So it has come to this...

Here I sit. Procrastinating on a paper, watching a new talent show on MTV. It is, basically, a show where a bunch of moderately attractive people vie for a spot at being the most "talented." The problem is this: these people only seem to have a talent for attracting attention to themselves for being unbelievably obnoxious. These shows seem to be increasing in numbers on television, or at least portions of talent competitions are able to attract viewers by showcasing contestants with little talent.
Why is this such a phenomenon in entertainment right now? So many of us, myself included, know it's bad, yet we can't look away? Is this the Napoleon Dynamite generation? Last week, there was an op-ed piece in the New York Times lampooning the coveted "youthful" demographic and how advertisers want to lock buyers into purchasing habits as early as possible. It is interesting, then, that a demographic of people who found Napoleon Dynamite so funny, (and trust me, many were laughing at Napoleon, not with him) are the same people being marketed to through programs that have premises built around poking fun at the weakest members of a competition. I suppose this might be somewhat more reflective of a culture built on the inequality of competition.

But this is supposed to be the hybrid car buying, everything organic generation? Clearly Toyota and General Mills have figured out a way to cleverly package and market these hippie ideals. Meanwhile, we have an entire genre of television that runs simultaneous to these advertisements, holding no-talent competitors in high regard. This might be great if the whole postmodern thing really took hold, but there is one problem: a lot of people missed the joke. America isn't laughing with you, they're laughing at you as a form of escapism. I would love to see the day when people laughed at these shows as a mockery of convention and rigid genre-making boundaries, but many of those people who watch these shows are still bound to these very things that postmodernism would shun. Is the joke on the convention or the person? I am sure most would respond more frequently with the latter (but I would hope that this could be demonstrated incorrect). These shows adhere to almost every other aspect of convention in television (for their respective budgets) with lighting, conventionally attractive people, editing, and the like. So it is an elaborate production, just to be mean?

I, for one think that as feminists, we could analyze these components of the media. I know that I get sick of reading feminist media analysis that focuses specifically on over-hashed issues like, "Women on T.V. Look Too Much Alike" or "Why Aren't Plus Size Women Represented More?" "Every One on T.V. is White" (Bitch Magazine I am looking in your direction). We should start looking at why this is happening in these types of articles instead of blaming "the patriarchy" and the fashion industry. Of course these areas of analysis are important and deserve attention, but as targets, they are actually becoming shields from larger issues linked to feminism in entertainment. Feminism is about power and inequality when viewed in the simplest terms. Feminist media analysis could also draw on this influx of shows based on competition designed to acquire profit from exploiting weakness based around designated and constructed conventions of what is considered "talent." More energy should be focused on processes that are linked to these issues, rather than the fact that the issues exist. Maybe the popularity of shows so rooted in picking on people are linked to the oppression of groups, say, perhaps, in the real world. Perhaps it is the interest of the viewer influencing the programming and not the other way around as many articles might suggest (I am still looking at you Bitch magazine).
A good friend of mine (I will spare the name because you know who you are) once told me about a classmate in a Women's and Gender Studies course that blamed Girls Gone Wild for the exploitation of women. She even went as far as to claim that the women in the video we unaware that they were "victimized" (*Sidenote: Apparently, she bought the DVD. So she was financially supporting something she felt victimized women to make this very point? Excellent logic!) I understand, and I hope I have this correct, she blamed patriarchy. Patriarchy is to blame for drunk girls flashing a camera?
Feminist media analysis is important and interesting, which is precisely why we should stop looking to the specific examples of hyper- sexualized, thin women, and start looking down other avenues in popular culture that provide insight into systemic causes for these very things that cause such outrage over representations of women in the media. We should start looking to things that feminists and non-feminists alike can understand (like the prevalence of bullying on competitive shows). It may be shamelessly idealistic, but I would hope that this could lead to a greater understanding of the why that causes certain views of women not only in entertainment, but in that nagging real world that exposes itself every now and then. We could spread our message of equality to a greater audience, maybe even the one who watches the 700 Club.

Banal Musings

Hello! I have been terrible about updating my blog! This is becoming a pattern in all of my posts.

This week has been crazy! We got the Brady Project off the ground. I thought that the response was going to be different, but I suppose that is the beauty of human response. The only problem that I have had with comments/responses, is people don't really seem to be reading the post in its entirety. Some feel that we didn't establish a "strong enough case" that the building name should change. Well, we are doing this over a period of a month. If we built the whole case in one entire post, people would certainly not read it (as demonstrated with the first one). Further, I am really not interested in naysayers' input, we have enough to do as it is. Anyhow, we have gotten a shitload of local press coverage. We were interviewed for KBIA last week, Patrick was on KOMU last night, and a story will appear in the Missourian next week (we were told that it will be a biggun' with pictures!). I am very shocked at how fast things are moving.

Moving on to things unrelated...

When I came into work yesterday, I had to climb over large squares of something covered by black plastic. When I asked what it was, Jeremy replied, "Oh yeah, they are moving asbestos from that closet.
' It was in the hall for two days! Thanks for the potential illness Mizzou! Oh well, maybe this University will make me rich after all.

Last night, I went to the A and C with Patrick, Erin, and Becky! Megan showed up later...She was fresh from her job selling kangaroo meat to hobos in Flat Branch Park. We had a pretty good time...Although that place is not the same without the karaoke. I ended up joining CoMo's local burlesque troop. We are going to work on a show to raise money for the Center Project. Finally, a chance to wear pasties...for a good cause!

Finally, I want to give a shout out to fellow blogger Sarah Smile! Now update your blog.

-I find it odd that Blogger's spell check doesn't recognize the word "blog."

The hirsute man waxes his legs

This week my impending graduation has been sitting on my shoulders like Dom DeLuise (ZING!). Goodbye easy livin' hello stressed poor eating habits living. I am having major freak-outs that I am not going to get into a good graduate program. I had a dream that I was rejected from all of my choices, moved to Jefferson City, got married, and had children. When I awoke, I was covered in sweat. This GRE is going to be the death of me!

"There's never enough time. I'll never get into Stanford. I'm so excited, I'm so excited..." (You know the rest)