Michael S. Kimmel and Mathew Mahler “Adolescent Masculinity, Homophobia, and Violence: Random School Shootings, 1982-2001” Extended Comments: Kenia Trinidad

The article was really interesting. I completely agree with the conclusions that the authors drew. The points that the authors made, were ones that I had never considered, but they make complete sense. These school shooters, are all white middle-class, hetero sexual males. They were all bullied, taunted and “gay-baited, and the authors believe that the extreme responses might be as a result of this treatment and an attempt to assert their masculinity.

I decided to Comment On Kenia’s post, she made really great points and we mainly agreed about the article, but there two points that I disagreed with.

One disagreement I had was with, “girls can pass easily as either a lesbian or straight, also girls can go back and forth without any consequences and its okay for her to do so. A boy on the other hand cannot.” The reason I disagree with this because I’m not sure this is true. I know the idea of girl-on-girl sex is far more acceptable, even considered to be “hot,” but only as long as it’s under a male gaze, therefore a teenage girl being perceived as a lesbian is “cute,” and because it is “cute” there is less negative backlash. However, as an actual person, they receive the same criticisms. In my sister’s middle school, there was an amazing and popular teacher, who came out as a lesbian in the middle of the school year. Upon hearing the news parents freaked out, some even demanded that she should be fired because she was a bad influence. And while this incident occurred in the ‘90s and was unsuccessful, it does not mean that it does not still happen.

Google Images, all I searched was "lesbian," I like how they are only shown in a sexualized manner

The other point she made, I didn’t completely disagree with, I mainly thought it could be pushed further. “This might also answer the question as to why only boys open fire and not girls, since they are also getting tortured and picked on. One side of it might be that girls are not as severely damaged as boys are, and to boys might be more of a pride thing and proving something, to themselves and also to everyone else.” I agree that it is a bit of a pride thing, but I also agree with the author’s that it is a desperate attempt to prove themselves. I think that boys have been taught that the only way to prove that one is man is through the through aggressive behavior. This aggressive behavior is anything from playing in a sport (football being the most obvious), to getting into fights. And if we combine the statistics that Kimmel and Mahler: “Of the 28 school shootings, 20 took place in red states” (1444), these would also be states in which gun culture reigns supreme. For many of these states the stipulations of being a man is knowing how to shoot a gun. So an adolescent male who is pushed too far may respond with the only way he knows how. I also think that it is important to point out that boys are taught that being called “gay,” especially if one is straight, is the worst possible insult, because it is shameful.



Questions and Comments for Class:

Kimmel and Mahler claimed that one way that other bullied or “gay-baited” boys were able to resist resorting to violence was by having a male friend who succeeded at showing masculinity (1454). I’m not sure about anyone else, but this immediately reminded me of Boy Meets World the Episode “The Univited.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=400JbMYgUTQ Did anyone else agree with their assertion? And if so do you know of any examples?

Peggy Orenstein, "Cinderella Ate My Daughter," Hyperlinks

http://PeggyOrenstein.com

The Peggy Orenstein reading is about the exploration of the growing influence that the princess, pink craze is having on young girls. She does this within the two chapters “What’s Wrong with Cinderella” and "Pinked!” These chapters talk about the princess craze that is currently sweeping the nation as well as the pink craze respectively. Together, Orenstein talks about the what these dominant images teach, which is largely consumerism. This is the magical, sparkly, pink and purple wave of products that too many executives have figured out parents buy for little girls en masse. Orenstein contends that this movement, despite any good intentions, is inadvertently constricting girls’ self image. 

She is not the only one who believes that. Created by two sisters, the site “targets the products, media and marketing that prescribe heavily stereotyped and limiting roles to young girls.” Much like Peggy Orenstein, the website is concerned with the limited array of toys for girls, and the lasting effects that those limitations may have. As both artifacts point out, the identities that this craze limits girls to, is one focused on outward appearance. 

