Not All Muslims

There is plenty of discussion about discrimination on campus but many of us forget others that should be talked about. One demographic Khalil and myself (Miguel) found worthy of uncovering was that of the muslim community. We realized that there is a stigma surrounding the Muslim faith suggesting they are violent or are terrorists. This was something that did not sit well us, since we are aware of the diversity among Muslim followers. A majority of muslims in our American media(99%) are portrayed in a negative light. Miguel and I are curious to find out and understand core values of the Muslim religion, for which it holds sacred truths. Throughout this process we are choosing to seek understanding of religion, and plan on to project such understanding through video, pictures, text, and interaction with community members.

 We hope to facilitate a wider acceptance of the Muslim religion by highlighting the fact that they can be everyday people like you and I. Through research and experience we will post periodically on this blog in order to keep track of what we have learned and expand on ideas we have learned in class. Hopefully, by the end of this project we will have affected enough people to see a change in the way people on campus think about Muslims.

Why a Playstation is Cooler than your Family Heirloom

Note: Not a VCR.

            As a kid, I believe my most precious childhood possession was a classic Playstation. Like many other kids at the time, I treated this system with the same reverence as you would give an old family relic. I’ve always felt a little ashamed of myself for worshipping the game system, but as I think more about it, why wouldn’t I praise such an amazing piece of craftsmanship? Let me tell you why a Playstation is better than your old beat-up heirloom and why you should appreciate it more.

            Let’s begin with aesthetics: the Playstation is a sleek, soft-gray masterpiece, while your heirloom is probably a dingy quilt or other craft your great-grandmother did in her off time from smacking your grandmother around (violence happens, get over it). You could place a Playstation in your home entertainment system and it would not look out of place. Hell, it might even be an upgrade to your living room, which is probably covered in weed crumbs and Dorito dust. If you throw an old smelly quilt over the back of your couch, you can’t be surprised with the company that type of feng shui will attract.

This is the type of company...

            Now let’s talk entertainment capabilities, if we really must. The Playstation is capable of playing two of the most iconic video games to date: Grand Theft Auto and Final Fantasy VII, where the argument for Playstation stops. This category is already a victory for the system but I’ll entertain the idea of an heirloom being remotely close to reaching Playstation levels of fun. You can sleep in your old quilt, and eventually die from hypothermia because it wasn’t thick enough to keep you warm. You could also stare at your good ol’ pocketwatch and end up missing the interview you’ve been waiting for, all because the stupid thing doesn’t tell time. If that’s not fun enough you could wear that old ring that was passed down to you and get robbed in the streets after a long day of work. Getting a Playstation would be so much less drama.

The guy on the left could be you.

            I’m surprised you’re still reading this massacre. Lastly, I would like to address cool-points. “Cool-points” is such a mind bending point system that I cannot go into detail about the results. What I can tell you is that Playstation obviously won by a large margin in the cool-points category. Basically, if a caveman found your grandfather’s old hat he would put it on his head and continue about his day. But if a caveman found a Playstation, he would plug it in and crap his loincloth from steep over exposure to coolness. So if you don’t want a caveman overflowing all over your living room, show him that old shoe you got from your great grandfather.

That's a face of relief. Ready for more Playstation

            We knew this would happen, but I’m contractually obligated to state the results explicitly. The Playstation is the clear winner in the battle for your attention and love. Does your family heirloom look cooler than a Playstation? Probably not. Can your family’s heirloom play Crash Bandicoot? Definitely not. Is your family’s heirloom as cool as a Playstation? It wouldn’t make a caveman crap his pants, so the answer is no. What I will give the heirloom points in is that it could be worth more than a Playstation, depending on the object. In any case, if your family heirloom is worth any money, pawn it and buy yourself a Playstation.

Satire Park

 Most of us have all seen an episode or excerpt of the show South Park. In effect, we have all seen an episode that puts a look of shock on our face from the level of controversy it seems that the creators seem to reach for. But within this constant offensiveness is usually a lesson hidden somewhere.

