Messages From TV Land: The Influence of Media on Our Thinking About Gender

Title: Messages From TV Land: The Influence of Media on Our Thinking About Gender

How do gender roles portrayed on television in the 1940s influence our perception of ourselves and each other today and how it has been shaped by society?

I am working on the topic of television of the 1940s because I want to find out how gender roles are influenced by television to help my reader better understand how our perceptions of ourselves and each other is shaped by society.

Article Analysis: "The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: Racialized Social Democracy and the "White Problem"

Valerie Koury

AMST 300

September 29, 2011

Article Analysis:

“The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: Racialized Social Democracy and the “White Problem”

                George Lipsitz makes the point in his article that “whiteness” is a problem facing the United States. “Whiteness” is everywhere, affecting other racial groups and some poorer whites who do not fit into the typical “white” demographic of middle-class. “Whiteness” can be seen in many aspects of daily life, including politics, culture, and the economy (383).

                To make this claim, Lipsitz cites many different sources. Richard Dyer makes a supporting point of how “whiteness” is heavily embedded in the American culture, that it is not even noticed. Further, when people think of Americans, they think of white people (369). Lipsitz also uses Richard Wright’s quote about how whites see blacks as a “problem,” rather than viewing their attitude of supremacy and entitlement as the “problem.” This is known as racial polarization, a key term in the article (369). Another key vocabulary term from the Wright is “presence of mind,” referenced to demonstrate a “precise awareness of the present moment more decisive than foreknowledge of the most distant events.” “Whiteness” is another term used to describe the white people and the power and the role they have that often goes unspoken, but is a huge factor in social and cultural aspects of American (369). “White supremacy” is used to also speak of the power that whites have and the attitude that white people often display towards other races. Finally, “social life,” which is a way of defining our individual racism through the way we define activities. This term also serves as a supporting point for the argument to further demonstrate how “whiteness” affects and influences the way people carry out daily activities and how they view themselves and others.

                Lipsitz looks at history, population, economy, politics, the housing market, and demographical statistics to make his claim. By looking at these data from different time periods and locations, he is able to demonstrate how white people and “whiteness” can be problematic. For example, Lipsitz uses qualitative analysis on page 375 to make points about housing and living arrangements more realistic.

                Sources that Lipsitz uses positively contributed to his overall article. His sources are scholarly and he uses articles, qualitative, and quantitative data. In the notes, he also gives credit to specific people that contributed to his article. For example, in the notes, he gives credit to Michael Schudson for clarifying an issue. This is a good example of scholarly and reputable sources.

                I liked the article overall, though it was difficult to understand at some points. I think the issue of whiteness is real, especially because of my Palestinian-American background. Sometimes I find myself saying I wish I was white because it would be easier to deal with issues like what box to check on forms (“other”?), and for familial practices and beliefs. My white friends often say in response they wish they had a culture. My question is does being “white” count as a culture, or is it like the color, the lack there of? Also, does being at a diverse university make people appreciate their culture and diversity?

Article Analysis: "Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis"

Valerie Koury

AMST 300

September 27, 2011

                                    “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis”

            Joan W. Scott’s main points in the article “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis” is how gender is defined, what gender is used to described, and how gender has been shifted from historical change. To make the gender analysis, Scott looks to three sources for support: feminists and their efforts to “explain the origins of patriarchy” (1057); Marxism and how gender is influenced by the economy (1061); French post-structuralist and Anglo-American use “psychoanalysis to explain the production and reproduction of the subject’s gendered identity” (1058).

            The key terms Scott relies on are gender, masculine, man, and feminine, and female. There are several different ways of interpreting and defining gender, as seen in each different source. On 1056, a definition of gender is offered to be a synonym for “women.” However, using gender in this ways misses out on the “inequality or power” the word “women” carries and thoughts it evokes. Gender is also “denot[-es] ‘cultural constructions,’” then making it a “category imposed on a sexed body” (1056). Every definition seems to be lacking some element, and there is no clear distinction between what gender is and is not because of all of the interpretations. Masculine, feminine, and terms to describe males and females are “not inherent characteristics but subjective (or fictional) characteristics” (1064). Another aspect of defining “women” is the fact that it can also seem to mean information about men, and that a definition of one is used to describe the other.

