Social Media in Action

[yesbrooklyngstuff-blog]

LGBT* Individuals of the Bible Belt: Marginalized and Systematically Oppressed

In the documentary Me at The Zoo, it explores the life of Chris Crocker, an internet sensation famous for his “Leave Brittany Alone” video that went viral back in 2007. Chris Crocker, while insanely popular online, was not so popular in his “small-minded” hometown, Bristol, Tennessee. The film focuses on Crocker’s life in the southeast U.S. and the problems that he had faced turning that time in his life. Just like many other members of the LGBTQ community living in the Bible Belt, he faced a lot of adversity regarding his sexuality and the way he appeared physically to the people he lived around. I argue that because of the institutionalized oppression of LGBTQ members in this specific area of the country, the members turn to connecting in person with people going through similar situations by using the internet, turning to creative outlets like social media, and often boycotting the public school systems all together.

The way that some people cope with the systematic oppression in the south is by using the internet to connect with other individuals who are in similar positions socially. Due to the marginalization of LGBTQ members in the south, many groups hold conventions to include one another and to bring a sense of community to people who are usually ‘outcasts’ within that particular society. In the documentary Southern Comfort, it follows the life of Robert Eads, who is a transgender male living in the south in the year 2001. In this documentary, it shows Eads attending what is known as the Southern Comfort Transgender Conference, which is a major transgender conference held in Atlanta, Georgia annually. News regarding the conference is spread via internet today, and they even have their own website. Without access to this information, many members of the LGBTQ community would be unaware of the organizations that are present in this region. Today, there are many grassroots organizations that have been founded to help shed light on the issues in the south. One of the largest is the LGBT* In the South, which collects donations to help members of the LGBTQ community who are struggling. Although most organizations were founded recently, even Chris Crocker turned to the internet for solidarity.

The use of the internet, more specifically social media, can be an excellent outlet for those who feel socially confined in the place where they live. In Chris Crocker’s case, this was everything. His videos gave him a way to connect with likeminded individuals without leaving the safety of his home. Like many LGBTQ members living in the south, Crocker was confined to live and act a certain way. Thanks to sites like YouTube and Myspace, Crocker found a group that would listen and appreciate him like his peers would not. Social media is extremely beneficial to these people because it provides a space to express themselves without the negative attention that they would normally receive in real life. On social media, it is possible to represent yourself any way that you see fit, and that is why it is so helpful in showing LGBTQ members that there are healthy, creative outlets for possible anger and frustration they feel that is brought on by where they live. Not only does social media provide complete creative freedom for the oppressed group, it may also save them from isolation from their peers and other people their age in the chance that they must be removed from certain aspects of society.

In the case of Chris Crocker, the bullying that occurred in his youth at school was the tipping point. Not long after the incidents at school, Crocker turned to homeschooling instead. This type of behavior is not uncommon for LGBTQ individuals who are targeted both by their peers and the public education system. For other members of the LGBTQ community, being homeschooled is sometimes not an option. According to the YRBS, LGBTQ members were “140% more likely to not go to school at least one day during the 30 days prior to the survey because of safety concerns, compared with heterosexual students” (CDC). The risks of being in the south and being a part of the LGBTQ community only amplifies the likeliness to boycott the public school system. The issue with the system is that it is not all inclusive and does not aim to protect every individual student. Due to the lack of protection by the schools, LGBTQ members are more likely to drop out, which is why according to the NYCLU, is why the “transgender population unemployment rate is “twice the rate of the general population” (NYCLU). This shows that the systematic oppression of LGBTQ youth in the public school system not only effects the children while they are young, but also follows them throughout their life. 