As one can see by the Barbie home page, that fear is not outrageous.

Not only is the entire site pink (with a dash of yellow), but all of Barbie’s moving boxes are labeled different stereotypical “girly-girly” make-up items and the one box that isn’t a make-up item, is about Ken a man. Sending the message that Barbie's life is all about looking pretty, and a guy. And she is supposed to be a role-model of sorts for little girls.       

The other toys/characters that Orenstein talks about, all have a similar formula,

All are designed to be “cute,” “pretty” and to sell (hence redesigning of Dora). They all have big doe eyes, with enhanced eyelashes, and have outfits with frills.

Even this Target commercial promotes the idea that all little girls’ want are tutus, sparkly things and princess castles, because while the Legos and board games were fun to look at (which are boy toys and gender neutral), she finds what she is looking for in the princess castle, an appropriate girl toy.

I think that this can be connected to the Brave film because it actively sought to be a different female protagonist. She was intended to be more relatable and less perfect, she made selfish choices, choices that other Disney princesses would not have made. Because of that clear difference from traditional princesses, Merida was immediately put under the microscope. She doesn't fit into the expected role, which is the whole point of the movie, and yet, is therefore suspect. Additionally, the dress that she hates so much in the movie because its uncomfortable and restricts her movements, is marketed on half the Brave items for sale, including dress up dresses for little girls, completely ruining the message of the movie.

Questions and Comments for Class:  (Two comments that have no correlation to each other)
This is easily relatable to Raby's "Pleasurable Consumption," especially when Orenstein continually remarks that Mothers' subservience to this culture is about finding ways to preserve their girls' innocence, so the consumption of things pink and princess is seen as a "good" and "safe" way to express oneself.

Additionally, This reading hits so close to home for me. I was a little girl who at once love all things Disney, princess and fairy, however I also loved to build with Legos and race  cars. This eventually lead to my total hatred of pink; a hatred so deep that I am still coming to terms with it: My wardrobe totals three pink shirts.

Did anybody else rebel from the toy aisle?

Final Project Brainstorm

I have definitely been struggling with having no clue what to do for the final project. However, I do have a few ideas that I have been thinking about lately.

One is an exploration of recently popular Young Adult Fiction to explore the construction of gender, male female, and the treatment (or neglect) of transgender identification. The main problem I see myself having with this, is that I would have already had to have read the books, I would have the time to read them now, and as I don't really get any time to devote to reading for pleasure, my frame of reference would be limited.

The other idea that I have been thinking about recently is using magazines to explore the construction of gender and gender roles (again male, female, transgender, etc.). There are an abundance magazines that specifically target teens and tell them what their interests should be, what they should look like. While, they usually target girls, that doesn't mean that boys don't get the messages as well.
Using magazines would be far more accessible, meaning that I would have a bigger starting point, that may be able to cover more. I also believe that I will be able to apply the texts from class quite easily to teen magazines.

So while I would love to do something with literature, I'm probably going to head in the direction of the Magazine idea.

Midterm Project officially finished!

My website is finally published!

Midterm Project

I am working alone for my Midterm project and I have definitely taken a risk and made a Weebly website. This is a risk to me because I am pretty illiterate when it comes to technology...

I chose a mixture of prompt number 1 (Making Dr. Miller's lecture more accessible, with the use of media) and prompt number four (Do whatever!).
What I have done is use Dr. Millers lecture as a lay out, and some context. I then have taken elements of media from youth  culture in the fifties I am going to apply our own readings course assumptions to them.
I have talked about Raby's Discourses, and Croteau's dominant ideology, and I am considering which others to use.
The site is not yet complete but it will be by Thursday. When I finish up the last of the touches the website url will be historyandteengaers.weebly.com.
For my presentation I am planning on just browsing the site quickly, and talking about how our readings apply to the youth culture of the fifties. Depending on how well I manage time I may show some videos that I used.
Hopefully, I will not turn too red... but no promises!