The Ideas Children Gain From Cartoons

As we are grouping as children, we mostly watch cartoons. Why? These are the shows kids are "meant" to watch. When we see children's shows we always see cartoons with animals, shapes, different characters, hardly ever real human beings. The children's shows use much more color, but are the cartoons using the colors correctly? Are they using gender roles correctly? Are they using plots as they should to increase a child's varied view on today's society? Most would answer "No" to all of these questions. Cartoons only show what we have been expected to see for years. We expect to see a female character in a dress, or if it's an animal, to be a girly color like pink.





Take Dragon Tales for example, in this cartoon, the female dragons are girly colors and they still outnumbered by male characters. For this particular show, I have to give them props due to the little girl being a little more knowledgeable than her brother. Her brother is younger though so that would make sense. I would like to see what they would do with two characters of the same age, male and female, to see if they would make the male a smarter character than the female. Something that is shown just with this picture, the male characters are all bigger, stronger, and much wiser. The young pink dragon looks sort of like a "ditz". Many female characters are portrayed as "stupid" or "less knowledgeable than male characters. A lot of the times, the female dragons are undermined by the male dragons. The male characters almost always think they are better than the female characters. What is that showing our children? This shows children the stereotypes we have been trying to get rid of. How can we get rid of  these stereotypes if cartoons and other media follow the gender roles and gender stereotypes? If we create shows that have female and male characters more alike and having opposite colors but seen as a variety of colors so they don't see one color and stick to that for each gender. Children have a one-set mind. That's why they can bug you about one thing for hours on end. If they have a mind like this, then we could use this to our advantage by adding a variety of things for children to see so that they don't use one thing to depict a gender or race. Other races than White characters need to be shown more often throughout the media. White people aren't the only people in the world and we need something to show that.

What Does Disney Teach Children?

Disney plays a huge part in a child's life. There are so many Disney movies out there but which ones are actually teaching children the right thing? Why do we think something is wrong with some Disney movies? Children don't see anything wrong with Disney movies, but why would they? Children are too young when watching these Disney movies to realize Disney so called "motives". Even I never noticed how Disney could teach children what is okay and what is not by watching them now. It never occurred to me that The Beauty and The Beast could teach children that domestic violence is okay. In that movie, Bell is held prisoner by the "beast" who eventually turns into an attractive human being. He smacks Bell during the movie as well. In the end of this movie it becomes the typical "happily ever after ending". Then she is able to show him happiness, and the fact that a person would be willing to risk their life with someone like that and try to show them happiness baffles me.

 I feel like this is why so many people say "Oh I can change him". This shows children that even though someone hurts you, it's okay and you will be happy in the end. This obviously is not true at all. Although, it is understandable that one would argue children don't think about these movies in that context, but then again, how do we know that they don't take in what they are seeing and carry it with them throughout their lives? I know that when I was a child none of this information that I have learned about Disney movies was thought about while I watched them. I remember during the classes we had talked about Disney movies, most people said that they don't see much wrong with children watching these movies because of the fact that they don't think about how these movies could cause domestic violence, or dependence on another individual. Children are taught, girls especially, to be dependent on someone else and they will be forever happy. In reality, we know that is not the case. Luckily, we have seen more and more women become more independent. My parents used to tell me to marry a rich man if I wanted to be rich. Whether they were joking or not, it fit in with the idea that you had to depend on someone else for your own happiness. Now that certain events have happened in my life and throughout society, my mom now says never depend on someone else, do everything for your benefit and if you want to be rich, then you make yourself that way, no one else will. My dad on the other hand has several opinions. Sometimes he will say you better marry someone rich when you are older since you want so many things or he will say well if you do become a vet, you will be able to have the things you want. Two very different opinions, but where did the one about marrying someone rich come in to play? Who thought up that idea? When I think back to all of the Disney movies, especially the princess movies, in the end the couples always become rich and live happy lives. In a way, I believe that Disney has helped shape the idea of dependence on another individual for your own happiness and of course going way back into history to the traditional roles that men and women played. Women are always seen as the "damsel in distress" during these Disney movies who are saved by their "true loves". This teaches young girls that a guy will swipe you off your feet whenever you are in trouble. No. We need to create movies that show people being dependent on themselves and having to earn someone's trust in more than a day unlike all of the Disney movies. Don't get me wrong I absolutely love Disney movies and my favorite is The Lion King, but there are some things I don't agree with why they put certain events in their movies.

