True Activism

Technology is what binds us together. Social media has become a ways of sharing information, finding a perfect match, and keeping in touch with old friends or family members. In this sense, social media is a very convenient option for communiation. Recently, activism has been added to the list of what social media is capable of achieveing. As Malcolm Gladwell points out in his essay, Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted, "The new tools of social media have reinvented social activism." This statement proves true with all of the hashtags on Twitter supporting different causes and demands for justice. But, can this really be called social activim, or is it just a glorifyed form of participation and awareness?

For example, there is the story of Ahmed and the hashtag #IStandWithAhmed. This child brought a homemade clock to his school and was arrested on the suspicions that the clock was actually a bomb. He was later cleared of his accusations when people including Mark Zuckerberg and Barack Obama invited him to visit their offices and supported his interest in science. The hashtag was bounced around for a while on social media and everything came to a happy end when Ahmed was offered these opportunities and moved on from his school. The people that actively retweeted this story and offered their support. While this made the people retweeting this act happy and self satisfied, it was not true activism.

"Social networks are effective at increasing participation--by lessening the level of motivation that participation requires." This perfectly describes how "activism" on social media is. The people retweeting these hashtags and reblogging these posts are sitting safely behind a phone screen. They are not getting into the issue at hand and they have no real personal connection to the words that they are repeating. Now, there can certainly be a personal or moral duty to support those who are falsely accused of crimes not committed. Social media has even served to being light to subjects that would have otherwise been looked over or completely forgotten. But unless the person preaching these words are actually causing the change that they so desire, then the word "activist" cannot be applied.

Beautiful Ballerinas

This is the picture that caught my eye when I was flipping through the New Yorker. This photo was part of an ad for the 2015-16 season of a ballet company. When I first saw this, it reminded me of the Bratz dolls that I used to play with when I was little, with their impossibly tiny waists and faces done up with makeup. I also felt that it was a little ironic that this was the picture I found after we had been talking about feminism for the past couple of classes. It reinforced that there are many ads in magazines that push for this unattainable skin-and-bones look. 

Now, given that this photo was used for a ballet company, where the performers have to be in top athletic condition, this is a justifiable depiction of their lithe bodies. I can also appreciate how the artist tried to capture the natural beauty that ballerinas carry within themselves. However, I felt that it was just another example of how we as women and as a society cannot escape these images of tiny waists and long legs. 

Feminism

Feminism, by definition, is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men". While this definition clearly point out the criteria of feminism in the literal sense, I agree with author Roxane Gay's preferred definition, first said by Kathy Bail, which is: "'women who don't want to be treated like sh*t.'" In Gay's Bad Feminist essay, she reflects on what society sees as "essential feminism," and how putting a label with a negative association in society today leaves no wiggle room for advocates to express their own individuality. Women are already categorized and forced into certain archetypes based on weight, appearance, lack of or too much makeup, sexual orientation, gender orientation, and so many others. Why, then, should feminism be seen as just women being angry and uncooperative, when it has been a social movement from the nineteenth century onwards for the equality of both men, women, and those who fall in between?

Gay describes how feminism has taken on a cringeworthy aspect to it. She says that, "I sometimes cringe when someone refers to me as a feminist, as if I should be ashamed of my feminism or as if the word feminist is an insult". Gay clearly states how she has been reduced to something shameful. I am afraid of the word feminist at times. I have read stories, including this essay, where once the author admits to being a part of this equality-driven movement, the person they are speaking with normally sneers or gives a look clearly implying that being a feminist is the exact opposite of what a woman wants to be. All it does is add more to labels; we have so many labels on each other that our individuality drowns in stereotypes. I am glad that Gay included this in her essay because feminists are called out on their passion by people who immediately want to put them down as the "'angry feminist'".

Gay also touches upon the "fear of being forced into a box that cannot quite accomodate a woman properly." She reveals that she loves the color pink and that she knows absolutely nothing about cars. In society's eyes, this is seen as something strange because feminists have to be to do it all to be considered equal or good. She goes on to say that she listens to rap music that has lyrics that offend her personally but she listens anyway because she loves that music. Gay likes men, she wants a child, and she wants to be able to keep her job without having to constantly be strong and unemotional to keep her respect and authority among her coworkers. Gay is a human being. Human beings cannot fit into a certain mold and just accept every single thing that they are supposedly "meant to be like" and they cannot deny the emotions that are meant to keep their mental stability intact. Gay does not need to know how to fix a car to be able to be called feminist. Gay should not have to hand over her job that she loves to take on motherhood and never look back. This is the reality that feminists face every day. There always has to be a choice, whether it be a child over a job, makeup over none, or even black over pink as a favorite color. We need to stop using the simplest things as a ways of attacking another person into conforming with the steroetypes placed on us.

There should also be men given the rights that women currently have, few as they may be. Women are allowed to be emotional and to express their feelings. The acceptance of these emotions has gotten to a point where a man showing emotion or crying is seen as being "feminine". Why should a man, performing a natural bodily response to something such as pain or stress,  have to hide and bottle up these feelings? Why should men lashing out at a lover or a family member after bottling up all of these emotions for months or even years been seen as something commonplace while women can rid themselves of their emotional baggage more easily? If men want to be able to have the right to do what is seen as something completely natural to women, then they need to join the feminist movement. Hyper masculinity may have (doesn't have any) perks, being macho can only carry one so far until they break down completely. I think that in order to reach the equality that we desire as women, we need to promise equality for men as well and get them to join our cause.

