media and terrorism

So I was thinking about the guy who flew an airplane into the IRS offices in Austin, Texas last month. The media basically stopped covering him the day after. They didn’t even call the act terrorism, even though so many other similar acts are construed as such. I have a sneaking suspicion that it was because he was white. He was a white American with a very “American” name: Joe Stack. I think that the media did not want to cover this story because it conflicts with their agenda. There can’t be members of the dominant culture that are terrorists, the media wants us to fear those who are not in power. Because he was in the dominant group, we weren’t supposed to see him as a terrorist. The media wants us to fear people who do not fit the rigid WASP standards, and see people who are not white as possible terrorists. I think this also has to do with them construing the Fort Hood tragedy as terrorism. Even though the guy was American, he was also a Muslim with a non-dominant culture sounding name, and it fit the media’s construction of terrorism to paint the Fort Hood disaster as a terrorist act. Tim Stack resembled the dominant culture too closely to be called a terrorist but the guy at Fort Hood was ideal because he matched the media’s construction.

post

Of course, women are just the tip of the iceberg for using positive, inclusive language. Another thing that really bothers me is when people use “gay” as a replacement for stupid. When people use that, I try to get them to think about what they’re really trying to describe. I try to challenge them to find a more appropriate adjective. Using gay instead of a more accurate thing relegates gay people to just one stereotype and portrays them as lesser people than heterosexuals. Another important thing to focus on is describing a person rather than their race, sexual orientation, or ability first. Instead of referring to someone as their race, we can refer to them as a person. This shows that a single characteristic does not define someone. Just simply picking more appropriate language is important to improving relationships with people, and here is a good guide. Here is another great guide.

So one thing I think is really important is to focus on using inclusive language. I want to spread the word as part of my project. I also need to focus on using it myself. As a woman, I still even use “man kind” instead of “human kind”. It is unintentional but I do think using male dominant language is a reflection of patriarchal values socialized into me, and helps to continue them. Instead of focusing on humanity as a whole, it focuses on man’s achievements and ignores women. It is important to reflect the value of women through our language. I found a good guide on gender-neutral language. It helps to explain why certain words carry certain connotations and need to be avoided. While it is silly to change things like “man-handle”, it is important to recognize women’s contributions by using “congress member” instead of “congressman”.

ice?

So one thing I found really interesting today was how homophobic remarks are easily dismissed as harmless. I haven’t used gay as a synonym for pointless or stupid since I was 9 years old and my mother explained to me that it was wrong. In that way I was prejudiced because I wasn’t educated and didn’t know what I was actually saying, and my mother enlightened me to see why it was wrong. I think that is a good example of how simple education can help with some types of prejudice, but I am positive that most people who say ‘gay’ now know what gay really means, but still say it anyways. I am surprised at how many educated people I know who say it but don’t think it’s offensive. Anyways, I thought of this because I was reading about my favorite figure skater, Johnny Weir. A Canadian commentator basically said he was too gay for figure skating and should take a gender test, and Johnny went on Joy Behar’s show and said “it’s figure skating”. While his response was hilarious, I don’t think he should have to be the one to address it. I think the network it was broadcasted on should. The comment is basically saying that gay people are lesser and bad representations, and the person who said it needs to be held accountable. I think the comment is an example of homosexuals being such an underrepresented group that public figures feel it is okay to express prejudiced opinions about them. Johnny is an elite athlete but that comment used one aspect of him to completely undermine him and his performance.