Advertisements Towards Children

Of course, children don't realize the object of the game for the marketers. Their goal is to make the children want their product, whether it creates a disruption throughout the media or not. Marketers gear a lot of food products and obviously toys toward children. They use numerous amounts of techniques in order to gain the children's attention and gain them as a consumer. One of the many tests they complete on children is a "blink test" where they observe how much the children blink during each advert. They choose the advert that the children blinked less during. As I think back to how the commercials and advertisements were during when I was a child, I realize now how they were able to achieve their goals of making the children and parents consumers.

This photo shows how the media has basically consumed children.

Children don't have the right brain mentality to decide whether the product is actually better because it is The Little Mermaid fruit snacks or whether the fruit snacks are the same but said to be better just because the adverts tell us that.  Children listen to everyone and everything. They copy everyone and everything. They usually do whatever they are told to do if it has something to do with benefitting them, like most people would. Now, thinking about how the parents feel towards these advertisments geared towards children, I can't imagine they are too pleased. Arguing with a 5 year old in a grocery store over whether Princess fruit snacks are better than regular fruit snacks is a lost cause. Whether batman bandaids are better than regular bandaids just because they have a character from their favorite show/movie on it makes the child think that it just tastes that much better. A prime example of this is a child named Abby whom my mother used to nanny. She is 4 years old. She has everything you can imagine with a logo of all of the Disney Princesses. She has a jacket, a blanket, a chair, a sleeping bag, and she was Ariel, the little mermaid, for Halloween this year. Without knowing it of course, she acts like a princess and thinks as though she should be treated like one. Thinking back, she watches a lot of TV, her day im sure mostly consists of watching TV other than when she is at school. In a way, I feel that TV and the media has shaped her view of everything (well what a 4 year old can handle in their brain) even though she is 4 years old. Yes, she is so young but she is so educated on things that she thinks she needs. I have watched her while she was watching TV before bed and almost every commercial, that was geared to a young girl, she said "I want that". These advertisements don't help the parents at all in these situations. Especially, because some parents just can't say "No".
Going off on how today's generation is with products being more enhanced, children in the next generation are probably going to be having iPhones at the age of 4. 2 year olds nowadays even know how to use an iPhone; they know that you have to swipe the screen and click on the screen in order to work it. Sometimes I wonder if they know what they are doing, because most of the time it sure looks like it. That might be a bit of an exaggeration, but I wouldn't be surprised. I can honestly say that I'm kind of disappointed in today's generation. I'm so sick of hearing children, usually ages 10-18, saying how much they want something and why they have to have it. My sister recently had two phones, now she just recieved the iPhone 5 from my Dad. I never understood why he bought her a new phone. I remember though, when I was her age, 15, I still had the Razer as my cell phone. These days children are so much more selfish and unthankful of what they have. I believe most of this is due to the media. The media tells us what to like, who to like, what is cool, what is not cool, what is necessary, and what is the product that "we need to have". The media tells the children of today's society what to like and they carry that with them throughout their lives, which is what the marketers aim for. They want to be able to grab children's attention and maintain it as they grow into adults. Why can't the media market products without choosing children to conform into consumerism? Well, the most obvious reason is, they just don't want to. They want to empower themselves by choosing a group that doesn't fully understand their reasons for marketing these products and that will tell their parents to buy them something just because they were told it was "cool" or "necessary for you to have".

Is it True Pornography Objectifies Women or Do Women Objectify Themselves?

