Stereotying in Stereo

One of the biggest complaints against hip-hop and dancehall music is their content of sexuality and gender stereotyping. Several critics, however, defend their use of such stereotyping. One such defense, as presented by George Lipsitz, is that they are a reaction to immigration and society. Lipstiz claims that, “…the world that is emerging all around us can be understood in part through analysis of the ways in which popular music in Miami and Los Angeles registers the changes in black and Latino identities enacted by massive immigration, as well as the ways in which these changes represent disturbances in gender roles and sexuality provoked by the new social relations in global cities” (376). Thus, in the eyes of Lipstiz sexuality and gender stereotyping is merely a reaction to the cultural chaos of large metropolises and should not be silenced as it provides an accurate look at the world.

Another common cry defending the use of stereotyping in hip-hop and dancehall music is that they are tied closely to the cultural identities of the artists. For example, at the trial of hip-hop artist Luther Campbell, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, “…correctly noted the long history of misogynist and sexually explicit rhymes within African American oral traditions like playing the ‘dozens’” (Lipsitz 380). If the use of stereotyping is tied to cultural tradition, then it is very difficult to condemn it without condemning the traditions of the people. Thus, culture becomes one of the foundations in the defense of sexuality and gender stereotyping.

Personally, I am not a fan of the stereotyping that goes on in the vast majority of hip-hop and dancehall music. The ways in which the artists repeatedly put down women as being nothing more than their sexual play-things is really disgusting. It seems to me that all these lame stereotypes do is provide a way for men to put women down, to take away their skills and minds and reduce them to legs, boobs, etc. It is just wrong. I, personally, do not want to be viewed in that kind of a light. I would like to be seen as an intellectual equal whose cup-size is irrelevant. Perhaps my viewpoint is because of my cultural upbringing (I’m from Mesa, so I’m used to everything being very conservative) and am interested to hear what others have to say on this topic!

That Golf Game is Looking a Little Rusty...

The sequence of events that I am about to recount all took place on an otherwise normal and beautiful day back when I was in third grade. In fact, the day had started off extremely well as it was Take Your Child to Work Day and I was going to head off to Tempe with my Dad. I had a blast with him! We took a tour of Honeywell’s facility (they make airplane and helicopter parts for the military and public aircrafts) and had a picnic lunch with his colleagues and their children. As a surprise, my Dad had taken a half day so that we could go golfing at a local course. I was not a good golfer by any means, but I loved driving the cart around when we were out of sight of the pro-shop employees (shockingly, even to drive a golf cart you’re supposed to have a driver’s license).

When we got to the course, everything went according to plan. It wasn’t busy so we didn’t have to worry about holding other players up thanks to my lack of golfing ability, to put it lightly. When we rounded a bend and my Dad deemed it was safe, we switched drivers. I felt like the queen of the course, smoothly conducting the small cart from hole to hole, winding along the cart path. The way that the course was set up, we would have to drive directly past the pro-shop in order to reach the last two holes, so naturally I asked my Dad if we should switch. He told me just to be careful and that we would just sneak by unnoticed. I hesitantly agreed, being at the age where getting in trouble is the worst thing in the world I didn’t want to get reprimanded by the course employees. Nonetheless, I sat up straight, pushed back my shoulders and pushed the golf cart back up to its near maximum speed of seven miles per hour.

Everything was going fine, as I approached the bend that would lead us past the shop. However, that was when disaster struck. The cart hit a pot hole, causing it shoot straight for the putting green in the middle of which was a gigantic light pole (the kind you see at football stadiums). In my nine year old panic, I pushed down even harder on the gas peddle which sent us careening towards the green at an alarming rate of ten miles per hour. At this point, seeing my alarm and lack of good judgment, my Dad grabbed the wheel in an attempt steer us away from the putting green. I however, maintained a vice-like grip trying to steer us around the light pole. Naturally, this push-pull dynamic only kept us heading on our pole-bound course. Then, we made impact. My Dad flew out the front of the cart, his feet getting trapped underneath the seat causing him to perform a perfectly executed Superman. Then, we heard the resounding CRACK. The huge light pole smashed down onto the putting green, sending glass and sparks flying everywhere. I froze with panic. Thankfully, I snapped out of it as soon as my Dad asked me to release his feet so that he could resume an upright position.