In places like the Bristol, Tennessee, Chris Crocker lived a life of physical isolation due to the bigotry in his small town. Thanks to outlets like the internet and social media, Crocker, along with other LGBTQ members, are able to find support physically by attending meet-ups, and also non physically by connecting on the internet. The use of social media also plays a large part in creating an outlet in which the youth is welcome and encouraged to be themselves. Due to the lack of support from the public school system, these individuals must find a way to survive in a place where they are not welcomed. If there are no outlets for these people to turn to, the percentage of drop-outs and unemployment will only continue to rise. To be productive in society, these people must be taught that there is a place for them, and without that they will continue to be marginalized.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq0X4a79gMg

[yesbrooklyngstuff-blog]

Misrepresentation of Women: By a Woman

The representation of women in film and media has been skewed for a long time. The idea that women are completely misrepresented in media is not a new concept. I argue that the media’s portrayal of women is based on their beauty and sexuality rather than their capacity to be leaders because of a systematic disapproval of professional women, stereotypes placed upon powerful women by society, and societies obsession with beauty.

The systematic disapproval of women is an idea that has been instated into mostly all societies by the patriarchal view that we, as a society, have subsequently bought into. When women are represented in media, they are judged and ridiculed by their beauty and youth rather than their power. Often times, women are shown doing “women’s work” or fulfilling a “woman's role” rather than focusing on a career or their own life like their male counterparts. A good example of this is in the hit TV franchise The Real Housewives. This show revolves around wealthy women and their lives as stay at home moms while they gallivant around their gated communities while their husbands work 9-5. TV shows like this perpetuate the stigma that women are not valued on their ability to work, but rather how beautiful and elegant they are. Historically speaking, women have been the primary care-takers, mothers, and delegators of all things home related. It seems as though their area of jurisdiction lies within the home, rather than outside of it. Typically, mothers are seen as all-knowing beings regarding home economics, rather socially legitimate in dealing with real world problems their children may face. This idea of stereotyping all women into one category of ‘mother’ or ‘care-taker’ further perpetuates the idea that women cannot succeed in a professional setting and that they should instead stick to these old stigmas instead of advancing in the work force.

Along with the ideas of stereotypes regarding what women should and should not do comes the stereotype regarding professionally successful women. Women in media, especially women with power, are seen as bossy when compared to their male counterparts. “Globally, the proportion of senior business roles held by women stands at 24%” by this standard, there is 2.4 women for every 10 men in high level roles within business. This divide shows that not only are women underrepresented in a real economy, but also in the media. A comparison that comes to mind when I think about the portrayal of powerful men and women in media is The Wolf of Wall Street versus The Devil Wears Prada. Both movies show a powerful person who is wealthy and has a lot of social reach, but they way that these two are portrayed is vastly different. Leonardo DiCaprio’s character Jordan Belfort is shown as a man who works his way up the social ladder on Wall Street, focuses on making money for all of his friends and employees, and is the main protagonist of the movie even though what he is doing to make his money is insanely illegal. The Devil Wears Prada, on the other hand, shows a bitter Meryl Streep who plays a “diabolical editor Miranda Priestly”. The sheer difference in how these two similar characters are thought of by viewers is why this stigma that powerful women are nasty and bossy even exists.

Societies obsession with women has been around for a lot longer than the invention of the television. Every time you turn on a TV or surf the web, you are constantly bombarded with advertisements for anti-wrinkle cream, creams that make your lips bigger and your pores smaller, creams that make your hair grow an inch a day. You name it, there’s an advertisement out there for it. The problem with this is that it further drives into the minds of women, especially teenagers and younger women, that they are judged by how taught their skin is and how radiant they look. Along with advertisements, the media also pushes the idea that beauty is everything onto women by constantly showing them what “real beauty” looks like. The celebrities that people see every single day are, by societies standard, the definition of conventional beauty. These celebrities and models looks nothing like actual people, which is why these standards are so damaging for women. The women that they see idolized are the exact women that they will constantly strive to be, and yet still never feel satisfaction from living in their own skin. The media does an excellent job at singling out women and flaunting their insecurities by offering countless outlets and solutions to their beauty crises. If a woman is feeling overweight, there are ads that play for liposuction and P90X. If a woman is feeling inadequate with how her face looks, she sees ads for plastic surgery and contouring makeup. This type of advertising perpetuates the idea that for a woman to be accepted in society, she must conform to these beauty standards.

Society’s role in regards to women is so backwards that if you look at it critically, you can see how damaging it actually is for women. Women in today’s world do not stand a chance due to the perpetuation of ‘stay at home mom’ culture, the stereotypes faced by women when they do become successful, and how the beauty standards we have created leave women feeling inadequate. For women to be represented fairly and treated fairly in society, we must leave behind these old ideas and encourage women everywhere that beauty is not defined by her motherhood, her complacency in the workplace, or her waist size, but rather by her stature as the badass person she really is, a woman.

[yesbrooklyngstuff-blog]

Television: Middle Class Kryptonite

Television has been a key role in the lives of Americans since the 1940’s. Television sales swept the nation during this time and made individual access to news and television sitcoms widely popular among viewers. Before this time, people would have to go out to see a film or buy the daily paper to read the news. I argue that the invention of television paved the way for the creation of a culture that romanticizes the idea of the ‘American Dream’, defines personal success by how much money you make, and outlines racial differences within society.

The concept of the ‘American Dream’ has been an idea that has been established in society for about as long as television has been around. The ‘American Dream’ is defined as “the ideal that every US citizen should have an equal opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative” (Dictionary.com). The idea of the ‘American Dream’ in turn perpetuates the idea of the ideal lifestyle. Because of this, television has worked to perpetuate this dream by creating shows that people can look to and try and relate with. An example of this mentality can be seen in the show Step by Step that was popular in the 1990’s. The episodes hold no real depth to them, but rather show of the family encountering a problem, facing the diversity the problem brings, and then coming together at the end of the show for a resolution. The family is living the ‘American Dream’ in a large house in a suburban neighborhood, and the characters do not discuss real issues like finances. Although this show came forty years post television boom, the same ideals can still be seen. Television works to romanticize the ‘American Dream’ and inspires viewers to believe that these perfect lives actually exist.

Along with the ‘American Dream’, television works to encourage audiences to define and compare their personal success with characters on television shows. Television does an excellent job at exploiting viewers which leads said viewers to equate their success to the success of the character. A modern example of this is the Kardashian family. The Kardashian family is filthy rich and they made their fortune by simply being in the public eye. The TV show, Keeping Up with the Kardashians shows what everyday life is like for this family. For the most part, the members of this family can usually be found driving around Los Angeles shopping and avoiding paparazzi or simply hanging out at any of their multi-million dollar Calabasas homes. Since this family is always in the spot light of the media, their television show attracts a lot of viewers. The Kardashians are millionaires and due to the flaunting of their lifestyle, their success projects an unrealistic expectation for the quality of life for the average American. The Kardashians version of a job is starting a company that people will instantly follow simply because it is a Kardashian brand. Due of the intense financial gap between the shows viewers and the Kardashians, the idea of ‘success’ becomes relative which leads, in turn, to individual personal success being defined by how much money someone makes and completely disregards any other asset of their life. 

Television undoubtedly paints unrealistic pictures of how the average American lives, but the largest problem I have seen is how different racial differences are represented in television. From the documentary Class Dismissed, the differences in social class representation on television is explored. Television shows exploit racial diversity by representing certain races in a way that is mutually exclusive. For example, shows that depict a well off African American family, such as Run’s House, disguises actual social differences between different racial groups. This is not to say that African American’s cannot be wealthy, but television has a hard time showing relatable characters to certain communities. Television shows that ignore racial differences further sever the gap between racial communities, which as a result can overshadow real life issues like racism.  Minorities face adversity every day that is not frequently shown in these kinds of shows, and I believe that the middle class viewers only tolerate minority representation in television is because the characters are living the ‘American Dream’. 

The television we see today has done a better job at showing diversity in their programs, yet the same issues with television that existed 20 years ago still exist today. The concept that the ‘American Dream’ is the best way to live has been pushed onto viewers, and this push has made people believe that their success is relative to celebrities and wealthy characters by providing an unrealistic expectation for their lives. Along with this misrepresentation of the average American life, the problems faced by actual minority groups are only seen in relativity to this standard of life. Television is very toxic and dangerous and I think that every show must be taken with a large grain of salt.

[yesbrooklyngstuff-blog]

Sports and Politics: Why Americans are Divided Now More Than Ever

In the documentary “Not Just a Game”, the relationship between sports and politics is explored through building noticeable connections: athletes are to politicians as sports outings are to political agendas. The concept that sports are separate from politics is a concept that has been brought up time and time again. I argue that both organized sports and politics in American societies work in similar ways in order to push ideas onto viewers that establish a sadistic pleasure in violence, encourage biased rivalries, and inspire gender and race based assumptions, which as a result works to further split the American people. 

The most noticeable aspect to most contact sports is the violence. Violence in sports is a derivative of competition. Competition is healthy, and has been a driving force in every society since the beginning of mankind (think survival of the fittest), and competition in the sense of a team promotes team working and establishes a sense of unity with helps the team to win. This competitiveness can either be channeled in heathy ways, or unhealthy ways. In the documentary “Not Just a Game”, athletes refer to their sports (especially football), as a war. This kind of thinking is dangerous as it imposes the idea that the game is much more than a game. When athletes take the games too seriously, there may be an increase in fatalities. This can be directly related to the recent 2016 election of Donald Trump into the presidential office. This past election has inspired hate groups across America to grow and promote violence onto the opposing political side. The issue that has risen is that these hate groups are taking into the streets using violence as a form of nationalism. A recent example of this is the Charlottesville attacks (one and two). In this case, counter protestors used pepper spray and Nazi chants to invoke violence onto a peaceful democratic protest. This violence, while not directly related to sports, mimics the way that fans and athletes view opposing their team’s fans and their athletes. A close-to-home example of the same out of left field violence was in 1949 when Eagles fans pelted the field with glass bottles and hit an umpire in the mouth after a bad call was made. While these two examples are not comparable in severity, they both serve the same purpose of explaining pack mentality violence.

Along with the idea of a pack mentality, sports create a sense of belonging and acceptance by encouraging fans to have a favorite team. While this may seem harmless, the idea of picking sides is present in all politics. The rivalry between Republicans and Democrats has created many divides within our society and how we treat others with opposing viewpoints. An example of this is a study by political scientists Shanto Iyengar of Stanford University and Sean J. Westwood of Princeton University that “found that people are perfectly willing to openly decry, and actually discriminate against, those who identify with the party opposing their own” (Fear and Loathing Against Party Lines). To put this into perspective, people are taking sides and hating the other sides with little to no information on what the other side believes. Another close-to-home example of this is this article called “The Hate Rankings: NFL teams that Eagles fans dislike the most”. The summary of the article is that it is, in short, a loose ranking of 30 teams that Eagles fans apparently hate the most. There is no factual information anywhere within this article, and it is based solely on opinions and mutual hatred from Eagles fans (it is also comical to note that the Detroit Lions are number #29 on this list even though a Lion’s fan was beaten by an Eagles fan in 2013). The hatred of certain teams and fans in sports is related to the hatred between Republicans and Democrats in that it is never addressed by officials. This is a major problem because organizations are not fighting to end the hatred and rivalries, but instead, we have a president that believes in hatred and sports teams that do not care as long as there is no lawsuit involved.

The result of violence and promoting rivalries leaves the American people in a state of division that goes beyond the sport itself. In modern sports and politics today, minorities and women are still fighting for their rights to prove themselves. In sports both professional and pastime, women’s leagues are highly discriminated against, even by sports analysists. Women’s sports are not only deemed “not worth watching”, but are also over-sexualized to compensate the fact that men don’t like women’s sports unless they deem it ‘sexy’. In relation to government, it is worthy to note that “in 2017, 104 women hold seats in the United States Congress, comprising 19.6% of the 535 members; 21 women (21%) serve in the United States Senate, and 84 women (19.3%) serve in the United States House of Representatives” (CAWP Rutgers). It is also important to bring up that only 38 of the 104 women serving in Congress in 2017 are women of color. The fact that women are constantly discriminated against in politics and sports shows that the two are closer related than we think.

The similarities between politics and sports are so clear, that even ESPN does not deny that the two are related. This all stems from the systematic principals put into place (violence, rivalries, and discrimination) that are singlehandedly lurking behind every election and every game.

[femfreq]

💪💪💪💪 

[yesbrooklyngstuff-blog]

[yesbrooklyngstuff-blog]

Social Currency is Not All That Bad

The documentary “Generation Like” put the world that we live into an eerily relatable perspective. The idea that ‘likes’ are used as social currency is not a new concept. As much as it may feel wrong to play into the social media game, the odds may be stacked against you otherwise. I argue that ‘likes’ and other forms of online recognition are helpful in advancing socially within a professional setting, within local scenes, and groups of friends.

Say you wanted to build a company from the ground up. The most accessible way to reach people is by social media, that’s the whole point of “Generation Like”. Without the use of technology, this would be nearly impossible today. Major marketing is used on all forms of social networking, from ads to commercials. Without social media, companies would be forced to advertise in old fashioned ways, like billboards and radio endorsements. Social media helps bridge the gap between employees and potential employers in an easy and accessible way. In today’s world, connecting with employers digitally is a large aspect of communication and growth within the company. Companies now have whole departments solely for communicating. According to Niche, communications majors rank #8 in popularity across the country. On the side of the employer, social media makes initial background checks easier because people are leaving larger social media footprints than ever before. 

I am loosely involved in a local Philadelphia scene called the DIY scene. The thing that makes this particular scene so interesting is that the majority of the interactions I have encountered within it are digital. For example, a band that goes by the name Junipur is relatively popular within the DIY scene. Most of their interactions and show announcement are done through Facebook. Compared to some bands from Philadelphia like Carroll, Junipur’s following is minor. The interesting phenomenon related to “Generation Like” is the connections between the bands. Similar to young entrepreneurs helping each other reach their goals in technology, bands tend to help each other in a similar way. To explain the dynamic, you need to take a look into which bands book shows together. Junipur plays shows in an event space called The Soundhole, as does Carroll. Although the two bands may not be connected directly, the commonality between them is the event space. Junipur plays at The Soundhole and in turn is connected to the people that own the space, thus introducing them to larger bands that they can potentially play with in order to gain a larger following. The symbiotic relationship that connects bands with venues through Facebook in turn increases the bands popularity resulting in more chances for higher paying shows. 

Along the lines of popularity, connecting with close friends using social media has become a prominent way of communication in society. As seen in “Generation Like”, a group of friends help ‘build’ one of the boys Facebook account by selecting a profile picture for him. One of the girls says that “Your profile picture is what you want people to see and your cover photo is who you really are” (Generation Like). With this being said, in my college experience so far, I have only met one person who doesn’t conform to the norm of having and maintaining any social media accounts. Matt and I met first semester of last year. We exchanged numbers, and I soon found out that he was without Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or Tumblr. Matt is a political science major, and I suppose an underlying reason for his social media absence is his online reputation. If he potentially wants to be someone that is in the public eye someday, a social media littered with his days of college might not get him an interview down the line. As stated in Social Media Freaks, we must “respect those who avoid social media out of concerns about privacy or harassment or any of a number of issues that they confront in their increasingly digital lives” (Social Media Freaks). In turn, Matts absence from social media could possibly cost him some friendships. True friends would not care whether or not Matt had or didn’t have social media, but not being able to reach him on different platforms means that Matt is less accessible by non-close friends, making it potentially impossible to reach him. Matt’s lack of social media means he could miss out on opportunities he didn’t even know existed.

While not all aspects of social media are helpful, I believe that the good aspects of it truly enhance our way of living. As said in “Generation Like”, technology is here to stay, and people do not have to completely conform to it, but one must be mindful of that fact.