 This is seen in the special two-part episode that the creators used to celebrate reaching their 200th episode. In this episode special pretty much every celebrity that the town of South Park has disgraced has decided to sue them. The celebrities would not sue the town if they were given Muhammad's goo, which they thought would give them invulnerability against being mocked,

 The explanation behind this episode is basically how ridiculous it is that the prophet Muhammad cannot be depicted to avoid the follow through of death threats that the creators received in the anticipation of the release of this episode. After these threats, Comedy Central censored the episode a ridiculous amount and bleeped out the entire ending speech about not succumbing to fear and standing up against terror.

 Of course, the show explains all of this in a humorous manner since it is a satirical show. I think this is the reason why satire is so important. A serious message can be told in an exaggerated and funny way which can make it easier for viewers to digest or accept. Putting the medicine in the candy is a great way for shows like South Park to discuss very serious topics and not receive too much backlash,

 Juvenalian satire is the type of joke that South Park usually uses to deliver its message and can be pretty jarring at times. But juvenalian satire is effective in criticizing aspects of society by using over the top exaggerations to show how crazy some ideas can be,

 What do you think about South Park's humor? Do you think it is a good way to speak on issues or is it too overly offensive for a message to be received? Leave a comment below to discuss how you feel about their use of juvenalian satire to speak about societal issues.

You Have to Eat the Peas Too

 When was the last time an aspect of your culture became cool? A dance, a hairstyle, traditional clothing, or any other aspect is not safe from possibly being appropriated for the dominant culture's enjoyment.

 That one thing you were raised doing and enjoying could possibly be taken and commercialized to the point where you don't recognize it anymore. From "Hip-Hop Abs" to Kylie Jenner's "Bold Braids," we are watching cultures become commodities before our eyes.

 Before Hip-Hop was "cool" its community was shunned. It was not respected as an art form until it first became accepted by the white masses. Then we saw cartoony, watered-down versions of this art form. Vanilla Ice and Macklemore are just two names who embody this idea.

 When the white masses find something they enjoy in another culture, they don't appreciate it, they appropriate it. This means that instead of giving the culture the respect it deserves they extract one piece from it, make it their own and throw the rest of the culture away.

 Give a picky kid a plate full of different foods and watch them eat what they enjoy and treat what they don't like with disgust. Maybe you try to explain that green peas are nutritious and essential to the rest of the meal, but no matter how much explanation you give, the kid will treat the peas with the same disgust. This is the same basic idea behind cultural appropriation.

 Twerking is taken because it is entertaining and edgy to watch Miley Cyrus "twerk" around on stage. Dreads are taken because it is a new look for Kylie Jenner to try on the red carpet. Bindis are taken to enhance Selena Gomez and Iggy Azalea's music videos. The problem is not that they are using these parts of different cultures but it is the only part of the culture they enjoy. The use of these cultural pieces does not mean the white masses like those particular cultures.

 Think about it, when Bindis fall "out of style" they are still a part of a culture. Dreads are not just a fad for a group of people but instead an important aspect of their culture. The problem with cultural appropriation is that parts of many cultures are being used as the "hot new thing" to sell in commercials and on the cover of magazines.

 Why is it that when a white woman twerk it is acceptable but African-American women are looked down upon to say the least when doing the same thing, if not doing it better? Why do dreads apparently look better on white people when they have been apart of black culture for an insurmountable time?

 What do you think about cultural appropriation? Has something from your culture been taken and sold to the masses while the rest of your culture is "thrown away?" Leave a comment below and discuss your thoughts about the idea.

W-W-What!?

 As a child I watched World Wrestling Entertainment pretty religiously. Every Monday and Friday I tuned in to see which superstars were beating each other to a pulp. My personal favorite was a beast named Goldberg, but we aren't here for that conversation. One thing I never noticed about the show until recently is how extreme the racist portrayals are.

 There was always one wrestler whose identity just never felt correct: Eddie Guerrero. This mexican wrestler was a known cheater. At every opportunity he would poke his opponent in the eyes, go for a shot below the belt, and a slue of other shameless winning tactics. Even his entrance music and video was degrading. The chant we constantly hear is about lying, cheating and stealing. He is always shown with a lowrider with hydraulics. This character type is a shockingly obvious form of stereotype reinforcement that flew over my head as a kid. This is what scares me about the rest of the WWE.

 Even Hulk Hogan's original entrance music seemed a little condescending. Others claim to be "Americans" but Hulk Hogan is a "Real American." Complete with guitar riffs, star-spangled tights and hair almost as white as his skin. This was the image of what a real American was and his music was making sure you knew it.

 You do not have to look very far in the past or deep in the roster of obscure wrestlers to find more blatantly racist portrayals. Papa Shango, Muhammad Hasan and Jimmy Snuka are just a few names that send chilling waves of racism coursing through fans.

 Any wrestler with a noticeable ethnicity (or even one slightly resembling another) was doomed to play to the extremities of their ethnicity's stereotype. Mexicans riding lawn mowers, white men acting as trailer trash, and black men being thugs/rappers are all so common that it doesn't seem out of the ordinary in the world of Vince McMahon.

 I admit to loving this source of entertainment for a majority of my childhood but now that I look back, it is difficult to finalize a list of stereotyping characters in the industry as I am almost always able to think of at least one more person to add to that list. 

 Did you watch WWE? What do you think about the characters that you remember? Comment below and tell me which ones you thought were the worst portrayals.

Fresh Prints in Bel-Air

 Can you recite the opening theme song of Fresh Prince of Bel-Air? Well if not, let me tell you about the main character's story. A young Will Smith was growing up with his mother in West-Philadelphia, born and raised. He spent most of his time on the playground with his friends relaxing, playing ball and other teenage activities. Of course, the good times came to an end when an altercation began with some local hoodlums. Will's mom wanted to shield him from further trouble and sent him to live with her sister's family in Bel-Air. The well-off and seemingly Republican household accepts Will with his wild antics and hilarity ensues.

 Most people would end the story here, but I believe there is a bit more to analyze. Considering the lack of realistic representation of low socioeconomic life, this show may also give outside viewers a skewed perception of what those situations entail. I know you're probably thinking, "Give me a break, it's a sitcom." But whether or not a show is created with the intent of humor or drama, you cannot deny that the representation is still there.

 The portrait that I think this show paints for those watching is that there is an escape for poor troubled youth when that is not always the case. For more privileged families there may be the option of sending a problem child off to live with a better off family member to keep them away from the irresponsible temptations of their own neighborhood, but for most families of low socioeconomic status, that is simply not an option. This is a problem because when we begin to believe that there is always a way out of a predicament, we also begin to see those stuck in a certain situation as people who are not utilizing their options.

 Some situations force a family to make changes in the household and sometimes that includes living with someone else. However, that someone else may not be a rich uncle, in most cases it is a lateral movement just to take that person out of that environment. In the show, Will gets the opportunity to live in a safer neighborhood, get better education and overall, he gets access to more fruitful opportunities. As I said before, to a person who is not afflicted by the problems Will faced prior to moving, the show seems like the obvious solution to his problems. It can make someone wonder why more people haven't handled their situations in the same manner. 

 All I want to point out is that we can enjoy the humor that sitcoms provide, but we should not be ignorant to the representations we are shown. I don't want to spoil any shows for you but I guarantee that if you look close enough, you will find an inaccurate representation of some minority group. Don't let your entertainment stop you from learning.  

Colorful Frames

 In terms of art, framework is important. A frame borders the painting, giving a context for the painting to be considered. A painting without a frame is basically a poster. In terms of journalism, framing refers to the information chosen to represent a story.

 For example, during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina there were different perspectives about the scavenging of food. In certain cases, people were reported as "finding resources" while others were depicted as "looting" the same goods. The purpose of framing is to convey a certain message about a situation without giving the full context of said situation. Framing is an important aspect of the news we receive, yet is not considered with the importance necessary to understand the messages we are being delivered.

 A recent instance of framing can be seen in the recent coverage of the Oscars in which Giuliana Rancic commented about actress/singer Zendaya's faux dread-loc hairstyle. In her critique during "Fashion Police," Giuliana stated that she got the feeling that because of Zendaya's hairstyle, she must smell like patchouli or marijuana. On the other hand, when Kylie Jenner appeared with her hair in locs, she was described as being edgy.