ruqayyahali, Cixous & Butler

Helene Cixous speaks about the body and the way that women are supposed to succumb to passivity due to cultural ideology of the world we live in. Women have always been seen as the weaker sex, the ones to be passive while the men are active. We exist in these binaries of hierarchy: there are always two oppositions and one is better than the other.

She says: "We see that 'victory' always comes down to the same thing: things get hierarchal. Organization by hierarchy makes all conceptual organization subject to man. Male privilege, shown in the opposition between activity and passivity, which he uses to sustain himself. Traditionally, the question of sexual difference is treated by coupling it with the opposition: activity/passivity" (C 158).

One way Cixous says that women have 'messed up' this hierarchy, however, is through bisexuality. Being bisexual blurs the lines of binary and hierarchy because one is not required to like the other sex (in this case, a woman is not required to like a man). Bisexuality replaces sexual differences between the two sexes and creates a "a fantasy of unity" (C 159).

She goes further to say that women benefit from this bisexuality because if they embrace their bodies and their sexuality, it is not necessarily for the pleasure or appeal of men. It is for themselves.

Judith Butler, another feminist theorist, goes back a couple steps to say that gender is a social construct. This active/passive binary ideology that Cixous is talking about exists because society fails to recognize that 'woman' is not an overarching term for all females.

Butler says: "Apart from the foundationalist fictions that support the notion of the subject, however, there is the political problem that feminism encounters in the assumption that the term women denotes a common identity. Rather than a stable signifier that commands the assent of those whim it purports to describe and represent, women, even in the plural, has become a troublesome term, a site of contest a cause for anxiety" (C 193).

Both of these authors delve into what has caused women to be the inferior gender. They discuss binaries, ideology, and terms as a way to see how women became the oppressed of the sexes and why all females are even classified as 'women'. Is it simply because they are alike? Or has their oppression bonded them into being alike and thus being constructed as their own gender?

These readings are a breakdown of feminism and what has led to it. Through Cixous and Butler we can explore the ideology behind gender specification that has cause the issue of man vs. woman, masculinity vs. femininity to this day. I look forward to discussing this more in class next week!

AsToldByGinger, Post Class 11/20

Apparently this is what
I've searched this week

When thinking more about Foucault and the panopticon, I started paying more close attention to the advertisements I am exposed to while on the web, and the relation they have to anything I search for or visit frequently. Just how John talked about the role Google plays as a panopticon in his post as with Google maps, or Street View, Google also does this in another way in which we are often unaware of, and show no rejection towards - targeted advertisement. Isn't it ironic how the advertisements presented to us seem to know exactly when we want something or have been shopping around for it? It's not ironic at all because Google, Facebook, and other companies keep track of things you search either on their engine, or through amazon, E-bay, independent stores, etc. and then show them back to you when you are away from that site. This tactic works in a very successful way, and I nearly always find myself clicking on the ads targeted to me on Facebook etc. thinking "ah yes I love this dress, how did they know" (sarcasm) but it still gets me. If you notice Facebook also brings your "friends" into the picture by telling you that they like these sorts of things too - as seen in the bottom of the picture to the right. This whole concept is absurd though, what else are they watching that I'm doing on my own private computer they I'm not aware of? How can you be sure that any site is truly "secure"? I'm no computer whiz so I would have no idea, and I'm sure the overwhelming majority of internet users are the same way. Going back to John's post, I agree that it is crazy how people (including myself) will accept this odd sort of spying that companies conduct on us on a regular basis, but yet would most definitely not accept a person from the NSA taking pictures of us walking down the street. I think we as a society need to align our thoughts on digital privacy and set guidelines for what we will and will not accept as being legal.

lacansmirror, a retrospective

A retrospective of Macherey from 9/15/13

After looking back at some past blogs, I realized that the ideas in my post about the significance of the unspoken have been seen in other theorists works as well.  The importance of Macherey's theory gives enhanced meaning for concepts like the panopticon, Zizek's views on terrorism in America, or Eco's perception of the passivity of guests at Disney.  For the panopticon, the unknown presence of someone in the tower of a prison restrains inmates even if it is empty.  This emptiness is a physical reference to the importance of "what is not said".

Zizek believes that we produce and glorify in media what we received on 9/11.  The notion that we simply accept and encourage violence in movies, and then are shocked when that violence becomes reality, is the unspoken quality that Macherey defines.  Our culture does not speak about the effects of our media, but then we are surprised when these events occur.




