strong," because although we may be strong, strength is not going to prevent these occurrences from happening, and we must change as a nation if we truly desire a new future.
Updike viewed the attacks from a mere mile away, and captured the awe and terrifying image of the collapsing towers. As he and his wife viewed the death of thousands, Updike expressed more of a feeling of unison with not only New Yorkers, but Americans as a whole. He also expressed concern for the country's freedom of motion, feeling that this attack would limit some of our country's accessibility and ease to certain privileges-- and it did regarding flying procedures. Updike's article also hinted hope. His conclusion expressed an uplifting tone, while still acknowledging the pain the attacks took on Americans.
On the other hand, it seemed that Susan Sontag took on a more political viewing of these attacks. She certainly recognized the heartache and severity of the situation, but she sought out change in our country. She believed that change in our international relations with the Middle East would change our country's future, and ideally to prevent affairs such as 9/11 from occurring again. Sontag explains that this is not a fight between men, but among countries. In addition, she cynically analyzes the notion that "America is strong," because although we may be strong, strength is not going to prevent these occurrences from happening, and we must change as a nation if we truly desire a new future.
Saturday, June 28, 2014
An Introduction to Myself
As many of you may know, my name is Cora Rugland and I am an upcoming senior at McFarland High School. The first thing I would like people to know about me, is that I'm terrible at describing myself--considering that my tastes, values, and opinions are constantly nuanced as I learn more about myself each day and continue to develop as a person. In addition, I'm a fairly introverted person, especially when it comes to publicly sharing information about myself. This is something I hope to make progress on in hopes of becoming a more outspoken person. For those reasons, I will simply be providing some dull and general information about my life.
I'm seventeen years old and the youngest in my entire family. Although, that isn't saying much considering I come from a small family of nine, including aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc. I have a twenty year old sister who is currently attending UW Madison. She moved out this past winter, and I am really enjoying my new life as the only-child in the home. My family and friends insist that I will miss her company sooner or later, but as terrible as it sounds, I don't see it happening soon.
Generally, I'm kept busy by school, sports, and work. I find school very stressful and overwhelming and my qualities as a perfectionist and as a chronic-procrastinator make schoolwork all the more difficult. I'm anxious to see whether the new AB scheduling will either help or hinder my high school experience, especially with prioritizing and managing my schoolwork. I am kept determined in school by my desire to attend a 4-year university. At this time, I'm mainly looking at UW Madison and the University of Minnesota where I would plan to study Environmental Science.
When I have free time I enjoy working out, listening to and discovering new music, being outside, watching movies, and going out with friends.
As promised, I kept this introduction fairly vague. I'm hoping my classmates (and I) will continue to learn more about myself throughout this school year and in AP Composition.
I'm seventeen years old and the youngest in my entire family. Although, that isn't saying much considering I come from a small family of nine, including aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc. I have a twenty year old sister who is currently attending UW Madison. She moved out this past winter, and I am really enjoying my new life as the only-child in the home. My family and friends insist that I will miss her company sooner or later, but as terrible as it sounds, I don't see it happening soon.
Generally, I'm kept busy by school, sports, and work. I find school very stressful and overwhelming and my qualities as a perfectionist and as a chronic-procrastinator make schoolwork all the more difficult. I'm anxious to see whether the new AB scheduling will either help or hinder my high school experience, especially with prioritizing and managing my schoolwork. I am kept determined in school by my desire to attend a 4-year university. At this time, I'm mainly looking at UW Madison and the University of Minnesota where I would plan to study Environmental Science.
When I have free time I enjoy working out, listening to and discovering new music, being outside, watching movies, and going out with friends.
As promised, I kept this introduction fairly vague. I'm hoping my classmates (and I) will continue to learn more about myself throughout this school year and in AP Composition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)