Code Pink, Raging, Grannies, and the Missile Dick Chicks

In this article  Code Pink, Raging, Grannies, and the Missile Dick Chicks, they talk about how different feminist groups do performances for activism for the contemporary anti-war movement.  Specifically, in the Raging Grannies use norm-embracing stereotypes to challenge their audience.  All of these groups aim to do this- challenge their audience.  Some allow for new members to easily join the group at demonstration while others like the Raging Grannies cannot have this because of their costumes and outward appearances.
The Raging Grannies use satirical songs and rewrite lyrics to spread a message.  This is seen with a re-write of "Yankee Doodle Dandy" making fun of "Georgie Porgie".  This re-do of the song spreads their message to their audience in a well known tune making the audience able to sing along.  Similarly to this, in 8th grade my history teacher made us change the lyrics (and preform to the class) for the song, "We Didn't Start The Fire".  This well known song connected to our meaningful lyrics added relevance to current history topics.  For our re-write we needed to continue from where the song 'left off' and include relevant historical events to make the youth of today understand their recent history in a new, enjoyable way.  This is a positive way of spreading a message through media action just like the Grannies and other groups.
The goal of all these groups is to show the illegitimacy of constructing gender roles.  For instance, typically, grannies are not out fighting and protesting.  These people defy ageism and dominant gender norms and manipulate the audience's stereotypes in the process.

Boys, Girls and Toys- Oh My

After watching the provided YouTube clip I decided to go to Google Images and simply type in the phrases "boy toys" and "girl toys".  Below are the first few items that popped up.

The little girl, Riley, from the clip was 100% correct- big company's make products specifically and 'only' for each gender.  As she put it, big companies, ""trick the girls into buying the pink stuff".  Because of the companies always making gendered packaging and colored products the toy market is NOT gender neutral.  My when my younger girl cousin was around 4 she 'hated' the colors blue, brown, black, and green- she would tell my aunt that they were boy colors and that girls cannot play with things that color.  This always bothered me because my aunt was not the girly-girl person that you would expect to have a daughter saying these things.  This video reminded me that it seems to be more of a media and company influence that is affecting the current youth (at times more effective than those raising the youth).  Not only is color a clear difference in terms of the boy side versus the girl side but the products being sold differ as well.  Again, as Riley stated, "some girls like super heroes and some girls like princesses".  However, in company minds girls are only to like pink princesses.  The Google search that I did exemplifies the fact that.  The girl products are almost all 'girl color'- pink.  They include dolls and make-up, baby-doll care sets, and even cleaning supplies.  Girls are taught at a young age that they are suppose to do the cleaning, care taking, and look 'pretty'.  While on the boys Google search images include trucks, cars, building sets, tools, and superheroes.  Toys are designed for enjoyment and even for constructive and dramatic life-skills play.  Boys are allowed to build, break, and create while girls are essentially practicing for what gender boxes dictate as their future lives.

The playmate and the rabbi: unlikely bedfellows fighting internet porn

I was confused by the title of this article as a playmate and a rabbi are an unlike pair in any situation.  However, after reading the article I believe the pair makes their stance much more meaningful and powerful in attempt to fight internet porn.  Of course one could assume that a rabbi would be against internet porn as it is demeaning and degrading- but to have a playmate say this as well is something unexpected.
I found Pamela Anderson's stance on the whole pornography matter to be interesting as she has been a part of so much dealing with the sexual image that is associated with women.  She has been a victim of sexual abuse as a child and young teen, she has posed as a sex image posing naked for PlayBoy, and she has stood up as an activist.  Shmuley Boteach, despite the negativity and backlash that he has received is firm in his standings and decision.  The two state how porn is effecting and shaping young mind stating that children, "are the crack babies of porn."
Anderson understands that people will call her names and say that her controversy is disqualifying the two.  However, Anderson reacts by stating the following, "There are people who eat meat and become vegetarian - that doesn't make them hypocritical, that makes them a growing, evolving human being."  I like this comment and agree with those who say that she based off of her experiences would best know the impact of the culture.
I also like that she states how growth and evolving human beings are critical, especially when talking about how pornography is shaping the mindset of the future generation.  I hope the two continue fighting the controversy and educate people on "loving sex without the demeaning side of it."