Finally, at Disney World, guests must comply with the Disney rules while experiencing a prefabricated fantasy, those who actively rebel against those rules are asked to leave.  The only way to experience Disney is to remain passive or else they will force silence.  Whether it is forced silence or voluntary passivity and acceptance, the notion of remaining voiceless contains the power.

West - Pre Class Blog

In the reading by West, he focused heavily on the issue of racial inequality and injustice in our society. We tend to "other" African Americans due to the color of their skin and thus use them as scapegoats for problems within this country the reading pointed out. This piece highlighted the politics of racism and the different views of liberals and conservatives on this pretty large issue that has been going on for years. West stated that the liberal view is that we need to stop "othering" the poor individuals and integrate them into our society. The conservative views on this issue tend to differ. West believes that we need to rid ourselves of racist thoughts, or the individualistic perspective as I have learned about in my State of Black American course, and accept people of color and realize how important they are to to our world today; he basically would like us all to embrace equality and practice it. This reading directly relates to everything I am learning in one of my CMC electives, State of Black America taught by Dr. Royce. In this class we have outlined the causes of racism and what it means, discrimination in the workplace, residential segregation, education segregation, economic differences, the White Middle Class versus the Black Middle Class, and many other sub topics to these general topics. I really liked this reading because I finally felt like I knew what the author was trying to convey to me as a reader and I liked relating it back to studies I have talked about in Royce's class and in class readings we have done. I think a big part of West's reading is the constant war between people who believe the individual perspective versus those who believe in the structural perspective. It was a really cool connection to make between two of my classes!

Higgins- Pre class

In class we talked about Foucault and his concept of the Panopticon, which is a device to used for power that instills fear in those around it. Order is kept in the country by one main thing, fear. When one does a crime the thing they are most concerned about is the punishment to come. The punishment is designed to strike fear in people contemplating any crimes, hence the reason we have jail, fines, etc. Foucault goes into depth about how we are always being watched at all times, that you are never alone and can be found always. Panopticon is designed to give the impression to prisoners that they are under surveillance which strays them away from causing chaos.

I was thinking about this idea of being watched all the time and immediately thought of two things: the movie V for Vendetta and the book 1984. Both pieces circle around the aspect of a higher power suppressing another one for the sole purpose to maintain order/ keep power. It was interesting to watch and read about what life would be like if the government we live in enhanced their control over its people and practically destroy our democracy.

Pictures from  1984:

                                            

ruqayyahali, West

Fitting in. At some point in our lives, we have all tried fitting in. Perhaps even now we try to fit in. Or maybe we say "screw it" and assume a pseudo-indivudality that is not necessarily the overwhelming norm so we feel like we're outside of ideology, that we don't need to fit in.

Racism is very much the simple notion of not fitting in. Whites and Blacks have had their differences all through time which has been dealt with in minor ways such as rude comments and major ways such as slavery, persecution, and murder. Most often, Blacks are on the lesser half of this scale and are submitted to much hardship because their skin does not fit the appropriate color palette that America's founders and ancestors deemed worthy of being equal to them.

This not about hating on Whites. That's not what Cornel West is doing in his piece. He's say, much more eloquently than I, that racism is a profound issue to this day in America while it should have been dealt with far in the past. Dealt with not in the way of purging our society of those who are not of a certain skin color but dealt with in the sense that we need integration in order to survive.

"One essential step is some form of large-scale public intervention to ensure access to basic social goods--housing, food, health care, education, child care, and jobs. We must invigorate the common good with a mixture of government, business, and labor that does not follow any existing blueprint." (West 630)

West believes that we must do away with all other notions of racism in our minds in order to change the way our society is. We need to understand that Blacks and colored people are an asset and an integral part of the world we live in. None of us are different; we are all the same.

West says: "There is no escape from our interracial interdependence, yet enforced racial hierarchy dooms us as a nation to collective paranoia and hysteria--the unmaking of any democratic order." If we realize that we are one and ideology is the only reason keeping us all apart because we've been taught by millennia of history that skin color is a separation of class and status and riddled with stereotype, we will continue to crush the democracy we are so proud of.

We must use our intelligence and independence as Americans to learn integration rather than tolerance and to understand that if we wish to succeed as a people in the future, we must make the incredibly massive move to influence and change ideology for the better.