A question we could ask ourselves is does pornography objectify women or do women objectify themselves? Many people would have different answers to this question because no woman wants to be told that they objectify themselves. Honestly though, the women in the porn industry are proud of what they do, they like being the object that people look at to give themselves pleasure. These women get pleasure out of other people desiring them. Of course, these women do not just come out and say that they objectify themselves but when you really look at everything within the porn industry that is what conclusion most people would get out of it. Take Jenna Jameson for example. She made a career out of being a porn star which is usually short lived, but she is a multimillionaire. She has her own products and is able to maintain her career. The video we watched that included her in it showed her with products that had been molded from her own body for other adults to use. In my opinion, I couldn't even imagine the thought of molding my body parts to make a product for other people to enjoy. It sounds disgusting and disturbing to me. Jenna Jameson loves her career and she loves that her "fans" use her products; she loves all of the attention she gets. Is this attention considered negative though? She only gets attention because others say that she is "hot" or "sexy". They only see her as a sex object. No one talks about her intelligence, for all we know she has no knowledge at all. An interview she had with Fox 411, she seemed like she was on drugs and she seemed like a complete ditz. I watched about 2 minutes and couldn't handle any more. Everything she said, she sounded so childish and unintelligent. Whether it was the drugs talking or not, I feel as though she has been so accustomed to the porn industry where they are meant to act in a childlike matter for the most part that it has come into her reality. This picture below is from an article on her about her accomplishments coming to an end. The article, Jenna Jameson Still Works in the Adult Entertainment Industry But Lies About It, talks about her wanting her new book "Sugar" to become an all time favorite, but every time she is on the air or on TV she seems to be intoxicated. She definitely sounds like it in her interviews. She has had her children taken away from her and she is being criticized so much for all of she appearances on television. She was maintaining a stable career unlike most in the porn industry but, from reading the article it sounds as though she tried to stop making videos. Obviously, that has not worked for her since she has been seen on a website on the internet that does not make much money. What does it take for women to realize that they could be doing better things in life? She could have her children and have a successful book if she just "grew up" and saw herself as being able to be knowledgeable and accomplish more than just things throughout the porn industry.
Men being interviewed at a porn event had said that "women are just there as sex objects, they're more like an object than a human being." Are women okay with being considered an object? Not even a living thing.
In pornography, women are submissive, they are basically the other partner's "bitch", and they seem to have no say in anything. This goes into the topic of women faking orgasms in porn videos. Why fake it? These women feel as though how they feel during sex doesn't matter, they are only there to pleasure the other person. This also goes along with the theory of women feeling as though they need to pleasure someone else and they get pleasure out of being desired by another person. This is probably the reason for porn stars. They enjoy being desired, they don't care about their feelings. At least, that is what it seems like. These women don't seem to care what other people think of them. Nor do they seem to care if they are happy with what they are doing because that is what today's culture is telling them. Today's culture doesn't even seem to have a female fantasy, nor does it show that women should be caring about how they use their bodies. A women should not feel comfortable selling her body to other people and being known as a sex object. In today's society, when you are seen as a sex object, that's all you become. Nothing more, just an object. Not a human being, just an object. Not a living organism, just an object. I see something very wrong with that.

How Do Ads Objectify and Dehumanize Women?

In today's society, there are many ads throughout the media that suggest the objectification and dehumanization of women. Not only, are women objectified, but men are as well.  Women are pictured in especially ads for men as objects. In some ads for beer and even food women are seen as the object being advertised. In an advert for a type of beer the woman was pictured with her body from the chest to the waist as the beer bottle being held by a man's hand. This picture is shown at the right. This is showing the empowerment that men supposedly have over women. Showing woman as objects leaves them looking powerless in the first place but to have a man holding the "object" in his hand shows much less representation for women. Like in the picture below, the women has a picture of a car over her face. This is dehumanizing her and objectifying her. The picture has the words the ultimate attraction written over it using the women as the supposed attraction but as the BMW. Showing women this way tells men that it is okay to treat women like objects. When I showed my boyfriend the picture of the beer shaped as a womens body, he thought it was funny. Most people do think these ads are comical or a "good catch". Why would we objectify the women when women are already very much so objectified in everyday life?

Women are shown in many fashion ads as being dismantled or using violence. A lot of different types of ads also do this. The picture to the left shows a fashion ad with a woman dismantled in multiple pieces. As always she has the jewelry, the makeup, and the high heels on in the ad to prove the femininity.