Gender and The Military

My grandfather, great-grandfather, and great-uncle have been a part of the military.  The military is still specifically a great influence in my grandfathers life.  He is my mom's father and because of his being part of the military I feel that the family has a greater connection and care for America and its value than some other people.  However, because of his military experience his view on gender remains consistent with gender boxing.  There is the expression, "don't ask, don't tell" with gay people and the military.  There is also feeling women's job is to care for the men- in all ways.  This mindset is changing, however, I think there is still a ways to go. 
As for gender, I have seen this clearly from the fact that all my family members that have served in the military are men.  This is reflective of the fact that only 14.5% of people that serve are women, and only 2.7% of people that serve on the front line are women.  I believe that women are still unsure about joining the military as they feel as though they are unwelcomed, and these low percentages demonstrate this.
Military wives differ than military husbands because of social expectations.  No matter who is deployed the other parents becomes the only parent.  This causes them to take on ALL of the responsibilities and act as both mom and dad.  This is a new, challenging task for either gender.  Struggles include becoming overwhelmed and feelings of guilt as not being able to be the breadwinner of the family since they have to compensate time/jobs for being the only available parent.  On the negative, it seems the military wives and husbands differ by what society deems as 'allowed'.  An example of how this is viewed can be through media and pop culture representations.  In commercials, you see the wife with a flag, sign, and children waiting for her husband to come back from the military.  Or you see the military son coming home and brewing his family some coffee awaking them to see him.  The media portrays the fact that it is males who are soldiers.  This goes further than commercials, movies, music videos and more always portray the men as soldiers and protectors of our country.  Sadly, the military is still seen as only a man's job.  I hope that more women are able to fight this and that women can be recognized for the great service that BOTH men and women are providing for our country. 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/24/us/military-women-glance/

Intelligence vs. Icon

The article on Marilyn Monroe surprised me on many accounts.  First, I did not know about Monroe's hidden intelligence.  Second, I cannot believe that she allowed the world to portray her as a 'dumb blonde'.  I am  amazed that a woman with the IQ intelligence of 163 was 'dumb enough' to allow the world's ignorance to hid her intelligence.  I feel sorry for Monroe as she was never truly understood by any of her so called fans.  "I've never fooled anyone," she said, "I've let people fool themselves.  They didn't bother to find out who and what I was.  Instead they would invent a character for me.  I wouldn't argue with them.  They were obviously loving somebody I wasn't."  It makes me wonder if she had not hid her intelligence would she have been as famous.  Sadly, I believe that the reason in which she hid her intelligence was because people would be threatened by a beautiful and intelligent woman.  This threat would remove her fame, lessening her success.
Another example of a celebrity hiding their intellect to secure greater success can be seen in the sit-com actress, Lisa Kudrow, better known as Pheobe.  Phoebe is the quirky blonde that is seen as 'dumb'.  Kudrow playing this character causes others to view her as a dumb blonde.  Phoebe did not graduate high school and because of this Lisa Kudrow is viewed to have this same life.  However, Lisa Kudrow graduated with a B.S. in Pyschobiology from Vassar College.  She went on to do be a medical researcher before playing to funny ditz.
In the case of both this blonde beauties their intelligence is played down in order to continue their rolls in fame.  I hope that this can change and that having beauty and brains can stop being hidden... so what if being intelligent and beautiful is seen as a threat by ignorant people?  It's a 'threat' to be proud of!

From Sickness to Citizenship

Susan Stryker - Speaker at TCNJ

Susan wished to tell the story of trans-history to the culture that is today.  Susan's book, "Welcome to Trans-Reality", speaks about how the root of oppression.  She states that due to people's ignorance many do not believe that trans is 'real'.  This made me think about the threat that trans people must feel by societies placing people in those gender boxes (that we spoke about the beginning of our class).  Susan read a section of her book and then discussed as a synopsis.  The section she read spoke of race, sex, and gender fluidity.  "Everywhere we go is dangerous... I am dangerous."  This sentence caught my attention.  I felt awful that men and women are forced to be oppressed by others because of an unwilling and un-understanding society.  Technology is helping to change this mindset by making it known that people have different identifies, for example the growth of the Google search of the word 'trans'.  Susan's speaking made me better understand trans-people and taught me to reassess and attempt to remove the gender boxes of today's culture.

Language of Persuasion

Examples of Persuasive Advertisements:

BASIC:


1. Experts:  The Colgate ad shows a testimonial done for toothpaste carried out by 'experts'.  This ad shows the experts as being dentists since they are those most associated with teeth care and shows the certified by PDA check mark making viewers rely on this ad to advise them about the best toothpaste decision.  This ad is useful as it shows dentists and the PDA as credible sources for people to believe that this is the best.


2. Fear: This ad used fear of the audience to promote a solution.  The fear is a hurt/dead child while the promoted solution is a speed limit of 30 miles per hour.  This is useful because it uses a child leading to a useful scare tactic in order to promote the claim of having people drive 30 miles per hour, instead of for example 40 miles per hour.  


3. Plain Folks: This advertisement used a 'plain folk' making the product relateable to the regular people in the world.  Unlike, celebrity endorsements this Subway ad uses a 'regular' person to market their food.  This ad is useful because it shows that Subway is interested in the average consumer and shows that just like the 'plain folk' in the ad, you too can 'make history'.