Fang pre class other

While many point to the election of Barack Obama as a sign racism is done, the theorists (although writing before the election or thought that a black person could be elected) for Wednesday's class clearly demonstrate that there is more at play in our society than just simple ideas about black people. There is a "commodification of Otherness" (M 308) and flaw in American contemporary society that "viewing black people reveals" (handout 627).
In Cornell West's piece, the more interesting of the two I felt, he analyzes the aftermath of the 1992 Los Angeles Riots or Rodney King riots which if he called them Rodney King riots, I would not have felt so stupid not knowing what he was referencing until after I looked them up. Californians were angry, and rightfully so, over how LAPD officers beat Rodney King and the riots began the day of the verdict causing the National Guard (shown below in LA) to be called in.

West illustrates that the solution is not as simple as "reliev[ing] guilty consciences by supporting public funds directed at 'the problems'" (627) but that there is a problem bigger than simply black people. Seeing black people, or any non-white faction in America, as something that needs to be adapted or morphed to fit into a certain social construct is fundamentally wrong and doesn't put "white anxieties and fears at the center of discussion" (628). Many don't view black people as people but black people which is a huge flaw in the framework of our society. West's plans for the future of America demonstrate a fundamental realization that people are people and regardless of race, there will be problems amongst people but they should be addressed as people problems not black people problems. Hook echoes this in the piece about the "other" and how many view the "other" as something simply different whereas those thoughts are what cause the problems.
Both theorists argue for a change in framework as seeing differences appear to be a bigger problem than seeing sameness.

Pre Class

In the reading on West and Inigarary it focused on the ideas of race in society. It mentioned the problems and how we view blacks as" problem people." The conservative ideas of our nation is that we need to dive deep into the poor parts of the nation, where unfortunately there are high numbers of African Americans who live in poverty. I watch a National Geographic episode on the Drug Problems in North Philadelphia. As a child, i was told by my parents to stay away. It was a place of abandoned houses, and mostly african american families who lost everything. Philadelphia was known to be a city filled with big factories, and as the factories shut down, the lower class was left to go nowhere, and they ended up in places like Kensington, there is some of the highest amounts of Drugs, as they are sold on every corner. This is what they do to survive, and it is because society has placed them and offered them no other alternative. When there were factories the lower class was given a place to work, now they are depended on the illicit activities to survive. We need to create a new strucure of society, to allow everyone to gain wealth, to at least survive on, without having to do things such as the Drug game to risk their life and families. The reading talked about how liberals believe that we need to look at the poor and make them fit in to society, and "act and dress" like the middle class and up. We need to understand the flaws that our society provides, rather than look at the black people and blame them. It is wrong to do that. They are just caught in the flawed system of the United States. It gives them and the poor class nowhere to gain, nothing to reach or achieve, so they are merely forced into the negative aspects that society offers, such as Drugs and violence. We talked about "sketchy people" last class, and we all thought about how much safer we felt when there was authority nearby. I think most of Rollins College can say that they were raised relatively sheltered in a Suburban neighborhood, and for us it is only scary because it is what we are not used to. When i travel from the Burbs to the City of Philly, i at times do feel uncomfortable, because i am not used to seeing homeless people, and such a vast array of people. It in reality is something that grows on you. My father and many others alike work in the city and live in the suburbs, and they understand the different parts of the city that are completely safe, even without seeing authority, and by just restricting ourself to those areas, we can feel comfortable, but if i was to travel to Kensington in North Philadelphia, i would be scared to death, just from the news and myself feeling like a minority in the heavily black location. My family friends own a factory in Kensington, and they employ all local workers, and they say that they are all very nice people. It is this negative viewpoint that we have on people before we meet them, and it causing there to be many problems in the country. This is not to say that everyone in the area is friendly, but i believe that they are pleased to have a stable job in a area where there is less amounts of steady work. There are 20,000 abandoned homes in Philly, and unfortunately, they house many homeless who live in poor conditions.

lacansmirror, Foucault

After discussing the Panopticon, I thought about other ways we are being watched.  Online, tools like Google Street View allow us to visually see roads and buildings to better understand directions.  In order for Google to collect these images, they have street view cars that drive around snapping photos in all directions.  I have been photographed by Google when walking out of Publix and walking down a street in Chicago.  Even though this tool is helpful for directions, isn't it intrusive to our privacy?  They blurred out faces, but the pictures are all taken without consent.  Even though it is legal for them to do this, why isn't there more controversy.  There is a lot of news and disagreement from the public about the NSA spying on us, but do people overlook the fact that Google is too?