Yes, men are still objectified in ads. Honestly, how often do you see men objectified or dehumanized in ads? I came across one interesting ad that pictured a women leash walking two naked men.

(Pictured below). For both genders we do not see their faces, we just see their bodies which is what the media mostly focuses on. The woman is shown with heels and tight clothing to show her femininity and figure. The men are naked and show the muscles they both acquire. This picture could be taken in two different ways. Yes, this is sort of showing empowerment for women but it also shows empowerment for men. Although these men are on leashes it looks as though they are slightly pulling the woman along. They still have dominance in this picture even though they are being represented as dogs.

 

I could go on forever about each ad that is shown throghout the media, but that would take an awful long time. The question I always wonder is, who actually started this whole trend to objectify and dehumanize a human being in the first place? How does that make someone want to buy a product? We all know why they objectify women during men's ads, in order to gain their attention and have them focus on the "important" body parts of a woman. According to these ads, men only need to pay attention to women's bodies, their breasts, their butt, and especially their figure. What can we do about his objectification and dehumanization? We are human beings. We are not objects. We are not animals. So why refer to us as one? For the proof of empowerment? I'm sure that can be shown with less violent ads and more postive ones. Today's society has began to these ads in the media as "normal" so most people don't think anything of it.

Gays and Lesbians Throughout the Media

Is there an equal representation of gays and lesbians throughout the media? I feel as though we see many more lesbians within the media rather than gays. Why is that? Considering the media tries to get as much audience as it can, lesbians would be expected to be seen more throughout the media. Straight men watch TV shows that include lesbians because that is seen to be acceptable seeing as men who look at pornography are just seen as your typical man. In society, it is not necessarily looked down upon if a man looks at pornography. The pornography almost always includes woman on woman action shots or interactions. So, the audience that looks at things throughout the media pertaining to lesbians are mainly straight men, lesbians, gays, and some straight women may watch TV shows with characters who are lesbians. Who would be the audience for gays? Gay men, lesbians, and maybe some straight women may watch TV shows about gays or even read things dealing with gays in society. There is not much of an audience compared to the audience for anything pertaining to lesbians since more people have been shown to pay attention to the media about lesbians. As said in the movie we viewed in class today, if you are not represented in the media then "you don't exist". There needs to be an improvement with the visibility of lesbians and gays throughout the media. Increasing visibility will help to normalize gays and lesbians in society. In today's society, many stereotypes are made of gays and lesbians. Most TV shows today show gays as being more feminine than your ideal man while lesbians are shown more masculine than your ideal woman. Even if there is a character who is gay or lesbian is portrayed as the ideal masculine man, their partner is almost always the opposite. When we see a gay couple anywhere there is usually one of the partners who look more masculine while the other partner looks more feminine.
An article I read from The Columbian Dispatch, TV's Gay Characters Equally Men, Women, which said that "Gay characters featured in leading or recurring roles on new shows this year include the Fox police comedy Brooklyn Nine-Nine, the NBC sitcom Sean Saves the World and the CBS thriller Under the Dome. ABC and Fox were the only prime-time networks to increase the percentage of gay roles on shows." This article proved how gays are more likely to be seen on television now with more equity of men and women. This doesn't mean that they are completely 50, 50; there is yet an improvement in showing each couples more on television. It used to be that gay couples were made fun of on television, whereas now they are being more normalized as not to be poked fun at. Society is becoming more accepting of gay communities. Personally, I feel the more we see it, the more we will begin to normalize it.
During the reading of GTLB on TV, I noticed a varity of opinions on the matter. Dan Savage felt as though gay pride was only once a cure and is now toxic to society and the gay community. He suggested the idea of being "quietly gay". Another indivual, James, said that people should conform to a more normal standard of gender identity while retaining non-normative sexual identities. Lastly, the individual Xaphan said that there is a need for repeated "treatments" seeing as it has not been completely cured. He expressed his idea that "Pride is the treatment". He said pride is the continuation of the homophobia chemotherapy reffering to Dan Savage's comparison of gay pride to cancer and chemo therapy. If you put all of these ideas together it still shows that we need to see it miore to believe it. As I have seen, gay communities are thankfully being more represented throughout the media which helps society to conform to these "new" ideas and styles of living.