Please Stop Hating My Childhood

I have grown up loving Disney. I have dressed up as multiple princesses (Jasmine, Ariel, and Alice) for Halloween, have watched many of the movies multiple times, and even met some of the princesses in real life when I went to Disney World in the 4th grade. Even earlier this year, almost everyone in this class had some part in the Disney Gala we performed in May. So it's pretty clear that the Disney franchise has played a very big role in my life and continues to do so. In class last Friday, we read Deborah Ross' Escape from Wonderland: Disney and the Female Imagination, which basically put down every movie ever created by Disney due to their "reluctance to embrace imagination with both arms", feelings of distrust and danger towards dreaming, and "rigid adherence to rules". Even with the close scrutiny done by Ross with her examples used in Alice in Wonderland, The Little Mermaid, and Beauty and the Beast, all the reader can do is feel attacked and exasperated when reading this essay.

 Ross uses examples from Disney's films to support the idea that imagination is not homogenous and that Disney should not be supporting the idea that marriage is the end all be all for girls. She says that "conservative authors have used romances and novels to teach that their dreams are dangerous and of little relevance to their daily lives". Children are taught to dream and as they grow up they can percieve whether those dreams are realistic or absolutely unachieveable. In Alice, Ross points out that at first "Alice stories...present adventure as positive". And it absolutely is. We shoudl be encouraging girls to go around the world and see new things and explore their passions. But then Ross says that Alice fears her dreams and wants to go home and go back to reality. This shows that we should not follow our dreams and that we should accept the fate that is given to us. And I love this story and it feels like this is such a bad representation of what that story was.

 I completely agree, marriage should not be the end of their tales. In the Little Mermaid, Ariel wants to see our world. She wants to walk on the street and sit in the sun and learn how to dance. The viewer roots for her in this aspect, especially with her "Part of Your World" song. But in the movie, as soon as she locks eyes with that prince, all of those dreams seemingly vanish with the blindess of love. I read the original tale before it was mentioned in this essay, so I knew what Ariel truly wanted. All she wanted was to be a spirit of the air and to gain a soul for Heaven. The movie completely looks over that tragic beauty to her character and instead replaces it with a bouquet and veil. It takes away the sacrifices that the little mermaid had to endure to gain her freedom and her legs and instead made her out to be a perfect housewife for Eric.

Now, this essay made some great points in its attack on marriage being the "happily ever after" and that dreaming should not be seen as a flaw. But it was such a chore to read and honestly I became so frustrated with Ross, if I am being completely honest. I have such a personal connection with both these movies and the fairy tales. I can sincerely say that I enjoy both the books and the movies. But the blatant attack that Ross uses immediately makes me exasperated. It just sounds like another adult berating a child for still dreaming when we're apparently too old to do so.

Entropy

Hi! I want to talk about one of my favorite short films called Entropy. The film was made by Rhubarb Zoo in 2008 and I first saw it in 2012 (i think, it was a really long time ago). This is the story of a lonely girl named Harmony who found a companion in a man on the moon. At the time I saw this, a good friend of mine had left my school, so I instantly related to Harmony and her journey. I really love the art style used in this piece and the songs played with the stars are so simple but they compliment the whimsicality of the film. Entropy taught me that there will always be companions to be there for us, even if they are in unexpected places. I just really love this film and I hope you enjoy it as well!

John Oliver VS. Standardized Testing

In this video, Last Week Tonight host John Oliver picks apart and critiques the system of starndardized tests that plagues students every year. He shows the methods that these companies to use to get kids hyped about testing, and how even with their persuasion the children still refused to take the tests. John Oliver makes his arguement against the standardized tests clear when he gives examples of how inaccurate the test graders are and what effects these tests have on the teachers and children invpved. By using many examples and throwing satirical comments left and right, John Oliver fully uses his power of persuasion to fight against this unfair system.

One major way John Oliver persuades his audience is by using evidence to support his claims and his viewpoint. He uses many clips, pictures, and statisctics to show how the standardized tests negatively effect all those involved. This use of logos helps provide credibility to his claims and makes us believe both him and his evidence gathered. He also gives the origin behind standardized testing by showing a clip of George Bush talking about schools needing to be accountable for the poor test scores United States children showed compared to other childrens' scores from around the world. This set the basis for the reason why standardized testing was increased and the "No Child Left Behind" was created. John Oliver then goes on to explain in the video that while this was a good idea with pure intentions, it created more havoc than improvement. Oliver went on to point out that test scores have gone down since the implementation of these tests and asks why they are still so inaffective.

John Oliver also applies to people's emotions with pathos. He shows just how much these tests harm the children that take them. He shows a photo of one of the rules of the test, stating what to do if a child vomits on his/her test book. This immediately makes the audience reach out with empathy towards the children so anxious and worried about a grade that they get physically ill. He also uses a video where an 8th grade girl is petitioning to stay in an advanvced language class that she is excelling in, but was taken out of due to poor test grades. The audience can clearly see how broken up this girl is about her program being taken away from her and I even felt bad when she started crying and choking up.

Standardized testing is the bane of every child's existance as students. These tests rule their lives and can make them physically, mentally, and emotionally ill, especially if they handle stress poorly or are put under pressure by their teachers or peers. John Oliver looks for ways to fight back against these injustices by using logos and pathos to add to his power of persuasion. He uses examples that makes the audience laugh, pity, and gasp at the systems used for testing. He clearly asks the audience to look at this flawed system and see what we can do to put an end to this source of immense stress. And in the words of John Oliver, I end this analysis with these four words: "Here comes the monkey!"