Craigslist

One thing I found particularly interesting today is the fact that Catholic Charities, recognizing the fact that homosexuals can now marry in Washington D.C., chose to exclude spouses of new employees from benefits packages. While not overtly targeted at homosexuals, it is alleged that the move was crafted to effectively deny homosexual partners from benefits, according to the Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/02/catholic-charities-drops_n_482388.html. This is obviously rooted in their church’s stance on homosexual, but fails to realize that their employees are not all Catholic and may have families despite being homosexual. Well on to another topic, since that one seems pretty cut and dry. Like I wrote before, I think Craigslist is a great place to find out about how prejudice reaches the mainstream. One important thing to note about Craigslist is the fact that it allows users to flag offensive comments for removal. I’ve noticed that there are few new postings on the Fort Collins section, probably because people realize they’re offensive. However, some really obvious prejudice and offensive things got through. This excerpt from a recent posting equates women with only their looks, and judges personality off of looks, and is just plain awful: “I was at Target today and there was a fairly decent-looking guy with a hideous bitch-o-matic of a wife. I don't know how she conned him, but she must've been working some awesome magic, because I could barely look in her direction without feeling nauseous. Maybe these hideous creatures are proof that the world of magical spells and incantations really does exist. Because otherwise, I really don't how you'd explain it.” Another incoherent post makes some really racist assumptions: “yea .I see the racism is long gone .The shackles have just changed with the dependency on you liberals to get them hand outs and things like affordable housing , welfare , health care.” This gem is too long to post: http://fortcollins.craigslist.org/rnr/1597196342.html. Finally, a shining example of prejudice entitled “if I where (sic) president”, http://fortcollins.craigslist.org/rnr/1594421752.html. Though these are obviously offensive, I need to do research on how someone can actually believe them. Maybe over time they hear all the prejudice on Craigslist and other areas of socialization and believe it. Or maybe their main source of “knowledge” sadly is Craiglist.

the internets

I found some evidence that the internet can indeed spread and ignite prejudice and even hate. The Christmas day underpants bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was recruited by Al Qaeda exclusively by the internet, according to ABC News. Prior to “training”, he had no actual person to person contact with Al Qaeda and learned the motives and techniques for terrorism only from internet communication. Through the internet, he learned the prejudices and hatred that motivated him to attempt to “train” in Yemen to blow up an airplane. This shows that the internet can be an extremely powerful tool in intensifying one’s beliefs. While he may have shared sentiments with Al Qaeda prior to connecting to them through the internet, he surely would have not had the funds or techniques without it. Al Qaeda used the internet to add to feelings he may have already had by indoctrinating him into their beliefs, teaching him why to hate others and how to act upon that hate. Another thing I found extremely interesting about this incident is it not only shows that prejudice is in fact spread through the internet, but also shows that government officials are actually concerned about the internet’s role in the spread of prejudice and hate. Up until recently, the internet has been a no-holds barred arena, where people spread offensive and prejudice ideals with impunity. Now that there has been a direct connection of the internet to terrorism and hate, government and intelligence officials are thinking seriously about the role of the internet in spreading hate and prejudice as an issue of national security. According to Dennis Blair in the aforementioned article; "Malicious cyber activity is occurring on an unprecedented scale with extraordinary sophistication." A revolutionary tool in communication, the internet also poses unique risks by facilitating a mass diffusion of hate and prejudice, and the Christmas day incident is a clear indication of the dangers that lie in new technology.

just keep swimming

So I have been thinking of this paper, and I’ve decided I need to research some advocates trying to curb the spread of prejudice. This will help my project be more comprehensive in understanding the spread of prejudice through new media by offering expert knowledge. While this one (http://www.splcenter.org/blog/) features hate groups in particular, I want to also research more subtle ways prejudice can be created and grow. I think exploring sites like craigslist (Rants and Raves), Fox Nation, and others will help yield more information on subtle racism and prejudice. These sites are also really popular, so it will help show how prejudice can reach the main stream through the internet. I also want to research why it might be that the internet emboldens people to say prejudiced things. Is it because of anonymity, that they know there is no repercussions, and that is how they are really feeling, or because they just want to make people angry and the internet is a good venue to reach people?