Are Women's Shows Ever Going to Be Less Genderedized?

There is a new show that came out this season called Devious Maids. If no one has heard of it nor seen it, it is a show with four women who are maids in very wealthy households who usuallly have something up their sleeve every episode. In the episodes I began to notice a pattern. The men in this show were always the more wealthy or the couple, had the better job, and was always the dominant person within the relationship of the man and woman. The men in this show call the shots, they boss their wives around like they are just an object made to be there for show. In one episode one of the upper class, wealthy women is divorced by her husband and left with nothing. She didn't get any money from him and since she did not have a job, she couldn't provide for herself. Her solution was to find another husband who could help support her. The woman talks about how she has had about 6 husbands and the thing is they have all been just for her to depend on. I don't agree with how this show portrays some of the women. The women, especially the wealthy ones living with their husbands unhappily, are portrayed to be helpless, dependent, weak, and hopeless. This show portrays that without a man, a woman can't provide for herself or anyone else and is unhappy. As the woman finds a new husband she becomes much happier and feels as though she can breathe again since she will now have the money to keep everything she owns. Women don't need a man to be dependent on nor do they need a man to be happy. Women should be portrayed differently in today's society to send a different message to people. Don't get me wrong, I love watching this show but I recently realized how everything is depicted within it from gender to race. Below is a picture of the maids in this TV show. They all possess some gender roles of that of a woman. They are all using sexy poses, they show the attractiveness and sexyness a women is supposed to have. They are maids so they do the work that women are "supposed" to do according to tradition gender roles. They cook for the families, they clean, and they take care of them in almost every single way neede. One of the girls is not exactly your typical type of maid. The one on the left works for a single gay man which is more of a business job than a maid.

The maids of the show Devious Maids.

Going on a race based argument, there are distinctions in this show that can be made about race. All of the maids are latinas and all of the wealthy people are white. Although an exception to this is a black man who is also wealthy but he is not very often shown during the show. There is also some irony with one of the men in the show. He is a latin gay man who decides not to come out of the closet because he would lose his job. This show explains the difficulty in society even today where gays cannot be "themselves" necessarily because they know they will be treated differently. Even when someone had found out that he was gay, he had to make a huge decision, whether to marry the girl who works for him or to lose his job. Of course he chooses to marry the girl who works for him in order to keep his career. This depicts the impact society has on someone that they can't even be who they really are. Then again this show is good in a way that it shows he still has every feature of an "ideal man". Even though his sexuality is different he is still the attractive man that everyone would expect a man to be.
All of the men in this show have at least one characteristic of the "ideal man". The older men who are the wealthiest characters in the show are all dominant and rich. None of them are particularly strong. Although, when we look at the young wealthy men, we see more characteristics of an ideal man. We see muscular, strong, aggressive, not really emotional, and dominant men.
I could go on forever about how much this show depicts all of the stereotypes and gender roles we have in today's society. The media needs to change how we view the gender roles so that people can stop expecting the unrealisticity of each gender.

Why exactly was 16 and Pregnant introduced to MTV?