If I walked down park ave with my camera and started taking pictures of people without their permission, I believe I would be told to stop, or people would cover their face.  However, with Google, people seem to overlook that problem and just focus on the benefits of the tool.  In addition, if I walked down the street taking pictures of people wearing a shirt that says NSA, I can guarantee most people would get upset.  Even though companies like Google are fighting against the NSA to provide privacy for the public, there seems to be hypocrisy with their services and the actions necessary for establishing those services.

AsToldByGinger, Foucault

In both of Michel Foucault's readings he discusses the notion of power. In the first reading, as related to disciplinary government actions, as well as in his second the notion of sex and power and their origins. The first reading gives a detailed description of what would happen to a plague stricken town sometime near the end of the seventeenth century, and the way in which the government would react and take strict control of the people and their livelihood in the name of the "common good." Foucault states "the plague-stricken town, traversed throughout with hierarchy, surveillance, observation, writing; the town immobilized by the functioning of an extensive power that bears in a distinct way over all individual bodies - this is the utopia of the perfectly governed city" (96). Foucault then compares this mobilization of power to designs created by Jeremy Bentham in his Panopticon writings that redefines power in incarceration - of criminals, mad men, etc. It is designed so that the captive "is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication" (98). I thought this was particularly interesting because he stresses the importance of visibility and the way people act differently because of it, just how I believe Baudrillard said that nothing is actual reality that we see because the camera immediately changes the actions of people; as soon as those know they are being watched - they act differently.

Foucault then addresses how sexuality came to be constituted in scientific terms, and lays out five different steps that led to the evolvement of sexuality, and the power that was associated with the subject's taboo. At the end of his work he states "as far as sexuality is concerned, we shall attempt to constitute the 'political economy' of a will to knowledge" (107). I would like to discuss this quote more in class and come to a deeper understanding of what his overarching point is in the second reading.

27Percent, Foucault

In Michel Foucault’s piece, “The History of Sexuality” he is talking about the power that sex and sexuality play in our culture (though the piece was written in 1978).  Specifically, he is getting at the notion of the secretness that our culture has put on sex, and how that urges the study, question and great suspicion of sex—thus giving the object power over us.

            Foucault states about the hush-hush of sex through our history that, “Thus sex gradually became an object of great suspicion; the general and disquieting meaning that pervades our conduct and our existence, in spite of ourselves; the point of weakness where evil portents reach through to us; the fragment of darkness that we each carry within us: a general signification, a universal secret, an omnipresent cause, a fear that never ends” (Foucault, 105). The nineteenth century society began to acknowledge sex to reveal its secrets and truths. Sex then acquired power (like capitalist power) to the point that the secretness is what intrigued people to partake and discover what it is all about. Foucault then begins to talk about how finding the truth in sex is pleasure in itself. “Pleasure in the truth of pleasure—of discovering and exposing it, the fascination of seeing it and telling it, of captivating and capturing others by it, of confiding it in secret, of luring it out in the open – the specific pleasure of the true discourse on pleasure” (Foucault, 105-106). This reminds me of Barthes and the pleasure of the text because once you make connections to something and give it your own meaning and understanding, there are no longer any secrets, only things to talk about. It is the pleasure of knowing the underlying truth of sex that also contributes to its power.

Higgins-Post Class

It was pretty apparent to me what I was going to write for this post the moment in class I was presented with an article that discussed an ex-NFL players decision to one day just leave the league in mid-season. What made this a troublesome thought to me was why he said he did it, because he read Chomsky's book and that created a life changing moment for him. Do I believe in moments where people can have a sudden life altering realization, yes i do but some things need to be addressed first. This guy is in a position many people would kill for and he has been playing for so long I just don't believe a book could change someone that drastically without having other factors come into play.

As a culture we are constantly being shaped and form from the different social shifts and pressures, so I understand when push comes to shove some people need to take a break. As for leaving the NFL over a book, doesn't seem logical in my eyes, who knows there may be more to the story. The theorist Chomsky is always presenting complex ideologies that leave many with a new outlook. The thing I would feel that could be related to Chomsky's presence of leaving one wanting to change their lives, would be the concept of faith/religion. Never have I seen more examples of people changing things in there day to day life than from the teachings they get from religion. In my opinion, that has always been something very interesting to me and I intend to look into it more.

One could also connect Chomsky and religion from how the theorist texts and those of the religious texts(bible) have documented cases of life altering realizations.

