Gender-Neutral Children

Recently some parents have decided to raise their children gender-neutral to help them avoid the gender norms forced on children from a very young age. I like the idea of not having to deal with the gender roles and the pressures put on young children, but I feel like this creates other issues. Sasha was raised gender neutral and his parents only revealed his sex when he started going to school and it was difficult for them to keep the secret. Sasha's parents don't want "to lumber their son with stereotyping their fear gender brings." The issue with this is that they put pressure on him by making him an outsider from the beginning. His mom talks about how she was labeled the "loony woman" and Sasha probably was labeled as well. By taking him out of the gender stereotypes it puts Sasha into a position where he can wear pink or blue if he wants, play with legos or dolls, which is perfectly fine, but refusing to give him a gender he is placed in a different box. Sasha will always be known as the gender-nuetral child and that label makes people make assumptions about him and also puts pressure on Sasha. I liked that Sasha had the choice of what he wanted to wear, but there are definitely ways to do that and promote individuality without bringing attention to him.

Another child that was raised gender neutral was Storm who was known as the genderless baby. Storm has older siblings and the older brother had liked dresses and wanted to be known as a girl. Storm's parents then decided that Storm can have the choice to be whoever Storm wants to be without the pressure of knowing if Storm is male or female. Again I can see why the parents did this because their oldest son had felt restricted by gender norms, I still don't totally agree with it. Children are very moldable so gender norms present from a very young age influence them throughout their lives. I don't know if being gender neutral helps to get out of those gender roles. I think that if children are given gender neutral options and if they happened to want to wear a dress, then why not. But I think the label of gender neutral can be harmful. This is fairly recent so I would be interested to see how these children grown up are like. I honestly don't think that this improves that much, but it is difficult to be sure, so whatever parents think is right for their children, whether raising them in their gender or gender neutral, is up to them. Personally I don't think hiding their biological sex isn't necessarily helpful, but it is great that parents want to break gender norms.

Summary on "Stephen King on the future of entertainment"

Back in 2009, Stephen King published an article that posed questions about how entertainment and how we receive it may change in the future. Six years later entertainment has changed greatly and we can see how his ideas match the changes. He first discusses e-books and wonders what will happen to books. He compares e-books and physical copies of books, to CDs and vinyl records. E-books weren't as popular but they were cheaper like how CDs were in comparison to vinyl records and that ended up overtaking vinyl records. It is funny because that analogy is even dated because barely anyone has CDs anymore. Since the article was published I think e-books have gotten more popular, but they haven't gotten rid of books. Also I have found that e-books are starting to be more expensive that certain books, at least the very popular ones, while Amazon Prime also gives away free e-books once a month. I have switched over to e-books and I know other people that have too, but there are still many people that want to stick with physical copies of books. I think it has stayed around because its easier to share and many people have a sentimental connection to the books they own. It seems like e-books may continue to become more popular, but I'm not entirely sure it will overtake books.

Stephen King also talks about how Rock and Roll Radio and serious American movies have been on the decline. They definitely are still available, but they are not nearly as popular. Radio as a whole has definitely changed and I think it will continue to change as there is a huge shift to the celebrity culture and less and less people are interested in listening to varied music and people talking for more than a minute or show. I am not as familiar with rock and roll radio so I am not sure how it has changed, but I would guess that it has become less popular. Also serious American movies have become less marketable but I still think that there are plenty being made. The movies that get nominated for Oscars haven't been as popular in the mainstream within the past few years, while superhero movies and sequels have dominated the top box office lists. I don't think that it is something that will go away, it just might head more to the fringes of pop culture but not entirely into the shadows.

The last entertainment that King looked at was network TV and it has been overshadowed in recent years by cable shows and even internet streaming networks like Netflix and Amazon. There are still some quality network shows but they are not as dominant as they used to be. A lot of the cable shows are grittier and more realistic, which people have been gravitating towards. Also it takes dedication to watch 23 episodes and season with commercials and airing weekly. People want entertainment immediately so I can see Netflix and Amazon taking over more and more of the TV industry.

Social Network

I am not a big fan of social media. I like the idea of staying connecting to people and thats the main reason I still have my Facebook, but its frustrating how much people share about themselves and how Facebook pages aren't a good representation of the person. With Facebook people have their profiles and it is just a representation of them, not the whole picture. I think that is alright because you don't want to share everything with the whole world, but sometimes people create this social media persona that just isn't them. Looking through some of my friends profiles I feel like if I didn't actually know them I would think they were a different person. Its dangerous because people can get these preconceived notions of a person just through Facebook. I've heard of plenty of people not getting a job because of their Facebook pages so its important to be careful what you put out there.