woman king

On the topic of media influencing prejudice about females…Twilight….I think it is one of the most patriarchal creations of modern media, and the fact that teens are reading it in school is troubling to me. So I think one of the main themes is “you aren’t anything without a man”. At least that is what the protagonist thinks, and there is not really any negative reaction to her in the books. Yes, I’ve read the first three. Severe boredom. Anyways, the whole plot of the first book is basically how her life was soooo bad until she met the guy, and then, in the second, after he leaves her life is meaningless. She basically tries to kill herself so she sees visions of him so her life regains its meaning. I get it’s a teenage drama and with that comes melodrama, but I don’t know if that is the best message to be sending to impressionable kids. Also, another HUGE theme is abstinence until marriage. OK, I get that it is admirable to abstain until marriage, but the main problem I have with this theme is that the protagonist gives up her life about a week after she meets the guy. She wants to drastically change her life for her man…just to be with him…not for herself…a week into their relationship, yet having sex before marriage is evil? So you can completely alter your own life for a man, but having sex is not alright? It is alright to let a man control you but not have sex with you? He becomes very controlling and in the book, it is shown as a sign of love. Another thing I find really disturbing is the fact that one character is mauled by her boyfriend when he is turning into a werewolf (seriously, I’m not kidding) and it is dismissed as him “losing control”. The reason this bothers me is this is a common excuse used by those who commit domestic violence, and their partners stay with them. She stays with him and says it won’t happen again, something that advocates want victims of domestic violence to rethink. Another odd thing is the fact that another main character, in book 3, keeps trying to kiss the protagonist, despite the fact that she resists his advances. She basically tells him no and he forces himself on her. After this, she decides she loves him too. I don’t really have to explain why this message may be detrimental. Enough for now. Some day I will write I serious research paper about Twilight and its negative affect on teens, with works cited and everything, but I’m tired.

Fox, not Mulder.

I remembered the Tea Party movement being called racist in the White Power USA video I watched, so I googled “Tea Party Racist” and came to a link for Fox News. Some of the comments were enlightening about people’s levels of prejudice. I was surprised and upset over some of the comments about our president, which had obvious racial undertones. I think I will definitely use the Fox Nation website in my project, because it is a mainstream site. Despite being a mainstream site, it has little comment moderation, and I suspect comments are only deleted if they offend readers on the site, who probably share the sentiments of those posting offensive comments. Since the target audience probably won’t be offended by, or even agree, to some of the more inflammatory comments, they are not deleted, and prejudice is allowed to fester. The fact that one of the biggest news channels allows prejudiced comments on their website (despite the disclaimer that they don’t reflect their company) legitimizes their content. Because it is delivered on a forum of a source that is “fair and balanced”, not deleting the comments lends credence to them. People may associate the comments with “news”. I will definitely try to look into this further.

movies!

So I went to the movies today and tried to pick out some of the negative messages our media sends to us. This was most apparent in the trailers. I noticed a definite pro-patriarchy sentiment in a trailer for a movie called She’s Out of My League. In the trailer, the girl was relegated to simply her looks and the guy was actually given a personality. She was called a 10, an ideal woman, simply because she was skinny, white, and blonde. This furthers the notion that a woman is only good for her looks and it is okay for men to judge women on their looks rather than other elements, which helps men discount women as simple sex objects and allows the patriarchy to marginalize women’s achievements. It also seemed to be another film in a long line of film and tv shows where the homely guy gets the gorgeous girl. It never seems to be the opposite way. In this trope, guys can get the hottest girl because they have good personality, but it never seems to work the other way around, maybe reflecting an idea that women’s personality is second to their looks. This corresponds to my perception that male entertainers are given more leeway in the appearance department than females. Average looking males are allowed to play normal characters, whereas average looking females are relegated to character characters, not protagonists. I also was really surprised by the fact that the replaced Terrance Howard with another guy of the same race, who looks or acts nothing like him, in the new Iron Man movie. I suspect it was because he happened to be black. Maybe the producers needed a new actor or the show couldn’t go on or maybe it is an unconscious reflection of dominant culture’s views on the disposability of non-whites? I doubt they would replace Robert Downy Jr. with Stephen Colbert or Gwenyth Paltrow with Angelina Jolie.