I'm sure everyone knows about the show 16 and Pregnant. In the beginning the show was trying to teach everyone that having a child at 16 is not going to give you an easy life, friends, nor will it give you a good education. They are still trying to portray it as something to prevent teen pregnancy but I don't see it that way. This article, Why I Created MTV's "16 and Pregnant", gives the other side's opinion of how this show affects society. Seeing as there have been so many seasons of 16 and Pregnant that goes to show the media is showing that it is okay to have a child at the age of 16 and they seem to glorify the fact. An article I read explains how others view this show, MTV's "16 and Pregnant" Glorifies Teen Pregnancy. One person said that they think the show promotes teen pregnancy, as do I.
Has anyone noticed about the characteristics of these 16 year olds? I've noticed a pattern, many of them have the guy in their life that they think is going to stick with them until the end not to mention most of them aren't capable of living on their own. How many of them actually do? 8 out of 10 of the episodes of 16 and Pregnant that I have watched have had the men (although I should be calling them boys since they are still "kids") leave them, abuse them verbally or even physically, or gone out of the picture completely. I know of one couple on that show that made the smart choice in giving up their child for adoption. I believe the girl's name was Catelynn. This couple had been together for awhile but they knew they weren't ready for a child in their life nor were they stable enough to take care of it. Of course giving up your child after it is born is hard, but wouldn't you want what is best for your child? My mom watches this show, so it dawned on me to write a post about it. I honestly can't stand to watch this show because it makes me angry based on the people's behaviors throughout the show. The girls always complain that they can't go out, but who made the decision to have a child? They did. For some of them though, I have to say they are strong teenage girls. Realizing that yes they did stupidly pretty much put their lives on hold for a long time due to having a child but to the ones who stick it out without complaining and deal with the fact that their baby daddy or boyfriend had left them I will consider them strong for going through everything even though their parents are there to help them. There was a change in this seasons 16 and Pregnant with one of the girls. Her mother was different than all of the other parents. She tried to convince her not to have her child and get an abortion. She told her that if she had the child then she would eventually have to move out since she did not like what her daughter was doing. I have not watched anything after that episode but if that mother sticks with it then I give props to her.

This is the couple that gave their baby up for adoption and still got to see her. This couple did the right thing for themselves and their child.

I believe that if you have a stable life, if you have someone you know for sure will stick beside you, if you can provide for yourself and a baby and you're ready for one; then have the child.
Going on a gender based view, the teenage girls and even mothers follow the type of gender role of that of a woman. They care for the children and their house. Yet, they also take on a part of the man's role. Instead of depending on the man, most of the girls, at least the ones who are smart enough, are independent. They find their own jobs, still try to educate themselves, AND take care of their child. To the teenage girls who actually do all of those things, I don't think I could nor would I want to do that so I feel as though I should give them some appreciation because of their hard work.
In my opinion, young girls such as ages 16 should not have a child. I apologize if I offend anyone. I'm not meaning to. All of this is just an opinion.

Video Games and Machine Games of Domination

Recently, everyone has been excited to own the game Grand Auto Theft 5 that just recently came out. This game is a major example of the violence shown throughout video games. This video game has brought out so many concerns to people because of the damage that can be done within this game. In an article I read, Has "Grand Theft Auto V" Grown Up?, they had talked about how it caused "a media storm like no other". The media questioned the violence in this game and were convinced that this is the type of thing that has corrupted American children. In this article it was brought to my attention that maybe GTA 5 has gotten better instead of getting worse by this line in the article: "The violence increased, but the use for it in the game matured.". Like Grand Theft Auto IV, Grand Theft Auto V seems to be taking the same approach where one of the main characters is trying to come out of crime and escaping violence, not "embracing' it.
I read an interesting article where a mother did not want her son to play Grand Theft Auto but didn't mind if her son played Call of Duty. Now there are two sides to every story, in this case its just an opinion which I have two sides to. This article is from the Grand Theft Auto IV but I still found value in it. The article,  Grand Theft Auto IV. Should 14 Year Old Be Able to Play? I'm With Mom, "No!", explains how the mother is considered a hypocrite from the father due to the fact she will let her son play COD but not GTA. The mother's excuse is that it is because COD is a game about war, teaching her son about the soldiers in battle. In reality, what 14 year old is really learning about historical wars during the game of COD? There is probably a very slim chance that the teenage boy takes something educational about this game. In my opinion, children aren't old enough at that age to realize what really goes on during a battle, whether the game is a perfect jist of it or not. Yes, GTA is more of a game where crime is committed by thugs and there are women in the game who are prostitutes. I believe COD is a better game to play than GTA, but I feel like they both provoke violence in our society even if one does more than the other. GTA has gamers enjoying the fact that they can steal cars, beat up women, kill prostitutes, and all sorts of other violent acts. COD is a more militaristic game but it also has violence which many people could learn from. Honestly, I used to love to play COD with my best friend and we would always laugh when we shot each other because of course we knew it's was not real, but what if one day a child does the same thing realistically, would the child still laugh? Another way to look at these games is if the gamer is mature enough to be playing these games. If the gamer knows that the actions during the game are somewhat realistic but should not be brought in society, then I find that perfectly okay. On the one hand, when children play these games, what goes on in their minds?  To go along with the idea that these games are somewhat tolerable, an article had talked about how the person enjoyed the more gruesome qualities of the game but also said that it could help people realize the gruesome and terrible consequences of killing someone. I honestly don't think a game will help a MAN or BOY realize that there is terrible consequences when these games really don't have a terrible consequence for killing anyone during the game. 

