Hairpeace

This article was a little confusing at first. I couldn't really tell what the author was getting at, and didn't understand what she was even complaining about. My thought is that possibly she was being partially sarcastic about her need to fulfill a quota of hair stories because it can be such a huge deal to people, and she's trying to make out the point that it's just hair, and although she used to spend 2 hours a day obsessing over it being straight and perfect and not the way she wanted it, she finally realized, at age 18 that it just wasn't worth it anymore. She was supposed to "fix" her hair to make it "good hair" instead of letting it be natural. She shares stories with the reader that exemplify how much (excuse my language) shit that people gave her over her hair being curly instead of wavy and beautiful and strait. By half way through the piece i managed to understand this general idea of what she was getting at, and she really makes a good point. It's sad that people feel they need to change their own image to be right, and even worse that those people judge others for not doing the same. I also like the title that Pearl Cleage gave her piece. hairPEACE.... implying the ending of per story where she comes to peace with her hair, and realizes that she doesn't need to alter her body in order to be beautiful, bc she already is.

Essay 2

I ended up writing my essay about gender roles, and how they effect athletics in American culture, and I was really happy about how it turned out. I discussed how these gender roles can negatively impact both men and women, and how they are enforced by the media, our peers, and older and influential people surrounding us in our community. It really made me think about how these ideas of "normal" impact my daily life, and how they have a huge effect on how i view people and events in my daily life.
I really like what the other two people in my editing group did with their essays too. It's interesting to see different people's thoughts on normalcy, and how they express their specific area of interest pertaining to it. I learned a lot by reading their essays both about them and about the subjects they chose to write about. Through reading and editing other peers' papers I feel like i learn more about my own style of writing, because i can compare the way that i write to theirs, and it makes me think more about how to better express my ideas and thoughts.

Essay 2 Topic

I have to confess I haven't started writing my rough draft of this essay yet, and one of the main reasons is that I'm having trouble deciding what to write it on. I'm going in the direction of option 3. I think it would be interesting to write and explore how we push normalcy in our culture, because we really do. We even lie to ourselves about it... such as we say different it good... you should be an individual... as long as the way in which you decide to be an individual is in an accepted way that's normal. The assignment sheet says to pick one body-related issue to discuss, and I think gender roles and expectations would be very interesting. This is definitely seen in tv shows and advertisements. Gender roles have existed since the beginning of time, although some of the changes in our culture that have and are taking place make this an even more interesting topic, bc a lot of the new ideas allow for much more flexibility in one gender than the other, which leads to major questioning of what those normal gender roles now are.

"Cultural Fixions of the Freak Body"

As I read this essay, I kept going back the the statement that said, "Who’s exploitative, the critic who condemns the performer or the producer who pays him a salary?" I think this was a very interesting comment. The thing is, it is ultimately the choice of the performer whether or not they want to take the job, and be labeled as a "freak." I think it actually may be rude to assume that people who would not be a candidate for this show to judge those who are in it. They may be perfectly fine being called a freak. It doesn't necessarily have to have bad connotations with it. Obviously people pay money to see the interesting things they can do with their body... i think that's kind of cool. So the critics who wanted to get rid of the term "freak," may actually be doing their would-be-clients a disservice. They didn't ask for help, but the critics created a problem for them. If they want that job, and they want the salary, I feel like the critic is the one being exploitative, because they're the ones who gave the negative connotation to the word "freak," and the job these people have. It's just an interesting topic to think about, and I think an individual's view would definitely depend on their own personal experiences, but I definitely feel like the critic is doing the performers a disservice in this situation.

in response to Danielle's Post "What is Normal?"

I agree with Danielle about the movie "freaks" that we watched in class. I definitely made me think about the concept of normalcy, and that your personal view of what is and is not normal is based on your perspective. People from different backgrounds would definitely see all of this differently. Like Danielle said, we tend to judge people's "normalcy" based on how they look to us. If they have a characteristic that stands out to us as not the same as everyone else, we say that is abnormal. That characteristic should be respected though, and not criticized. We're all freaks, just in our own ways, some of which are more readily noticeable than others. People who look different on the outside still have the same potential to be decent people as people who fit into the "normal" category. The movie "freaks," shows us that these people who do not necessarily look the same actually turned out to be the decent human beings, who looked out for their friends, and helped those in need, and didn't take advantage of the situation. The "normal" people in the circus were the ones plotting, manipulating, taking advantage. I guess it just goes to show, don't judge a book by it's cover.

In Response to Christine's "Advertising"

I agree with Christine's thoughts on "Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt." This article and our class discussion really made me think about some of that tactics that advertisers may be using to get us to notice and purchase their products. Some of the ideas that the author had about the ads seemed a little ridiculous and like she was over analyzing what the ad was saying, but at the same time, we have to realize that these ads are gradually impacting our society and the way we think. If society sees certain things in magazines, although they may not agree with them, those things start to gradually become more and more of a normality and a thing of daily life. The first time we see a "riskay" type of message in an add it may shock us, but we won't believe it. However, as we see more of those ads, we are desensitized to the idea of having those types of ideas exposed to the public in the form of ads. It become okay to us bc it is the norm. We see it all the time. In this way, on individual ad is not destroying society, rather the reappearance of many different types of ads are gradually changing society's opinion of what does and doesn't belong in a magazine, or an a billboard.

"The Masculine Mystique"

This piece, is sort of an interview with Stallone about his new decision to become a different type of man. He's known to most from his boxing movies. He's a very masculine man. Is that possible? In today's society have have a certain set of perceived guidelines for how a male vs a female should look and behave. For men, i think it's probably a worse thing then for women nowadays. Men should be tall and strong. They should be unemotional and able to cope with whatever life throws at them. However, for women, we are not expected to be taller or stronger than men... actually we should be the opposite. Society says that we should be the more docile of the two sexes and that we should be more concerned with how we look and what people think of us. However it's much more exceptable for us to be emotional and vulnerable, whereas this is not ok for men. Stallone was the stereotypical strong, masculine figure... and this is also who he played in his movies. The very muscular, deep voice, ready-to-fight type person. The interview is about how he decided to change this. He wanted to be in a movie about a nobody type person, and had to put on a lot of weight (aka stay out of the gym and eat a completely opposite diet) in order to do it. What he realized, and says in the interview is that by being heavier, society doesn't treat him the same anymore. We have such a standard for how these people should look that we take a once respected actor and just because he has gained weight (even though its just for a movie) he has lost respect and standing with his fans. They don't want to come see him in his movies because he doesn't represent that strong masculine character that we all want to watch. I just think it's interesting to hear his point of view on this being someone who actually made the transition and has literally been on both sides of the fence. I guess our society wants what it wants.