            Methods that Scott uses are studying history, such as looking at Marxism and feminist history to make sense of gender. Scott uses the qualitative analysis of researcher Carol Gilligan to delve deeper into the roots of moral development in school children; she relies on the work of anthropologists in their kinship studies. She references journals, fieldwork, and directs the audience in the footnotes to further discussion. In all these methods and scholarly sources, Scott’s investigation of gender’s history will answer questions of the past and clarify gender’s present and future in terms of usage, definitions, and inclusions (1075).

            I thought the article was fascinating! Gender is one of my favorite topics to research, and my research paper is about how the media influences society’s perception of gender. Reading the article allowed me to gain a better understanding of the history of the term “gender” and the many perspectives in defining and understanding gender. Though the article seemed repetitive and was difficult to interpret at times with all of the terminology and various standpoints, it was still interesting and furthers my interest in gender development. Questions I posed at the beginning of the article were answered slightly at the end, but I would still like clarification. At the end of 1063, Scott writes that “the idea of masculinity rests on the necessary repression of feminine aspects—of the subject’s potential for bisexuality—introduces conflict into the opposition of masculine and feminine.” I was confused as to what exactly what the sentence meant, so I did not paraphrase to avoid the risk of misinterpretation of what Scott means. However, my interpretation of the quote is that bisexuality is problematic, and I pose the questions of why does bisexuality have to be seen as a conflict? How can the author and theorists be so sure that “potential for bisexuality” is a threat? Why is it a threat? Maybe bisexuality is supposed to be acceptable, and everyone else is wrong; it is an interpretation of right and wrong. Where the hell did hetero-normative practices come from?

Society, STOP Bullying Me!

You have freedoms, rights, and free-will? Yes, a question is being posed. You may think you have all of these things, and maybe to an extent this is true. You have the freedom to be exactly what society wants you to be or to be ostracized for not conforming. Even down to the origins of your gender, society has controlled everything you think, feel, and do.

Society’s omnipotence puts you at a loss to conformity. Are you really male or female? Society makes you think that. Maybe you are somewhere in between. In that case, you are rejected by society. Gender is socially constructed; you cannot escape it. Classifying people into categories satisfies our need for organization; without such, there would be a deficit of social order. The influence that the public has over its constituents is tremendous, and it has been since the beginning of mankind, but why is that? How does television influence our culture's perception of gender roles?

Television is a dominant force in the world’s entertainment and news source; it is opinionated, but it is not reflective of individual views. Historically, television has played a vital role in portraying the views of society to its audience. Because television has such an influence, anything that society (literally) wants broadcasted, it will be on television. In present- and previous-day television, gender stereotypes have been portrayed and influence our thinking. Gender stereotypes are not always true, but they are reflective of the culture.

Socially, television instills values and ideas of what our lives should be like. Ideas of gender, including heterosexuality and homosexuality, have been shown on television for decades. These things influence how we see ourselves and others, and the roles we take in society. Television shows such as “I Love Lucy” have shown women to be more of the care-taker and housewife, while their husbands come home from work and expect the house to be clean and dinner on the table.

In the “I Love Lucy” example and most television shows from that period show heterosexual relationships. Not only do they provide context for a woman and man’s place in the household, but also in the world, society, and culture which they participate. They are reinforcing gender stereotypes that start forming from three years old. 

Children learn the stereotypes from their social and physical environment; they perpetuate the ideas just as their parents. Children grow up learning the stereotypes, see them on television, engage with them in their everyday lives, follow them as they grow up, and teach them to their children. The male and female roles are now changing; we are evolving to a less stereotypical society, but we have a long way to go.

Because of I am a child of the media, a product of the technological age, I am heavily influenced by the images and a major target of marketing agencies. I am bias in these regards because I have lived in the gender stereotyped society, but am now seeing the change of gender roles.