Violent Masculinity in Advertising

It all starts out early. Children learn things quickly. They quickly learn the aspects that they should have based upon their gender. Boys learn at an early age that in order to be considered male even they need to have specific "boy" toys. Let's take the huge Hulk hands for example, kids are learning that they need to be strong in order to be a man. There are so many adverts that affect a men's view of what a "real man" should look like. The formula for manhood is strong, assertive, confident, sexy, and powerful. A lot of ads show the dominance over women. Although there are some ads I have seen on the internet that show a woman dominating over a man for a fashion ad. Why do we see violence as being the major aspect of dominance? Men take on a Tough Guise by Sut Jhally which makes them develope an act of violence whether it is fake or not. Eventually they adapt to that nature and therefore it stays with them. A huge developement within helping men think they need violence to be dominant is the media. Television, magazine, any type of ads show men that are dominant and successful. We see successful and violent men as the dominant people in society such as Eminem. Eminem is successful in his music career and has so many fans, but why? Why do we like his music so much? What does he show throughout his music videos and songs? He sings about violence and shows power and violence in his music videos. We have been so accustomed to the violent masculinity act that we don't see anything wrong with it. People today still joke around and might say, "Yeah, my girlfriend got that bruise from me." The funny thing is that I have seen so many women allow their significant other to talk like that. They just find if funny. There's something wrong with that, joking or not.

 Even during car commercials the cars more pushed towards men use words like "speed, power, acceleration, strength". The media wants men to feel like they have to have a nice, powerful car to go along with their powerful and confident aspects. There are even political ads that show power dominance very violently.  The ad below shows the U.S. kicking Chinese out of the U.S. this shows the power and dominance of the U.S. over China by using violence. 

This political cartoon, circa 1886, uses the metaphor of washing to describe the cleansing of the Chinese from the U.S.  At the bottom it reads, “The Chinese must go.”

Traditional Roles Within TV Shows

In today's society there are still so many stereotypical views towards men and women within their occupations, their roles as a family member, and their roles just as their gender. These stereotypes are highly portrayed by television shows in the past and still are today. The Little House on The Prairie shows how women were the ones without an occupation and men were the ones to go out and provide for the family financially.  The family had more than one child which was very common back in that time period. The mother would always be the one to do all of the housework, take care of the children, and even the children did work at home also. Now, in today's society we still have shows stereotypical like this, although the shows are more realistically within our time period. One show which I think is a good example of this is Modern Family. This show has in a way gone against what we usually see on television with gay couples, which I think is great. The couple in this show may be two guys but they still each portray themselves as more feminine or more masculine. The more masculine guy of the two goes to work and has a good occupation. His partner is more feminine and stays home, does the laundry, makes dinner; he does everything a woman would typically do in a household. I found an article very alarming on the gay couple in the show; People are still hateful towards gay couples. If you read the article you might be able to understand the argument they are making but some of what they say shocked me. http://www.mamapop.com/2011/10/why-modern-familys-gay-couple-cameron-and-mitchell-are-a-bad-influence-on-families.html. I chose to talk about this show because there is so much to talk about within it dealing with gender roles, race, religion, and class. Going off on how television shows are usually portrayed as the "american dream", this show proves that in good detail. During the reading, within the chapter "Family Formation and the Economy-The Television View" they talked about how the tv shows do have female and male expectations shown through their dialog. The children in TV shows express their parents' need for change. Throughout these tv shows you can see what the society expects us to be like and how they expect us to react to certain things.

http://www.mamapop.com/2011/10/why-modern-familys-gay-couple-cameron-and-mitchell-are-a-bad-influence-on-families.html