The security guard for the course came and took down all of our information, asserting that we would have to pay for the lighting equipment. I lived in fear for almost three months that every time the phone rang it was the course calling to collect their thousands. Thankfully, the never did. The best that we could figure was the since the base of the light pole had been completely rusted through they had just chocked it up to the fall of the pole being inevitable. Furthermore, the fact that it was so rusted leads me to believe that given what could have happened should it have collapsed on its own accord (which would have happened quickly), the damage could have been much worse and someone could have been seriously hurt.

On a side note, I haven’t been golfing since. However, I still have the score card from that day, across which my Dad has written “Pole in One.”

Week 8 Blog Reviews

Jade:

Your post “Happily (N)Ever After” had a lot of really great points in it. I especially like how you mentioned that many people view love as a learned trait! I just thought that that was a great way to express the idea, it really resonated with me. I also liked how you brought up fairy tales, I thought that they were super relevant to this topic. Great use of support from the article, it really fit in well with your points. Also, I totally agree with you about keeping with the perception of love being mysterious and mystical rather than scientific and cold. It’s way more fun that way! The post “To Be or Not to Be…” definitely had strong points in it as well. Again, nice use of quotes from the reading. You did a really nice job of expressing your own voice and ideas in this post.

Krista:

“Ray of Light” was really nicely done. I felt like you clearly and cleanly expressed all of your ideas and touched on all of the parts of the question. Also, the way in which you explained how homosexual relationships in the animal kingdom can either be used to support or opposed such relations in the human world was dead on. I liked how you brought up the point that this debate will continue for years to come. I especially liked how you pointed out that information can be interpreted differently simply by who is looking at it and analyzing it. So true!

Monique:

In your post “What’s Chemistry Got to do With Love!!” you brought up some really interesting ideas. I thought that they way that you said that love to you is more than just a marriage certificate was so great, amusing and true. I also really like how you brought in the idea of love that is illustrated in movies since it is such a contrast with what the article was saying about love. I really like the way that you started off your other post “Is Homosexuality Natural??” with a brief history of the “causes” of homosexuality. You used some really good quotes from the articles, they really fit in with what you were saying. Your point about the individual’s personal beliefs being what really mattered was very good. Really strong ideas!

Jungle to Jacksonville? (Class Discussion 1)

Nature provides mankind with a chance to examine the behaviors of species similar to ours and to use those observations in our own world. In fact, the characteristics of several animals, particularly apes, have opened up our eyes to previously ignored human behaviors. Animals have shown us that we are not always as unique as we believe ourselves to be in areas such as communication, but have also illustrated just how different our species is from others when it comes to phenomena such as homicide. It is this very practice of comparing apples to oranges that has led researchers to claim that homosexual relationships are both “natural” and “unnatural.”

Recent studies conducted on the practices of animals have illustrated just how diverse the sexual practices of animals truly are. As Jeffrey Kluger plainly puts it in his article “The Gay Side of Nature,” “What humans share with so many other animals, it now appears, is freewheeling homosexuality” (Kluger 337). Kluger goes on to site the various species that have been show to have homosexual trysts and relationships: Giraffes, bonobos, elephants, rodents, macaques, graylag geese, and the list goes on and on (Kluger 338). The homosexual activity between these species does not necessarily end with the sexual act, but many of these animal couplings form long-lasting relationships and some even bring up their offspring in same-sex relationships. Thus, the argument for the human practice of homosexuality being “natural” is able to assert that numerous members of the animal kingdom engage in similar acts, making such pairings part of the norm in the animal world. In their eyes, if the animals can do it why can’t we?

However, Kluger also points out some of the flaws of using such an argument. The main reason that it is difficult to use such a simple correlation is that while the animals may be engaging in the physical act of homosexual relationships, no one knows what they really mean. For instance, in the animal kingdom sex plays several different roles than it does in our minds, “In species that lack sophisticate language—which is to say all species but ours—sex serves many nonsexual purposes, including establishing alliances and appeasing enemies, all things animals must do with members of both sexes” (Kluger 339). Thus, those who assert that human homosexuality is “unnatural” are able to claim that the reasons behind such relationships for animals are completely different from those of people.

There are several other human behaviors that can prove just as paradoxical to validate based on animals. One example is the common practice of infidelity in the animal kingdom. In fact, when it comes to animals, life-long monogamy is the exception to the rule and is rarely found in nature. Thus, one may attribute people’s struggles with monogamy to “nature” while another can claim, much like those who oppose the idea that homosexuality is “natural”, that animals have different reasons for their philandering ways than mankind does. As it stands now, without an animal-to-human dictionary we may never be able to rightly claim correctness for either side, thus continuing this old argument.