I think that Facebook pages shouldn't be seen as the whole picture, just what people want others to see. My Facebook page is private and I have it under my middle name instead of my last name. I did this because a professor of mine during student teaching told the class that principals and parents can look at your page and if there is anything inappropriate up there it could cause issues. I didn't have anything up there that I thought would get me into any trouble, but I still did it because I didn't want people that I didn't know seeing my page. I like the idea of people that I know seeing my Facebook page because they already know who I am and what I like to do, so the Facebook page isn't informing them about me. It is just merely a way to stay connected to friends and family. I hate when people make assumptions about people and do the Facebook stalking because it only gives you glimpses of a person. I also think that gender plays a big role in Facebook because many people do the Facebook stalking of their crush and make their opinions from there. Its also interesting to see the different ways males and females are on Facebook because it seems at least from my timeline that the females share more about their own lives, while the males share more about their interests. Overall I see the point of social media and some of the benefits but it isn't something that I will spend hours stressing about.

Summary of "Small Change: Why The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted"

Malcolm Gladwell analyzed how activism on social media is not nearly as effective as high-risk activism like actually participating in walk-ins in "Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted." It was interesting to see how he compared past protests to the current Twitter "Revolutions." Before reading this article I also thought about how Twitter and other Social Media is great at spreading and raising awareness to issues there often isn't much done about the issue because people aren't as invested in it. If someone physically goes to participate in a protest they are talking with other people and making connections that build a protest. Gladwell discussed how thousands of people supported 4 black college students in 1960 when they weren't served at a restaurant because of their race. People did sit-ins and they spread all over the country. People were arrested, but it was apart of the civil-rights movement that helped change the country. The participants put themselves at risk in order to make a statement and that made other people want to change. If that were to happen on social media, I feel like people would be impressed and want to help, but not motivated. The fact that there was a risk and they did it anyway and that others followed was extremely powerful.

There was also talk about the Twitter Revolution in Iran and how it actually didn't do as much as people thought it did. Many things that people saw were in English so it seemed like more people were commenting on the issue from afar instead of the people it affected banding together. Social media definitely has limits with activism and is not nearly as effective at causing a drastic shift, but it did help to raise awareness of some of the issues in Iran. Gladwell wrote about how change and activism is based within the strong ties of the people and their willingness to take risks. But unfortunately social media is based on weak ties between people because they are often superficial ties. There isn't as much of that emotional and physical connection between people. Talking to people online about an issue does not create as much of an impact as hearing about it first hand from someone. Also social media activism is inherently low risk because the words aren't coming from your mouth they're coming from your profile. It isn't as authentic and not as many people would be affected by it.

There are definitely many issues that have been helped by social media activism, but I agree with Malcolm Gladwell that drastic change won't be accomplished on the internet. I think this could possibly change but social media activism isn't as strong and united. Even with the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, there were many people that participated and said they supported the cause, but how many actually donated and still are concerned about the issue. All that really mattered was the superficial social media response and now it has largely gone away. It is unfortunate that it doesn't always work, but people can still enact change if they can create those strong ties and take a risk.

Reality Television

I used to watch a lot of Reality TV when I was in high school, but now I just don't have the patience for it. I hate that it is marketed as reality, when so much of it is staged or edited to have higher stakes. Its a distorted view of reality and it can be harmful if people see it and think that its true. I also feel like because it is TV there is always that wall that keeps people from being themselves. People are often a caricature of themselves on TV and it is a shame that so many people want to be seen as that.

I don't keep up with any reality shows now, but one that I used to watch all the time was America's Next Top Model. I loved the competition aspect and it was interesting to see people transform from normal girls into high-fashion models. I ended up stopping watching it after realizing how fabricated it was and how much drama the show had. Every single cycle had so much drama between the girls and it just didn't seem all that authentic. Most reality shows, even ones with a competition, tend to focus on the drama, which makes people either love it or hate it. The show also experimented with gender roles and one episode in the eighth cycle, "The Girl Who Takes Credit," focused on a photo shoot that had the girls dress up as men and pose with a drag queen. They were given a couple to portray, some examples were outdoorsy, power-couple, bohemian, hip hop, and collegiate. The one girl that excelled at this challenge was Natasha who was a part of the hip hop couple. As shown in the picture below, she really adapted to the male role. She was the most comfortable with this shoot and even had the idea to have tin foil in her mouth to make it seem like grills. It was interesting to see how easily she slid into this role, even though she was portraying mainly a stereotype. The judges praised her and how comfortable and creative she was. Some of the other girls struggled because they weren't comfortable being in the men's clothes and couldn't break their femininity. The people that succeeded in this were the ones that weren't bothered by portraying a man and embraced it. Natasha ended up winning the photo shoot and everyone was very impressed with her. Her gender was portrayed as something that she knew and didn't care about.