4. Celebrities: This advertisement shows Jennifer Aniston as the endorser for Aveeno's product.  She is used to advertise for Aveeno simply because she is a beautiful famous celebrity.  People pay attention to celebrities and wish to emulate their actions.  This ad is useful because it makes it seem as though if you use this product you will end up looking like Jennifer Aniston.


INTERMEDIATE:


1. Flattery:  This advertisement persuades the viewers to buy this mascara "because you're worth it".  This is a good way of getting someone to buy a product because it shows praise to the buyer.  Also, typically people appeal to situations that make them feel good or feel praise.  This ad is useful because it makes the buyer feel like they are worth something good, therefore making them likely to buy a product that is worthy to them.


2. Name-Calling: This advertisement uses the technique of name-calling by saying that 'i' products, example, iPhone, iPod, etc. make someone an idiot.  This is a persuasive technique as it associates idiots with people that use those products.  This ad also points out how "i" products are so much more expensive than those that are not "i" products making the comparison that you're also an 'idiot' if you are willing to spend more for the same thing.  This ad is useful because the word idiot is a negative word comparing the "i" product buyers/users to the name-calling word of idiots.



3. New: This advertisement shows exactly how as a culture we associate old with boring and new with exciting.  This company if you look closely seems to have just changed the direction of their product making it 'new'.  However, at a glance one would choose this product of the company's opposed to the other kind simple because it is 'new'.  This ad is successful because in the United States we place great faith in new products and new ideas.


4. Nostalgia: This advertisement is the opposite of 'new' and makes the audience crave simpler times, bringing them back to when they were young.  Remembering how "great" the world was.  Trump campaign promises to bring back the "good old days" and his followers jump on to the nostalgic ways and old time traditions.  This advertisement works despite Trump being a new presidential candidate because his slogan is 'old' reminding people of the good times from the past.


ADVANCED:



1. Scapegoating: This ad shows that the United States loss of jobs is due to work being exported to China.  Scapegoating is used here to claim that the loss of jobs in the United States is 'only' due to China.  This mindset does not acknowledge any other possibility for the reason of lost jobs in the United States.  This is useful because it takes the attention off of the United States by pointing blame elsewhere, this is often used in political situations.


2. Timing: This ad was run around Halloween making timing key to the products success.  The delivery of this timing is important because it would look like Pepsi was trying to be Coca-Cola at any other time of the year, however, because of timing this ad shows that being Coca-Cola is 'scary'.  This is useful because it is carefully-timed to grab the attention, demonstrate that Pepsi should be the desired brand, and generates a response, for example funny because of the dressing up of a soda can.


3. Ad Hominem: This ad shows the use of attacking the opponent instead of the argument.  In this ad approved by Obama, he attacked Romney by saying that he is directing "the problem" instead of attacking the argument, or lack of argument, that Romney produced. This is useful because it allows for the audience to belief that there is something wrong with Romney, since he 'must be' a problem.

 
4. Analogy: This ad compares an unwashed tomato to a bomb.  These two situations being compared shows that not washing your fruits and vegetables can be just as dangerous in the long run as a deadly weapon.  This uses emotionally-charged images because you would never feed a loved one a deadly weapon- so why would you feed them unwashed food.  This ad is useful because it shows a comparison between the unwashed food and a harmful weapon, demonstrating the correspondence between the two. 

Bad Advertisement

1. This ad is bad advertising as it demonstrates that there is an expectation for girls and boys- even at a young age.  The fact that Gap- a well known company, was able to publish this advertisement is awful.  This shows a bad ad by stereotyping the young girl as needing to be a 'social butterfly'.  While, stereotyping the young boy as the 'little scholar'.  This ad is not 'bad' like some others that are funny or sexually inappropriate, however, this bad is bad because it shows that as a culture that even well known companies feel that they can continue spotlighting girls to be nothing more than social.  This forces girls to remain in this societal bubble of social instead of allow girls to spread their wings and learn for themselves that they are capable of being the spotlight as a little scholar.


2. This ad from Victoria's Secret is very misleading.  I felt that in order to understand how bad this ad from Victoria's Secret is it needed to be compared to the Dove Ad that shows true, real beauty.  This Victoria's Secret ad shows titled "love my body campaign" shows the audience that only the perfect skinny, toned body is worth loving.  This ad is seen by men, women, and children.  This makes men feel as though the Victoria's Secret ad demonstrates what women should look like.  This makes women feel that they can only love their body if it looks like these women.  Finally, this teaches children from an early age that either women are only worth loving if they look like this or that women in order to be loved need to look like this.