Word Count: 496

Article Analysis: “Encountering Mass Culture at the Grassroots”

Cohen’s research focuses on how buyers, specifically the working-class, find and react to mass-produced goods. Her argument is that though people share the experience, they do not always have similar reactions (13). Her dominant focus is on Chicago because it had the most records available for the 1920s and 1930s time frame. She offered an example on how people still shopped at local grocers rather than chain markets that sold mass-produced, name-brand goods (11). Also, how people saw the same movie but had different reactions to particular scenes (13). Key vocabulary from include mass culture, mass consumption, and “nationality hour.”

            Methods of research that Cohen utilizes are literary criticism and history. She looks at the newspapers of various ethnic groups, listens to the stories of people who lived during that era. She also uses sociology to further her research and understanding by studying the overall way of life of working-class civilians.

            Sources used in the article were both primary and secondary. In the paper, Cohen includes charts and graphs that depict the economy and the amount of available goods in Chicago at the time. She also references first-hand accounts to make the argument more reliable.

            I thought the overall argument was interesting and informative. Mass production and name-brand items are huge in today’s industry and it is exciting to see where the industry got started. Since I and my family classify as the middle-class, seeing how people were affected by this economic change is intriguing. Questions for discussion I would pose are how are people in all economic classes affected by the industry, as it is larger than ever before?

Article Analysis: “The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problems and Possibilities”

           Lears references the work of Antonio Gramsci to offer his argument that people are influenced and shaped by cultural hegemony, which can also stem from the type of economy and power structure the society utilizes. Aided by Gramsci’s ideas, Lear concludes the piece saying that “culture is…absorbed and shaped by each individual” (593).

            To support his argument, Lear uses support from Gramsci. For example, Lear references Gramsci’s idea of cultural hegemony to address “the relation between culture and power under capitalism” (568). Lear goes on to say that cultural hegemony can be used to facilitate ideas on the power of dominant groups and the compliance by the subordinate groups (568). Hegemony and domination must be paired together to understand how each concept works, and because “consent and force nearly always coexist” (568). Key terms from the article are hegemony, cultural hegemony, consent, ideology, historical bloc.

            Methods employed by Lears include literary criticism and looking at the history, culture, economy, and studies the work of Gramsci. Sources Lears uses are scholarly and in the footnotes, he is able to provide readers with evaluation and examples of ideas that are stated in the paper.

            I think the article analysis was very well written and analytical of the culture. I am interested in how people are influenced by culture, and mixing hegemonic practices makes the topic very interesting. One question I would pose for discussion is how is American culture influenced by cultural hegemonic practices?

What Defines Me

What defines a person? His or her actions, breathes, tangible items or intangible moments that seem to be priceless? A person can best be defined by his or her interests; intellectual interests influence our thinking and personal interests influence our actions and choices.

Social Psychology, theories on personality and intelligence are an interest of mine. Fascinated with why people are a certain way, I have a passion for working with people which provides opportunities to analyze their actions, based on age groups and social settings, to better understand and help them. I also have a curiosity in sexuality, gender, social constructs, and normalization in society because of the prevalence of gay rights in the news. My place at such a diverse institution also influences me to learn about my peers and to better understand society as a whole, especially in the means of how concepts are socially constructed and how greatly it influences society.

Children are another a major interest of mine. I have worked with many different types of children in a variety of settings. They are interesting to me because everyone, despite all of our differences as humans, has a childhood and was a child at one point. Being able to influence a child’s up-bringing for the better motivates me.

My passion for creativity, psychology, and children has heavily influenced my career choice of child-life specialization. My personal interest in improving the lives of children in hospitals has influenced my actions. I have volunteered with domestically abused children and raised money for children at John’s Hopkins Children Center.

In combining intellectual and personal interests, I am able to define myself as more than a mere student of Psychology, cheerleader, sister, friend, or other various roles. Rather, the intersectionality of the roles is how I can be defined. 

Word Count: 299