inglourous basterds

So today I found out about a really appalling hate group site in my social movements class: nsm88.org . While it is a little biased, we watched an informative video: democracy now . These people are trying to expand white supremacist beliefs by reaching mainstream white Americans. They use legitimate grievances to draw people in (lack of jobs) and then indoctrinate them into their beliefs. I think the reason this works is because people are frustrated and angry and these groups appeal to their initial anger and then gain their trust to “teach” their prejudices. By reaching out to the internet, they can spread their neo-Nazi beliefs to other countries and to states without “chapters”, recruiting angry people and acting as an outlet, then furthering their racist agendas. What I found very interesting was the fact that the site mentions ACORN and their practices, which was also on FOX news. I found the mainstream Fox’s coverage of ACORN racially tinged, and the fact that coverage similar to theirs appears on a neo-Nazi website furthers my suspicions. I would say that FOX news uses fear and anger, just like the hate groups, to appeal to viewers, and then use that to further subjugation of minorities (ie Glenn Beck’s “Obama is a racist”). I was really surprised that the site actually took an anti-war in Iraq/Afghanistan stance. One more thing I found interesting was the fact that the group tried to legitimize themselves by doing a highway cleanup in Colorado.

paranoid android

So today I found out about a really appalling hate group site in my social movements class: www.nsm88.org . These people are trying to expand white supremacist beliefs by reaching mainstream white Americans. They use legitimate grievances to draw people in (lack of jobs) and then indoctrinate them into their beliefs. I think the reason this works is because people are frustrated and angry and these groups appeal to their initial anger and then gain their trust to “teach” their prejudices. By reaching out to the internet, they can spread their neo-Nazi beliefs to other countries and to states without “chapters”, recruiting angry people and acting as an outlet, then furthering their racist agendas. What I found very interesting was the fact that the site mentions ACORN and their practices, which was also on FOX news. I found the mainstream Fox’s coverage of ACORN racially tinged, and the fact that coverage similar to theirs appears on a neo-Nazi website furthers my suspicions. I would say that FOX news uses fear and anger, just like the hate groups, to appeal to viewers, and then use that to further subjugation of minorities (ie Glenn Beck’s “Obama is a racist”). I was really surprised that the site actually took an anti-war in Iraq/Afghanistan stance. One more thing I found interesting was the fact that the group tried to legitimize themselves by doing a highway cleanup in Colorado.

ok computer

So I started this blog to start a dialogue about prejudice and its origins. Most of the things I wrote are opinion-based, but I have tried to do research to stay informed. Please be respectful when commenting on this blog, and have an open mind. I tried to have an open mind, but also make persuasive arguments. Also, this is journal-style, so I wrote each entry in about 10 minutes, so forgive poor grammar. I should probably do better fact checking, so don't be afraid to enlighten me.

I tried to pay attention to the subtle things in media that help to shape prejudice or reflect a focus on white culture today. One thing I noticed was the fact that pretty, white, rich girl Natalie Holloway was still in the news. While her story is tragic, the fact that it gets press time over the hundreds of missing native women in British Columbia, the host of the Olympics, is notable. Also is the fact that the coverage of the disaster in Haiti seems to skirt over and ignore the colonialist policies and even more recent but just as detrimental, “free trade” policies that have helped make Haiti the poorest nation in the Western hemisphere. I think the coverage of the Haitian disaster is inherently racist, because it depicts a country that was not able to help itself strength its society, and was already vulnerable when the disaster struck, rather than a country crippled by policies of rich, white nations. I also noted a news story on the (white) victims of a train crash in Florida. It made a point of mentioning that they were pretty. This seemed interesting because it seemed to show that ugly victims would not have been as tragic. Another thing I found interesting was the constant news coverage and reaction of police to a missing American actor in Vancouver. While sad, this seems to directly contrast the coverage and reaction to missing sex workers in the city, who mostly were native and numbered 500. I wouldn’t be aware of these missing women if it weren’t for a class in college. Also, the police have diverted numerous resources to finding a missing actor, but didn’t seem to care about the missing women, until they uncovered a mass grave at a white man’s home.