Culture of One

I've been thinking a lot lately about how the talk on The Culture of One has affected me. I thought that the idea of who I am right now has been shaped things in my past is fascinating and different than what I have been thinking since I arrived on campus at Whitworth. Its not just about what dorm I'm in or my meal plan that define me. Its the people I've met, the places I've been and the experiences I have had. I found my story difficult to tell to some people I have barely met but it helped that they looked like they were interested in what I was saying and didn't bring themselves into it at all like may people usually do do. It made a huge difference just knowing that theses people were acknowledging who I was and respecting me enough to pay attention, even if it was part of an assignment.

Over Thanksgiving break I got the chance to practice my new skill of listening without interrupting. It started when my sister came home for break and was telling me about her finals and when she will be home next. At first she was a little puzzled by why I was just looking at her and not responding in any way. But as she became used to it, I got to really hear how she was feeling about her tests and retain that information. She did ask me what I was doing because it was apparently very different than the way she gets treated at school. I went on the explain how we had done this exercise in class and it really works when you want to listen to someone. She thought it was a fantastic idea as well and we got the chance to use it at Thanksgiving when my family came for dinner.

I took away two major points from the talk two weeks ago. The first is that who I am has been shaped by forces that have been in my life in the past. That the world I lived in is different from everyone else's and that makes me unique. The second point is that listening to someone speak can make all the difference in an interaction. If all I am doing when someone is talking to me is how I am going to respond then I am not doing my job as a friend. It is my job to actually listen and absorb what they are saying so I fully understand and acknowledge their value when they speak.

Lost Count: A Love Story

A couple years ago I watched a spoken word video in my English class called Lost Count: A Love Story and I recently came back to it. The spoken word was written and performed by two Chicago youth, Nate Marshall and Demetrius Amparan in 2007. [Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVD-HsHoUNM ] The poem addresses youth-on-youth violence in Chicago, which has become an epidemic in the city. The spoken word is very powerful and I highly recommend watching it.

 I researched some more about youth violence in Chicago and came across an article [Link: http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-muckrakers/2013/01/chicagos-homicide-epidemic-is-a-youth-homicide-epidemic/] that included a map of all the youth (ages 25 and under) homicides in the city from 2008-2012. If you go to the article and scroll down to the map you'll see red dots scattered across it and when you click a dot it pops up with a sort of profile. Each dots says the name, age, race and gender of each victim. What I found interesting and somewhat disturbing was that when I clicked the dots, 15 out of 20 times the victims were African American males. I did some more research and found that most of the articles I came across about shootings and youth violence in Chicago featured African Americans. Latinos make up 1/3 of the 21 minority communities in Chicago but I didn't come across any articles talking about Latinos. In the year 2008 80% of Latino youth in those minority communities were victims of homicide. The statistics show that African American males account for the largest number of youth homicides in Chicago but they aren't the only victims.

I found another article [Link: http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130728/downtown/let-us-live-youth-plead-march-spotlight-youth-violence] that was talking about the Let Us Live march that took place in Chicago. Youth gathered to protest youth-on-youth violence in their city and while that's great the article was somewhat surprising to me. The movement was focused on African-American victims and Corey Hardimin, a college student said "This is not a race movement. This is a human rights movement." Hardimin may believe this but the media makes this an African American issue by only reporting the black-on-black youth crimes. On the Map from the first article I was surprised to also see a large amount of white youth victims and, again, I couldn't find any articles talking about white-on-white youth crime in Chicago.

I found a lot of this information somewhat overwhelming and I don't know exactly what to gather from all of it. So, my question is: Do you think the youth violence in Chicago is an African American issue? The statistics show that their group has the most number of homicides in Chicago but what about the other minority groups? