I found this video on youtube called '10 Reasons to hate Hillary Clinton', made by a group of American teenage boys. Every reason seems to include some sort of sexist remark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtpdd6hnX6I
'She's not in the kitchen, and I'm hungry'
'She's more of a man that i'll ever be, and I'm jealous'
'She cant control her husband, so she cant control this country'
'the war will never end: P.M.S.'
'REASON NUMBER ONE: She's a woman, nuff said'
---
The video shows a group of white American males expressing their prejudiced views who seem to be taking on the role of 'stupid white men'. It seems to me like the 'crisis of white masculinity' reigns here. They need to emphasise their sexist views by stating their disagreements with the idea of a female president, especially one that is seen as strong and 'more manly' than they are.
Tuesday, 13 May 2008
Thursday, 8 May 2008
'Is Barack Obama too smart to be President?'
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/6694
Is Barack Obama too smart to be President?
I have recently come across a few articles that actually seem to be questioning if Obama is too intelligent to become President. The first article above asks if Obama can give Americans what they really want, being ‘fewer real ideas and more schmuck and jive’.
The article provides the views of Roger Simon who suggests that Americans do not want their Presidents too be too brainy and are ‘too dumb to know what they want from their leaders’, calling upon the idea of America as a stupid nation.
The problem with seeming too intelligent is that ‘braininess is elitist’ and to be elitist in America is never seen as a good thing – especially as President.
Obama is said to have to ‘modified his has modified his stump speech to try and broaden his populist appeal’ – in other words dumb down his speeches, so that he can appeal to ‘stupid America’.
As Obama’s intelligence is now being questioned, the idea of Clinton being criticised for being too intelligent for a woman can also be re-assessed. There have been arguments that Clinton is criticised because people do not like intelligent and powerful women, but if Obama is now being criticised for the same thing maybe it is not just a sexist idea. It is said that Bill Clinton had to hide his intelligence whilst in office and played on his southern roots instead to keep his mass appeal, so it seems as though Obama may have to do the same thing appeal to America.
As Susan Jacoby has stated in her book The Age of American Unreason, 'America is ill with a powerful mutant strain of intertwined ignorance, anti-rationalism and anti-intellectualism', which Obama and Clinton now have to play to, to maintain popularity with the masses.
Is Barack Obama too smart to be President?
I have recently come across a few articles that actually seem to be questioning if Obama is too intelligent to become President. The first article above asks if Obama can give Americans what they really want, being ‘fewer real ideas and more schmuck and jive’.
The article provides the views of Roger Simon who suggests that Americans do not want their Presidents too be too brainy and are ‘too dumb to know what they want from their leaders’, calling upon the idea of America as a stupid nation.
The problem with seeming too intelligent is that ‘braininess is elitist’ and to be elitist in America is never seen as a good thing – especially as President.
Obama is said to have to ‘modified his has modified his stump speech to try and broaden his populist appeal’ – in other words dumb down his speeches, so that he can appeal to ‘stupid America’.
As Obama’s intelligence is now being questioned, the idea of Clinton being criticised for being too intelligent for a woman can also be re-assessed. There have been arguments that Clinton is criticised because people do not like intelligent and powerful women, but if Obama is now being criticised for the same thing maybe it is not just a sexist idea. It is said that Bill Clinton had to hide his intelligence whilst in office and played on his southern roots instead to keep his mass appeal, so it seems as though Obama may have to do the same thing appeal to America.
As Susan Jacoby has stated in her book The Age of American Unreason, 'America is ill with a powerful mutant strain of intertwined ignorance, anti-rationalism and anti-intellectualism', which Obama and Clinton now have to play to, to maintain popularity with the masses.
'Hillary Clinton is too ambitious to be the first female president'
http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/hillary_clinton_is_too
By Gerald Collins
The writer of this article above states foremost that he thinks it is time that a woman became the president of the USA, but lists many reasons why it should not be Hillary Clinton.
Collins states how he does not like the way Clinton is so self-promoting and acts like she knows better than anyone else (which brings about the idea of Clinton maybe appearing too intelligent and too headstrong for a woman to become President).
He expresses the case for why it is time for a female president (‘women can be just as smart and qualified as men’) but at the same time, there is a small hint of male chauvinism. By stating ‘I'd rather see a female presidential candidate who wasn't so focused on herself and her political aspirations’ and how she should ‘start thinking about acting a little more ladylike’, gives off an impression that she should not take on a ‘man’s job’. If a male candidate was focused on his political aspirations it would probably be seen as ‘normal’, but because Clinton is an intelligent woman with aspirations, Collins is criticising her for it.
When he states ‘not to mention the fact that, as a working woman, she should take those precious Sundays to spend some time with her family, not to meet with the press on national television’, it begs the question would he say the same thing about Obama?
Collins seems to contradict himself slightly in this article, and seems to just confirm some of the prejudices against Clinton for being too intelligent and headstrong and maybe too much of a ‘man’, which she has been criticised for by feminists as well.
By Gerald Collins
The writer of this article above states foremost that he thinks it is time that a woman became the president of the USA, but lists many reasons why it should not be Hillary Clinton.
Collins states how he does not like the way Clinton is so self-promoting and acts like she knows better than anyone else (which brings about the idea of Clinton maybe appearing too intelligent and too headstrong for a woman to become President).
He expresses the case for why it is time for a female president (‘women can be just as smart and qualified as men’) but at the same time, there is a small hint of male chauvinism. By stating ‘I'd rather see a female presidential candidate who wasn't so focused on herself and her political aspirations’ and how she should ‘start thinking about acting a little more ladylike’, gives off an impression that she should not take on a ‘man’s job’. If a male candidate was focused on his political aspirations it would probably be seen as ‘normal’, but because Clinton is an intelligent woman with aspirations, Collins is criticising her for it.
When he states ‘not to mention the fact that, as a working woman, she should take those precious Sundays to spend some time with her family, not to meet with the press on national television’, it begs the question would he say the same thing about Obama?
Collins seems to contradict himself slightly in this article, and seems to just confirm some of the prejudices against Clinton for being too intelligent and headstrong and maybe too much of a ‘man’, which she has been criticised for by feminists as well.
Thursday, 17 April 2008
Will "elitist" label stick to Obama?
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/16/elitism/index.html
The above article captures, i believe, very much the essence of what we have been examining, articulating the paradoxical and slippery nature of political intelligence expectations in America.
First off, the irony-in contemplating and publicly analysing what they call "a potentially toxic image problem" the author Kristi Keck is arguably engaging- at least to an extent- in exactly the elitism on which she comments.
Keck goes onto set the background for the irony that laces the issue when she reminds that, beneath anything else, the presidential office is by its very nature an elitist position.
Accusations of elitism are, notes Keck, an ever-present trap in presidential campaigning, Obama's opponents, for example, jumped on a comment about small town residents bitter over gun laws. Hillary Clinton joined in the condemnation by branding Obama "elitist, out of touch, and frankly patronising".
Yet Clinton herself has by turns highlighted her privelaged education, whilst also posing for publicity shots with guns and beer.
Republicans have historically made a tactic out of portraying their Democratic rivals as the "liberal elite", placing emphasis on their ability to connect to the "everyman" in America.
What makes the difference, suggests Keck, is the way that a candidate responds to such allegations- former democratic candidates Kerry and Gore failed because, she says, they allowed such a label to stick.
However, that is not to say that fighting back does not pose its own risks, as a candidate could then be branded uppity and too un-elite.
Therefore, it again comes down to-as i have mentioned in a previous post- a candidates public approval and whether voters want to look positively on a stance, a situation that appears to have served Obama well so far.
In a quote from Dr. Drew Western of Emory University, Keck sums up the crux of the situation;
"I do think it speaks to one of the conflicts that Americans have about their leaders, which is that we want them to be like us, and we want them to be above us at the same time".
The above article captures, i believe, very much the essence of what we have been examining, articulating the paradoxical and slippery nature of political intelligence expectations in America.
First off, the irony-in contemplating and publicly analysing what they call "a potentially toxic image problem" the author Kristi Keck is arguably engaging- at least to an extent- in exactly the elitism on which she comments.
Keck goes onto set the background for the irony that laces the issue when she reminds that, beneath anything else, the presidential office is by its very nature an elitist position.
Accusations of elitism are, notes Keck, an ever-present trap in presidential campaigning, Obama's opponents, for example, jumped on a comment about small town residents bitter over gun laws. Hillary Clinton joined in the condemnation by branding Obama "elitist, out of touch, and frankly patronising".
Yet Clinton herself has by turns highlighted her privelaged education, whilst also posing for publicity shots with guns and beer.
Republicans have historically made a tactic out of portraying their Democratic rivals as the "liberal elite", placing emphasis on their ability to connect to the "everyman" in America.
What makes the difference, suggests Keck, is the way that a candidate responds to such allegations- former democratic candidates Kerry and Gore failed because, she says, they allowed such a label to stick.
However, that is not to say that fighting back does not pose its own risks, as a candidate could then be branded uppity and too un-elite.
Therefore, it again comes down to-as i have mentioned in a previous post- a candidates public approval and whether voters want to look positively on a stance, a situation that appears to have served Obama well so far.
In a quote from Dr. Drew Western of Emory University, Keck sums up the crux of the situation;
"I do think it speaks to one of the conflicts that Americans have about their leaders, which is that we want them to be like us, and we want them to be above us at the same time".
Wednesday, 16 April 2008
Obama's Bold Gamble on Race
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1723302,00.html
The above article comments on a speech that Barack Obama made in response to public concern about the racial views expressed by his own pastor.
The speech was particularly striking as it was Obama's first real departure from the strategy of treating race as a non-issue, in contrast to the tactics of Hillary Clinton, who has consistently made her gender a part of her campaign.
Obama had therefore been treading a fine line of commenting via not commenting, a tactic which also relies, to some extent, on public acceptance and confidence.
Without the latter, Obama's actions would, arguably, inevitably be seen as negative.
This particular, brand of appeal has been evident throughout the campaign.
Directly making race an "issue" was thus a huge risk, acknowledgement threatening presumed endorsement.
On an issue that those in power rarely asked the public themselves to confront, Obama handed just such a challenge to the people of America, not demanding that they came up with a definite answer, he sought only that Americans understand that there were no such answers.
Therefore, the speech arguably displayed an ambiguous, complex quality, but this could be said to reflect the nature of the subject itself.
It may not have been the simpler, definitive message prefered by politicians, but that commentators and the public allowed Obama to give this speech, and responded to it positively, is revealing of their connection to the candidate.
The above article comments on a speech that Barack Obama made in response to public concern about the racial views expressed by his own pastor.
The speech was particularly striking as it was Obama's first real departure from the strategy of treating race as a non-issue, in contrast to the tactics of Hillary Clinton, who has consistently made her gender a part of her campaign.
Obama had therefore been treading a fine line of commenting via not commenting, a tactic which also relies, to some extent, on public acceptance and confidence.
Without the latter, Obama's actions would, arguably, inevitably be seen as negative.
This particular, brand of appeal has been evident throughout the campaign.
Directly making race an "issue" was thus a huge risk, acknowledgement threatening presumed endorsement.
On an issue that those in power rarely asked the public themselves to confront, Obama handed just such a challenge to the people of America, not demanding that they came up with a definite answer, he sought only that Americans understand that there were no such answers.
Therefore, the speech arguably displayed an ambiguous, complex quality, but this could be said to reflect the nature of the subject itself.
It may not have been the simpler, definitive message prefered by politicians, but that commentators and the public allowed Obama to give this speech, and responded to it positively, is revealing of their connection to the candidate.
Hillary Clinton's "silly" Irish Peace Claims
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml&page=2
The above article reports on recent debate surrounding claims made by Hillary Clinton that, during her time as first lady, she "helped bring peace to Northern Ireland".
In doing so it raises many points about political intelligence and experience, the particularly American role of the 1st lady, and the influence of gender in a political campaign.
At stake here is firstly the question of what exactly constitutes "experience"- just how much does it matter?- and within that, ideas about the relative importance/influence carried by the role of first lady, and indeed, the role of a wife.
Her claims are imbued with gender influence when Clinton talks of hosting a meeting which bought Catholic and Protestant mothers together "for the first time", a declaration acceptable as a woman but also limited by its image as what Lord Trimble describes "a classic woman politicky sort of way".
This was also seen to collide with the cut and thrust of politics as commentators remember that particular meeting being crammed with reporters.
Gender again clashed with protocol when Hillary hugged and kissed Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness, a move that Lord Trimble suggested "lost all credibility".
But perhaps none of this matters-arguably what is interesting here is what Americans are prepared to accept, to believe, and the freedom allowed for in American political intelligence.
The above article reports on recent debate surrounding claims made by Hillary Clinton that, during her time as first lady, she "helped bring peace to Northern Ireland".
In doing so it raises many points about political intelligence and experience, the particularly American role of the 1st lady, and the influence of gender in a political campaign.
At stake here is firstly the question of what exactly constitutes "experience"- just how much does it matter?- and within that, ideas about the relative importance/influence carried by the role of first lady, and indeed, the role of a wife.
Her claims are imbued with gender influence when Clinton talks of hosting a meeting which bought Catholic and Protestant mothers together "for the first time", a declaration acceptable as a woman but also limited by its image as what Lord Trimble describes "a classic woman politicky sort of way".
This was also seen to collide with the cut and thrust of politics as commentators remember that particular meeting being crammed with reporters.
Gender again clashed with protocol when Hillary hugged and kissed Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness, a move that Lord Trimble suggested "lost all credibility".
But perhaps none of this matters-arguably what is interesting here is what Americans are prepared to accept, to believe, and the freedom allowed for in American political intelligence.
Wednesday, 26 March 2008
Stupid white men films
As i get ready for my presentation on 'stuid white men films' such as american pic and road trip. I was wondering whether anyone had any suggestions on topics they would like me to bring up? such as why these films are so populuar!! any suggestions would be helpful
Thursday, 13 March 2008
Anti Hillary
http://www.nohillaryforpresident.com/hillary-president-forum/
This website is a forum devoted against hillary clinton and many peoples views on the woman candidate. The site contains alot of useful information why people should not vote for Hillary Clinton. If you look at the site many people have there views on what is wrong about her campaign and views on how to run America.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm
This website goes through many of the issues that Hillary is bringing up in her campaign and comparing them to the issues that were won under other presidents. This is a useful site for information as you can see all the polices that she is fighting for. Also shows what the other presidents have commited themselves to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/17/usa.hillaryclinton
This site is an article which is written explaining how people are trying to find out the worse about Hillary and what issues they will bring up to get dirt on her. This shows the dirty side of politics where people are always trying to find dirt on you so they can move ahead.
This website is a forum devoted against hillary clinton and many peoples views on the woman candidate. The site contains alot of useful information why people should not vote for Hillary Clinton. If you look at the site many people have there views on what is wrong about her campaign and views on how to run America.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm
This website goes through many of the issues that Hillary is bringing up in her campaign and comparing them to the issues that were won under other presidents. This is a useful site for information as you can see all the polices that she is fighting for. Also shows what the other presidents have commited themselves to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/17/usa.hillaryclinton
This site is an article which is written explaining how people are trying to find out the worse about Hillary and what issues they will bring up to get dirt on her. This shows the dirty side of politics where people are always trying to find dirt on you so they can move ahead.
Monday, 10 March 2008
Anti-Hillary websites
- This website is against Hillary Clinton, as they see her as a 'generic female presidential candidate' that could not cope in the times we are living in - such as the War on Terror. It seems to suggest that this is a man's job at this moment in time, and this generic female would fare better in 'ordinary times'.
-They also see her as inflicting mistreatment on real-life women as much as her 'mysogynist' husband.
-There are many anti-Hillary posters, one even comparing her to Stalin.
-Videos to 'Vote Smart' - as a warning to all women against her.
-This website shows itself to be based on facts and not on gender...until the person who ran the website posted a recent blog 'I’m going to break one the cardinal rules that I set for this site, which was that we would not make gender an issue in this campaign'. If he is stating this now, surely this would have always been the case. He says how there are clear differences between men and women, because of not being able to deal with emotions. This person does not want a president who cries through all the struggles.
-Although advertised as a non-gender argument web-site, there is an advert at the bottom of the page which states 'I'm a stay at home mom, come see what i do to make thousands from home in my spare time'... suggesting a woman's place is at home, and not in the white house.
Answers being:
-"we came to the conclusion that it is because she is smart, articulate, accomplished. She is a policy wonk. Yes, in the end, people hate Hillary for the same reason that they distrust intellectuals, writers and other thinkers. The fact that they think at all."
-They also see her as inflicting mistreatment on real-life women as much as her 'mysogynist' husband.
-There are many anti-Hillary posters, one even comparing her to Stalin.
-Videos to 'Vote Smart' - as a warning to all women against her.
-This website shows itself to be based on facts and not on gender...until the person who ran the website posted a recent blog 'I’m going to break one the cardinal rules that I set for this site, which was that we would not make gender an issue in this campaign'. If he is stating this now, surely this would have always been the case. He says how there are clear differences between men and women, because of not being able to deal with emotions. This person does not want a president who cries through all the struggles.
-Although advertised as a non-gender argument web-site, there is an advert at the bottom of the page which states 'I'm a stay at home mom, come see what i do to make thousands from home in my spare time'... suggesting a woman's place is at home, and not in the white house.
- There are many websites which try to explain why people hate Hillary, and one in particular relates to what SISII has been talking about so far:
Answers being:
-"we came to the conclusion that it is because she is smart, articulate, accomplished. She is a policy wonk. Yes, in the end, people hate Hillary for the same reason that they distrust intellectuals, writers and other thinkers. The fact that they think at all."
Friday, 7 March 2008
Pro Hillary Clinton Websites: The interplay between notions of gender and other qualities
I have been investigating the presence of Hillary Clinton's supporters on the internet, and how perceptions of her gender are being enacted, and not enacted, in relation to other qualities in order to present her in a positive light.
On www.votehillary.org, a news item picks up on Clinton's recent endorsement by the American Nurses Association.
Here, the perceived centrality of women in the issue of healthcare and health care provision ( both literally, in the proliferation of women in nursing and as care-givers in the family)- the is played out alongside Hilary's pro position on universal care (a socialist, more caring approach?) and her power in being able to possibly turn this into governmental action.
As a women, "surrounding herself with nurses" is a powerful image, and one that could not work (at least, not so well) for a male candidate, as Clinton is seen to understand these nurses.
On www.hillaryclinton.com, a news item picks up on Women's History Month.
Here, Hillary's gender is enacted to display her solidarity and understanding of women's issues,
whilst her career- in traditionally male sphere's such as law, and now politics- is referenced to show how she has used her own personal achievements- and the development of that same womens history- to make a difference on these issues.
Whether Clinton has had to become more masculine in order to get ahead adds another dimension.
Additionally, in the menu of her opinions on individual issues, "champion of women" is listed as a section of its own.
On hillblazers.com- "Young Leaders for Hillary"- there is clearly a buzz about recent visits by Clinton's daughter, Chelsea, to universities around the US, during which Chelsea has spoken about her mother's plans to help families and students.
Firstly, its interesting to note that Chelsea is being used in part for this part of the campaign, perhaps as an indication that nothing is as powerful as a young voice to speak on youth issues, something Hillary could never authentically have.
In speaking for her mother, Chelsea is helping to enact Hillary's role as a mother and wife, as part of a family unit.
Interestingly, Chelsea appears to have achieved a little of the status of her mother, solidifying narratives of female achievement and highlighting one of mother-daughter closeness.
On www.votehillary.org, a news item picks up on Clinton's recent endorsement by the American Nurses Association.
Here, the perceived centrality of women in the issue of healthcare and health care provision ( both literally, in the proliferation of women in nursing and as care-givers in the family)- the is played out alongside Hilary's pro position on universal care (a socialist, more caring approach?) and her power in being able to possibly turn this into governmental action.
As a women, "surrounding herself with nurses" is a powerful image, and one that could not work (at least, not so well) for a male candidate, as Clinton is seen to understand these nurses.
On www.hillaryclinton.com, a news item picks up on Women's History Month.
Here, Hillary's gender is enacted to display her solidarity and understanding of women's issues,
whilst her career- in traditionally male sphere's such as law, and now politics- is referenced to show how she has used her own personal achievements- and the development of that same womens history- to make a difference on these issues.
Whether Clinton has had to become more masculine in order to get ahead adds another dimension.
Additionally, in the menu of her opinions on individual issues, "champion of women" is listed as a section of its own.
On hillblazers.com- "Young Leaders for Hillary"- there is clearly a buzz about recent visits by Clinton's daughter, Chelsea, to universities around the US, during which Chelsea has spoken about her mother's plans to help families and students.
Firstly, its interesting to note that Chelsea is being used in part for this part of the campaign, perhaps as an indication that nothing is as powerful as a young voice to speak on youth issues, something Hillary could never authentically have.
In speaking for her mother, Chelsea is helping to enact Hillary's role as a mother and wife, as part of a family unit.
Interestingly, Chelsea appears to have achieved a little of the status of her mother, solidifying narratives of female achievement and highlighting one of mother-daughter closeness.
Thursday, 6 March 2008
White Male Films
The possibly different ways in which Hollywood 'stupid white male' films (Waynes World, Bill and Ted, American Pie, etc.) are viewed and reviewed in the UK as opposed to in the US. Do British viewers, for example, tend to see these films as evidence of a general US 'stupidity'?
This is an interesting question to ask and one that can have an argument on both sides. Film such as 'American Pie' do give the UK public a bad conception of their american cousins. As it portrays them in such a way as to make them seem stupid and imature. But you can also see this from the other side where it is simple a comedy and is there to entertain people and make them laugh. The general audience for these films are ranged between 13 - 25. This is the so called 'MTV' Genertaion where people were brought up on TV and movies. If we look at the film Forest Gump, this portrays the life of a simple white man who achieves great things. Though he is seen as stupid, throughout the film you see what amazing thing's he does with his life. Many people see this as a perception of George Bush as his intelligence is always put to the test by the press and public,. but yet he is president of the united states of America. The films are showing that you dont have to be the smartest American to be sucessful but if luck falls your way you can still make it or live the ' American Dream'.
This is an interesting question to ask and one that can have an argument on both sides. Film such as 'American Pie' do give the UK public a bad conception of their american cousins. As it portrays them in such a way as to make them seem stupid and imature. But you can also see this from the other side where it is simple a comedy and is there to entertain people and make them laugh. The general audience for these films are ranged between 13 - 25. This is the so called 'MTV' Genertaion where people were brought up on TV and movies. If we look at the film Forest Gump, this portrays the life of a simple white man who achieves great things. Though he is seen as stupid, throughout the film you see what amazing thing's he does with his life. Many people see this as a perception of George Bush as his intelligence is always put to the test by the press and public,. but yet he is president of the united states of America. The films are showing that you dont have to be the smartest American to be sucessful but if luck falls your way you can still make it or live the ' American Dream'.
Friday, 29 February 2008
Third Meeting
Scheduled for 1pm Thursday 13 March (week 6) in my office again. Precise topic to emerge from this weblog - watch this space and get blogging!
Also think about your choice of topic for the presentation element of the module, to take place after Easter.
JD
Also think about your choice of topic for the presentation element of the module, to take place after Easter.
JD
Progress Report: Second/Third Meetings
Interesting discussion on 28 Feb. meeting re: the 'Mapping Stupidity' article. We considered how the stupidity/intelligence binary configures various relationships touched on in the article, especially the valency of the North/Southern USA, via such examples as Sweet Home Alabama and 'My Name is Earl,' as well as the Bush/Clinton/Forrest Gump paradigms. We also emphasised how for those with marginalised identities the strategy of 'playing stupid' is much more problematic. From there, we considered what was at stake in validations of Barack Obama's inexperience (notably by Robert de Niro) and in antifeminist contructions of Hillary Clinton.
In terms of future work, we identified the following as interesting directions to follow:
1. The ideologies brought to bear in pro- and anti-Hillary Clinton discourses, especially but not only in terms of the experience/inexperience issue in the Obama/Clinton campaign.
2. The possibly different ways in which Hollywood 'stupid white male' films (Waynes World, Bill and Ted, American Pie, etc.) are viewed and reviewed in the UK as opposed to in the US. Do British viewers, for example, tend to see these films as evidence of a general US 'stupidity'?
Russell and Philippa agreed to investigate these respectively and post their findings. John could you either add a third interest, or contribute to these?
thanks
JD
In terms of future work, we identified the following as interesting directions to follow:
1. The ideologies brought to bear in pro- and anti-Hillary Clinton discourses, especially but not only in terms of the experience/inexperience issue in the Obama/Clinton campaign.
2. The possibly different ways in which Hollywood 'stupid white male' films (Waynes World, Bill and Ted, American Pie, etc.) are viewed and reviewed in the UK as opposed to in the US. Do British viewers, for example, tend to see these films as evidence of a general US 'stupidity'?
Russell and Philippa agreed to investigate these respectively and post their findings. John could you either add a third interest, or contribute to these?
thanks
JD
Wednesday, 27 February 2008
Reflections on Stupid White Men: Toward a political mapping of stupidity
This piece drew me to consider issues of power and identity.
-Where stupidity would normally be considered a negative identity, it is interesting to note that America has been able to powerfully reappropriate it, to give it an additional, more positive context- something that perhaps a more marginalised group would not be "permitted" to do.
Moreover it reveals a confidence in the use of this power.
-Clearly there are levels at which the guise of stupidity can and cannot be used, that it is employed domestically suggests that it is something that the American public genuinely responds to.
-The place of stupidity in creating a sense of redemption, reconciliation- simplicity at the base of therapuetic community, which America has historically and powerfully deployed as a response to trauma.
-Where stupidity would normally be considered a negative identity, it is interesting to note that America has been able to powerfully reappropriate it, to give it an additional, more positive context- something that perhaps a more marginalised group would not be "permitted" to do.
Moreover it reveals a confidence in the use of this power.
-Clearly there are levels at which the guise of stupidity can and cannot be used, that it is employed domestically suggests that it is something that the American public genuinely responds to.
-The place of stupidity in creating a sense of redemption, reconciliation- simplicity at the base of therapuetic community, which America has historically and powerfully deployed as a response to trauma.
Sunday, 24 February 2008
Last Meeting
The meeting we just had was a good one for a starting point for a module. Alot of interesting points came up such as George Bush and Television. These will be interesting topics to study throughout the semester.Although myself, I am more interested in the sporting side of American culture this can still be adapted in this module via David Beckham.Overall a good meeting with some topics that interest me.
Response to 'Transnational American Studies'
-The “stupid white man” being seen as ‘rejuvenating conservative forms of straight white masculinity into the public sphere’ in the 1990s-2000s is what gives the ‘dumb’ view of America to other countries, especially those in Europe.
-I found interesting reading the idea of American stupidity vs. English intelligence, and how the two world leaders were viewed differently over the same subject of the war in Iraq. ‘Bush is an idiot, but what is Blair’s excuse?’ is a quote that struck me because although it is clear that both leaders were untruthful, they were treated in different ways because of how they addressed their nations, with Blair being more resented because of being ‘intelligent’. Bush’s reputation was far less damaged by taking a moralistic ground.
-The way the article ends with ‘the consequences of stupidity, in the forms of misrecognition and failure to plan, can be catastrophic’, can relate to an article I found ‘Why Bush’s stupidity is a threat’ by Matthew Yglesias:
http://www.alternet.org/story/39770/
:“The real problem is that the risk of a wider regional war involving the United States remains. And if that risk becomes a reality, our country will be led into it by a president who doesn't seem to grasp what's happening.”
-The idea of the stupidity being hilarious…until something uncontrollable happens is further explored in this article, because Bush seems to not really know what is going on around him. It seems like this ‘desired presidential quality’ (quote from West Wing) of stupidity could cause major repercussions.
-Towards the end of the Transnational American Studies article is mentioned how the emergence of the ‘stupid white men’ came at a time when other identity movements were becoming stronger such as civil rights, gay and lesbian and femininity, so I would have liked to have read more about how this may have left white men looking for a new identity so that their power was not so under threat - the idea of the ‘crisis of white masculinity’. This is an area I would like to study further into, as I could relate it to my FYP as well, with the early 90s a time period I am looking at with gay identity in contemporary American film.
-I found interesting reading the idea of American stupidity vs. English intelligence, and how the two world leaders were viewed differently over the same subject of the war in Iraq. ‘Bush is an idiot, but what is Blair’s excuse?’ is a quote that struck me because although it is clear that both leaders were untruthful, they were treated in different ways because of how they addressed their nations, with Blair being more resented because of being ‘intelligent’. Bush’s reputation was far less damaged by taking a moralistic ground.
-The way the article ends with ‘the consequences of stupidity, in the forms of misrecognition and failure to plan, can be catastrophic’, can relate to an article I found ‘Why Bush’s stupidity is a threat’ by Matthew Yglesias:
http://www.alternet.org/story/39770/
:“The real problem is that the risk of a wider regional war involving the United States remains. And if that risk becomes a reality, our country will be led into it by a president who doesn't seem to grasp what's happening.”
-The idea of the stupidity being hilarious…until something uncontrollable happens is further explored in this article, because Bush seems to not really know what is going on around him. It seems like this ‘desired presidential quality’ (quote from West Wing) of stupidity could cause major repercussions.
-Towards the end of the Transnational American Studies article is mentioned how the emergence of the ‘stupid white men’ came at a time when other identity movements were becoming stronger such as civil rights, gay and lesbian and femininity, so I would have liked to have read more about how this may have left white men looking for a new identity so that their power was not so under threat - the idea of the ‘crisis of white masculinity’. This is an area I would like to study further into, as I could relate it to my FYP as well, with the early 90s a time period I am looking at with gay identity in contemporary American film.
Friday, 8 February 2008
Friday, 30 November 2007
Helpful sites
This website may also be useful for Kevin as its a military site and can lead to army, navy etc. sites. If you go through the search you can find articles.
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters
Wednesday, 28 November 2007
Presentation
The journal article I am looking at for my presentation is
The Work of Sex Work: Elite Prostitutes Vocational Orientations and Experiences
The Work of Sex Work: Elite Prostitutes Vocational Orientations and Experiences
| | Ann Lucas. The Work of Sex Work: Elite Prostitutes' Vocational Orientations and Experiences. Deviant Behavior, Volume 26, Number 6 (November 2005), pp. 513-546. and can be seen here:
| |||
Presentation
This is the article that i am looking at for the presentation.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0419-11.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0419-11.htm
Presentation
Just thought I would post the link to the article I plan to use as my secondary source in case anyone wants to look at it before hand.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/1/hanson.htm
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/1/hanson.htm
Thursday, 15 November 2007
Session 3: Sarah's Primary Source
Henriques, F. DR., Prostitution in Europe and the New World (Volume Two of Prostitution and Society), (London: Macgibbon & Kee, 1963), pp. 356 & 357.
(From the chapter The Contemporary Situation in The U.S.A.)
‘Today, although the brothel still operates in the United States, it is our contention that the emphasis is much more on the call girl. Let us consider how life is organized by a successful member of this profession. The really top-class call girl will earn an income amounting to $20,000 dollars a year, and this of course is tax free. Each transaction would cost the client from twenty to a hundred dollars. The more he demanded in terms of time or performance the higher the fee. Against this large income a number of expenses have to be set. Rent is a prominent item. The girl’s apartment, which may have to be used for business if the client does not wish to go to a hotel or to his own apartment, must be situated in an expensive quarter. Normally, the rent will be high but it may become even higher than usual if the girl’s profession is known to the owner or his representatives. The average will be about three hundred dollars a month. An essential for her work is the telephone. An answering service, such as doctors use, is contracted for. Throughout the day the number will be phoned by the call girl to see who has rung up, and then contact is made with each client. The cost of such a service amounts to forty-five dollars a month.
Clothing is a significant part of the expenditure. The call girl at the top of her profession must dress accordingly. That is to say she must have a wardrobe which enables her to go anywhere, to the best hotels and places of entertainment; she must be dressed in the height of fashion, but not vulgarly. This expenditure is associated with morale spending in times of mental depression. Not all clothes are bought retail as, through her connections with the underworld, stolen goods may be purchased. Again, grateful clients who are in the garment industry may assist by gifts, and so on.
A girl who entertains a high percentage of her clients in her apartment has to face a considerable bill for laundry - clean sheets may have to be provided for each customer. Beauty aids, perfume, and hairdressing are all items on which large sums are expended. Visits to the doctor are imperative - for the monthly check-up. Fees charged may be higher than those for ordinary patients but have to be paid just the same. It does appear that the V.D. rate is low among the top flight prostitutes. If the necessity for an abortion arises this is obtainable but the cost may be as high as three thousand dollars.
The attitude towards contraception is curious. Many girls are forgetful or do not like to use a device. Many clients refuse to wear a sheath. In these circumstances one might imagine the pregnancy rate to be high. This is not borne out by the facts. A common belief is so long as they are continually sexually active they will not conceive - the theory being that different kinds of semen neutralize each other. There is, of course, no scientific backing for such a theory. On the other hand, the low incidence of pregnancies may come to the same category as that resulting from youthful promiscuity in many parts of the world.’
(From the chapter The Contemporary Situation in The U.S.A.)
‘Today, although the brothel still operates in the United States, it is our contention that the emphasis is much more on the call girl. Let us consider how life is organized by a successful member of this profession. The really top-class call girl will earn an income amounting to $20,000 dollars a year, and this of course is tax free. Each transaction would cost the client from twenty to a hundred dollars. The more he demanded in terms of time or performance the higher the fee. Against this large income a number of expenses have to be set. Rent is a prominent item. The girl’s apartment, which may have to be used for business if the client does not wish to go to a hotel or to his own apartment, must be situated in an expensive quarter. Normally, the rent will be high but it may become even higher than usual if the girl’s profession is known to the owner or his representatives. The average will be about three hundred dollars a month. An essential for her work is the telephone. An answering service, such as doctors use, is contracted for. Throughout the day the number will be phoned by the call girl to see who has rung up, and then contact is made with each client. The cost of such a service amounts to forty-five dollars a month.
Clothing is a significant part of the expenditure. The call girl at the top of her profession must dress accordingly. That is to say she must have a wardrobe which enables her to go anywhere, to the best hotels and places of entertainment; she must be dressed in the height of fashion, but not vulgarly. This expenditure is associated with morale spending in times of mental depression. Not all clothes are bought retail as, through her connections with the underworld, stolen goods may be purchased. Again, grateful clients who are in the garment industry may assist by gifts, and so on.
A girl who entertains a high percentage of her clients in her apartment has to face a considerable bill for laundry - clean sheets may have to be provided for each customer. Beauty aids, perfume, and hairdressing are all items on which large sums are expended. Visits to the doctor are imperative - for the monthly check-up. Fees charged may be higher than those for ordinary patients but have to be paid just the same. It does appear that the V.D. rate is low among the top flight prostitutes. If the necessity for an abortion arises this is obtainable but the cost may be as high as three thousand dollars.
The attitude towards contraception is curious. Many girls are forgetful or do not like to use a device. Many clients refuse to wear a sheath. In these circumstances one might imagine the pregnancy rate to be high. This is not borne out by the facts. A common belief is so long as they are continually sexually active they will not conceive - the theory being that different kinds of semen neutralize each other. There is, of course, no scientific backing for such a theory. On the other hand, the low incidence of pregnancies may come to the same category as that resulting from youthful promiscuity in many parts of the world.’
Tuesday, 13 November 2007
Session 3
My primary text for session 3 is the defence budget of the US. Although this is supposed to be a primary text for the lesson the real US budget is 401 pages of mostly useless information. So to make it easier for everyone to look at it in time for tomorrows meeting I’m using this website as my source.
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp
New and final FYP idea!
In my final year project I aim to look at the permanent war time economy of America. In the dissertation I will focus on how America as a nation since World War Two has changed from a traditional stance of isolationism to a global military power. By examining how the nature of the Cold War shaped America’s perception of War and the military I aim to show how America’s “military industrial complex” has influenced the identity of the nation.
A series of flash points during the Cold War such as the Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam and the Berlin blockade defied traditional conventions by distorting the definition between War and Peace. Because of the changing nature of warfare during the Cold War I aim to show how America’s military economy has become a permanent part of the nations character. Especially as the Cold War has been replaced by the War on Terror.
From the Truman Doctrine to the present day America has believed it has the duty to interfere in World affairs, something traditionally America has avoided. This study will show how American policy has changed since World War Two. As well as how America’s “military industrial complex” has created a global military power, which has consistently abused its position as a superpower to influence regions for its own national advantage.
A series of flash points during the Cold War such as the Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam and the Berlin blockade defied traditional conventions by distorting the definition between War and Peace. Because of the changing nature of warfare during the Cold War I aim to show how America’s military economy has become a permanent part of the nations character. Especially as the Cold War has been replaced by the War on Terror.
From the Truman Doctrine to the present day America has believed it has the duty to interfere in World affairs, something traditionally America has avoided. This study will show how American policy has changed since World War Two. As well as how America’s “military industrial complex” has created a global military power, which has consistently abused its position as a superpower to influence regions for its own national advantage.
Thursday, 18 October 2007
FYP Outline - Prostitution in the US
The aim of my FYP is to look at prostitution within the US. Regarding it’s history during the ‘Wild West’ period (the 1800’s), looking at the ‘soiled doves’ of the West and women such as Calamity Jane. There are stories of the prostitutes of that era doing well for themselves and marrying mayors and suchlike, I wish to look more closely at these.
I plan to investigate the results of the ban introduced between 1910 and 1915 in most US states, why it has remained legal within parts of Nevada. Moving forward I plan to focus on the legalised brothels that exist in Nevada, the treatment of the women working within them and the media depiction of these places, which have spawned television shows such as Cathouse (about the Moonlight Bunny Ranch). I will aim to discover whether the treatment of the workers is infact as the documentaries show or if there is a darker side to the business. Comparing the prostitutes of the ‘Wild West’ and the present day, I aim to look into whether it would have been better to have been a sex worker then or now in the present day.
Jude's piece of writing for session 2
For my contribution to session 2, I have chosen a forthcoming article entitled: 'Stupid White Men: Toward a Political Mapping of Stupidity.' Because it exists as a pdf file, I can't post it here and will instead email it to group members. Don't feel obliged to read it! However it may be of some interest.
The essay tries to tackle the question of the apparent power of 'stupidity' as a pose, or a performance, in contemporary American culture. In a way, the most obvious example was in the way that George W Bush's 2000 and 2004 election campaigns promoted Bush's persona against that of his opponents - that by being ignorant, Bush was a dependable normal guy, while his Democrat opponents were untrustworthy because they were too intelligent (and hence lacked sympathy/understanding of ordinary people.) Thus stupidity works here in a tradition of American anti-intellectualism. This tradition was mapped by historian Richard Hofstadter in the early 1960s, as discussed in the essay.
In the wake of McCarthyism, Hofstadter identified the power of stupidity as belonging to the political right. However, since the early 1960s things have become more complex. First, people across the spectrum use stupidity - Michael Moore for example. Moreover, as Europeans, we have to guard against the self-serving assumption that we are cultured/sophisticated/clever and Americans are dumb. In the article then, I tried to work out some of these issues, by starting to map out some ways in which 'stupidity' functions at the intersection of politics and culture in the USA.
The essay tries to tackle the question of the apparent power of 'stupidity' as a pose, or a performance, in contemporary American culture. In a way, the most obvious example was in the way that George W Bush's 2000 and 2004 election campaigns promoted Bush's persona against that of his opponents - that by being ignorant, Bush was a dependable normal guy, while his Democrat opponents were untrustworthy because they were too intelligent (and hence lacked sympathy/understanding of ordinary people.) Thus stupidity works here in a tradition of American anti-intellectualism. This tradition was mapped by historian Richard Hofstadter in the early 1960s, as discussed in the essay.
In the wake of McCarthyism, Hofstadter identified the power of stupidity as belonging to the political right. However, since the early 1960s things have become more complex. First, people across the spectrum use stupidity - Michael Moore for example. Moreover, as Europeans, we have to guard against the self-serving assumption that we are cultured/sophisticated/clever and Americans are dumb. In the article then, I tried to work out some of these issues, by starting to map out some ways in which 'stupidity' functions at the intersection of politics and culture in the USA.
Canon
Issues of identity and national tradition are crucial when thinking about the canon. Most people accept that the canon changes over time, because its primary function is to connect people with the past (usually, the past conceived of in terms of a nation.) Traditions are dynamic things, mediating between the present and the past. They have to change a little or they die. So again most people accepted that it was important to bring in previously excluded writers (eg women, people of colour). The more difficult question arises when such inclusiveness (as Donadio hints) results in the affirmation of specific identities - in particular she characterises African American Studies as being simply about celebrating AA culture. This leads then to all sorts of worries that education just becomes about affirming who people are, that national identity is fragmented into lots of little groups, etc. For my part, there is something in these fears, though I think they are somewhat exaggerated and one-sided, for the following reasons:
1. Good examples of such courses are not simply affirmative. They draw attention to debates and conflicts within identity groups and their relation to nations.
2. Although more traditional canoncal writers (the 'dead white males') rarely deliberately wrote with the intention of affirming white masculinity, it is undeniable that even their notions of 'universal' values were shaped by their own identities. So there's no disinterested, transcendent, set of cultural values embedded in the canon.
3. Above all, it seems to me, the whole point of engaging in depth with culture of any sort is a kind of encounter with difference. It's not about affirming, it's about encountering - and encountering is always a mixed, two-way process.
1. Good examples of such courses are not simply affirmative. They draw attention to debates and conflicts within identity groups and their relation to nations.
2. Although more traditional canoncal writers (the 'dead white males') rarely deliberately wrote with the intention of affirming white masculinity, it is undeniable that even their notions of 'universal' values were shaped by their own identities. So there's no disinterested, transcendent, set of cultural values embedded in the canon.
3. Above all, it seems to me, the whole point of engaging in depth with culture of any sort is a kind of encounter with difference. It's not about affirming, it's about encountering - and encountering is always a mixed, two-way process.
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
FYP - Is Iraq Another Vietnam
I am going to look at the debate surrounding whether the Iraq War can be called the new Vietnam. To do this I am going to look at the similarities that have been drawn to compare them. But also on the differences, no matter how little they seem, to see if there any core differences that help to provide evidence that the wars are two individual wars which have to be looked at for there own significance in the world. Or if in fact Vietnam’s failure are being seen in Iraq, this will be able show if America really needs to learn from their past in the policies that they make today.
I will look at the impact of the media during both wars. For Vietnam this is the idea of the first televised war and with Iraq I will focus on the way in which the war is being fought on the internet. I will also study the methods and tactics of both wars to be able to see if both wars can be seen as fighting against guerrilla tactics and whether the military can win against these tactics. And finally I will look the reasons behind the war and whether they can be seen as a just cause or American interference.
FYP outline
This is just a brief description of my fyp. It's basically what I used for the fyp 2 form.
I aim to look at the relationship between Britain and its thirteen North American colonies in the build up to the American war of Independence. I will focus on whether the colonies breaking away from Britain was inevitable or if events could have turned out differently.
This study will focus on the policies of the British government and the reaction of the colonies to the laws forced upon them. The project will also look at the influence of other factors that led to the colonies wanting Independence. Those factors range from population size, to the potential of America’s economy and the origins of settlers. Britain’s treatment of Quebec compared to the thirteen colonies is another key issue I will focus on. The difference between America’s origins and rise to Independence compared to colonies, such as Australia and Canada is another topic that I plan to use to show America’s inevitable break away for Independence.
To get a sense of how the build up to war began I will look at political writings of the time and what they can tell us about popular support for independence in the colonies. Newspapers and pamphlets of the time were a key instrument in inciting popular support for the revolution. The effect of the Stamp act and the influence of the press helped encourage anti-British ideas throughout North America.
The first year of the Revolutionary War has been described as a ‘phoney war’ it was not until The Declaration of Independence late in 1776 that it seemed certain American would break away from British rule. I plan to argue that the War for Independence was inevitable but it could have happened at a different time.
I aim to look at the relationship between Britain and its thirteen North American colonies in the build up to the American war of Independence. I will focus on whether the colonies breaking away from Britain was inevitable or if events could have turned out differently.
This study will focus on the policies of the British government and the reaction of the colonies to the laws forced upon them. The project will also look at the influence of other factors that led to the colonies wanting Independence. Those factors range from population size, to the potential of America’s economy and the origins of settlers. Britain’s treatment of Quebec compared to the thirteen colonies is another key issue I will focus on. The difference between America’s origins and rise to Independence compared to colonies, such as Australia and Canada is another topic that I plan to use to show America’s inevitable break away for Independence.
To get a sense of how the build up to war began I will look at political writings of the time and what they can tell us about popular support for independence in the colonies. Newspapers and pamphlets of the time were a key instrument in inciting popular support for the revolution. The effect of the Stamp act and the influence of the press helped encourage anti-British ideas throughout North America.
The first year of the Revolutionary War has been described as a ‘phoney war’ it was not until The Declaration of Independence late in 1776 that it seemed certain American would break away from British rule. I plan to argue that the War for Independence was inevitable but it could have happened at a different time.
Canon
'Hey, Dickens was a pulp writer, Tolstoy a sexual maniac and heretic, Twain was satirical... ;-)
Btw, Shakespeare was for quite some time considered as anything but respectable (especially for his lack of decency and the general lewdness of his texts).
'Novel' was in the beginning a "low" genre and not in the same league as epics or classical drama, the German "Roman" was even less reputable. I hear the same was true in China were it was a major faux pas to use the word for novel in the same sentence as those for "true" literature.
The canon has its fashions too.'
I think this quote sums it up nicely that fashions change what is now considered a classic wasn't always thought of that way. It's interesting to think what could be thought of as a classic in the future I just hope its not Harry Potter!
Btw, Shakespeare was for quite some time considered as anything but respectable (especially for his lack of decency and the general lewdness of his texts).
'Novel' was in the beginning a "low" genre and not in the same league as epics or classical drama, the German "Roman" was even less reputable. I hear the same was true in China were it was a major faux pas to use the word for novel in the same sentence as those for "true" literature.
The canon has its fashions too.'
I think this quote sums it up nicely that fashions change what is now considered a classic wasn't always thought of that way. It's interesting to think what could be thought of as a classic in the future I just hope its not Harry Potter!
Tuesday, 16 October 2007
Canon
“I'm always a little amused by the failure of many to see the circularity of the arguments in regards to "the canon." Of course these authors "continue to appeal across generations" -- they're taught in English classes beginning in grade school and continuing through college and grad school. What opportunity do more contemporary -- I'm talking mid-to-late 20th century here -- writers have to become part of the canon if their works aren't studied and taught?”
I agree with this comment that nothing new can become a canon if they are not introduced into the school texts. If new texts are slowly brought into the education text then over time they too could become a canon. This is not to say that I don’t believe the books that are presently studied at schools are not valuable but then there are some modern books that could have a place in English classes and could themselves become over time canons.
I agree with this comment that nothing new can become a canon if they are not introduced into the school texts. If new texts are slowly brought into the education text then over time they too could become a canon. This is not to say that I don’t believe the books that are presently studied at schools are not valuable but then there are some modern books that could have a place in English classes and could themselves become over time canons.
Thursday, 4 October 2007
Revisiting the Canon Wars
I found this site, which is a reply to the article . Its only a short piece but their are a lot of comments posted as well. Some of the comments make a good argument so are worth flicking through.
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2007/09/canon-fires.html
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2007/09/canon-fires.html
Sunday, 23 September 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)