Chapter 54 Summary: "Marketing 'Reality' to the World

Chris Jordan's chapter focuses on the reality competition show Survivor and its affect on Reality Television. Survivor was able to be produced and be successful primarily because of its advertising and its relatively low cost. It also began the reality TV craze, which could be seen as a bad thing but it was a show that "steered away from sexual sensationalism and towards themes of competitive merit" (518). Many networks were moving from the half-hour comedies and had very expensive dramas so they were looking for cheap and successful shows. Survivor was able to get a lot of money in advertisements because products like Doritos and Mountain Dew were able to align themselves with "adventure and heroism." Most shows did not advertise within the show because they thought it would break the suspension of belief. This format Survivor worked with was conducive to many different products advertising within the episode and also was attractive to many viewers. It had very high rating and a low cost which was very important to CBS. Reality TV is also very successful globally because it appeals to many different people.

Jordan talked about how the global proliferation of reality television is due to the "increasing concentration of ownership in the television industry, the globalization of commercial TV, and the fragmentation of the worldwide audience" (522). This is important, but one downfall is that educational programming has been affected by the rise of reality TV. Many networks that had educational programming noticed that often many people switched away from it and it was difficult to understand. Reality TV is designed to be light and gives a distraction from global issues. It provides a welcome distraction, but it may be detrimental too. Because it is so commercial and reliant on advertisers, the democratization of television is limited. It was interesting to see how reality TV has changed the different networks and how it isn't as negative as many think it is. There are some benefits as pointed out in this chapter.

Girl Rising

I enjoyed watching the documentary "Girl Rising" and it was very eye-opening to me about how a person's education is essential in their success and overall well-being. I am an elementary education major and although I knew that education was important, I didn't realize how important it is for some people. In the United States we all are expected to go to school and we don't have to pay for tuition. We are given these amazing educations and we take it for granted. So many people don't have the opportunities we do, especially young girls in developing countries. The boys in the family are the ones that are usually educated, while the young girls are expected to work and serve other people. They aren't given control over their lives and often they can't take the control back because they don't have the education. Even if they want an education often it is extra money, and if they barely have enough money for food, their education is forgotten. The two stories that had the most impact on me were the stories of Ruksana and Amina. The others were also very impactful, but I think that their stories mirror each other.

Ruksana lives in India and she struggled in school because she was always dreaming and drawing in her notebooks. She thought that she would get in trouble with her father, but he ended up buying her a  drawing pad and pens. Her education and the education of her two sisters were not free, and their family was living on the streets but her parents were dedicated in giving the three girls an education to improve their lives. After Ruksana was almost attacked on the streets, her mother wanted to leave, but her father knew that heading back to their village would only trap the girls there. Even after they were kicked out of their home on the streets and her father wanted to give in, the mother than decided that they wouldn't let the people stop them. They didn't have a lot of money, but they knew that it was worth it to spend it on their education. I thought it was fantastic how supportive the parents were and they wouldn't let their struggles stop their children from succeeding. Ruksana got her strength from the support of her parents and she now has all the tools she needs to succeed.

Amina had a very different experience from Ruksana, but that did not stop her from trying to get her education. Ruksana's story was much more positive, but Amina's showed that she had a lot of inner strength. In Afghanistan, women are treated terribly and they are in a much more restrictive society than India, but Amina wouldn't let that stop her. Her birth wasn't recorded because she was a girl and she wasn't seen as important. Her mother was sad to have a girl and Amina started working around the house at 3. She was able to get a few years of education and learned to read and write, which seemed to give her a lot of strength. She was married off to a cousin at 11 and the money her family received from the wedding allowed them to buy a car for their son. Amina was seen as an object by her family and her husband. She is a child mother, but she didn't let that stop her get her education. She knew that she could be ostracized or even killed for pursuing her education, but she believed it was worth it. For Ruksana she had her parents to support her and give her the opportunities, but for Amina she took them. Having a few years of education helped her from turning into her mother and made her break the mold that so many people tried to place her in. She gained power from knowledge and it is so amazing to see.