Chomsky, Post Class blog

Our discussion on Chomsky was particularly fun and interesting to sit back and listen to Jack and Alex pick apart the football player’s statement about quitting the NFL because of the enlightenment he experienced from reading Chomsky. I had my own opinions and ideas as to why he had quit and why Chomsky’s concepts had a major effect on his career playing in the NFL, but it was much more entertaining to watch what was going on in front of me. I think it is definitely possible to read something or see something and have a life changing moment because of it. I definitely think his decision was not spur of the moment, and with the help of chomsky’s theories, he was able to use it as a way out.

            The words by Chomsky, “opine and recline” intrigued me during our class discussion. Just like how I had my opinions during the conversation about the NFL player, I sat back and kept quiet. There is no particular reason to it, but I was being a passive listener and student in the classroom, as Eco would say. As a culture of mass media consumers, we are attacked with media images and manipulation thousands of times a day, and there is a notion of passivity that goes along with it. The five ingredients of the propaganda model shape how the media directly affects us. The fact that a few large corporations own all media sources reminds me of the food industry and how corrupt the system and its products are.

            Yesterday, I came across a music video from a local Orlando rapper, Brandon Caskey, that talks about media and advertisement manipulation and how it has the capitalist power to shape our views on many aspects of culture and essentially make us buy into the power. Not a good song what-so-ever, but very applicable for Chomsky.

lyrics:

It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
Had enough of that
It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
Had enough of that
It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya

Yo let the television develop my vision
This not a hell of a prison that I am standing inside
Capitalism capitalizing on my condition
Every tiny ass that circulates I’m making decision
Being taught to consume
Fear’s all they ever promote inside of the news
I’m confused what they notice defused with that bogus
The locus inside the fear ain’t necessary to grow it
I got family at home everybody need the new shit that’s coming on
They are coming on to me like a 12 bus groupie
Trying to hop inside my hooptie on the low
They thinking the life of me is a movie
They are programmed from the lad that is no man’s
Up in nasty nice and some slow jams
My eyes in the low lands in the cold cans
These commercial and titles they the start to the circle

Inviting me to keep your eyes on the screen
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything
Keep your eyes on the screen 
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything
Keep your eyes on the screen 
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything
Keep your eyes on the screen
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything

It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
Had enough of that
It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya

It’s psychology someone owe me an apology
I usually ain’t concerned with they policy
But honestly this rewriting my whole main
It’s like I have to purchase this so I could maintain
What’s the verdict on life, are we still the appraised?
We always got to be slave to someone’s pocket decide
Is you gonna live a life consuming materials
I’ll be the one who can stop it

Keep your eyes on the screen
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything
Keep your eyes on the screen 
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything
Keep your eyes on the screen 
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything
Keep your eyes on the screen
Watch everything, watch, watch everything
Watch everything, watch everything

It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
Had enough of that
It’s another add for ya, everything bad 4 ya
Had enough of that

Great stuff

Some great content, all, post- our 11/13 class. Gator chomp and all! (Thanks ~ dc)

Foucault- fang pre class

Michel Foucault is outlining the current state of discipline in his piece. He describes “the utopia of the perfectly governed city” (96) which has essentially made an overlord that represses the citizens and outlines one path. Foucault explains how the current attitude towards discipline and notes that the “collective effect, is abolished” (98). When a group is oppressed, either by a state regime or an ISA, the collective group becomes stunted and there is a lot less freedom and thinking. Foucault notes the big change for the guardian after the oppression stating, “[the collective effect] is replaced by a multiplicity that can be numbered and supervised” (98).  The state of oppression is such that the underlings of the guardian go about the day knowing they have no free will past their day-to-day lives.

Foucault’s second piece focuses on how secretizing sex only augments its power. By seeking pleasure in knowing something about the secret of sex, we have created a “new pleasure in confiding [sex] in secret, of luring it out in the open- the specific pleasure of the true discourse on pleasure” (105-106). Over time, sex has become something more than it needs to be and a secret in society.

I suggested Bob Dylan’s “Maggie’s Farm” for class because it expresses Dylan’s feelings about the oppressive state regime. There is a line about the “National Guard that waits outside the door” and an overall theme of anger and oppression (though some argue that it was about his response to the folk movement, aspects of the song could speak to oppression and class exploitation).  The song also is a part of Bentham’s idea that “there were no more bars, no more chains, no more heavy locks; all that was needed was that the separations should be clear and the openings well arranged” (99) as the narrator works on the farm just subtly oppressed.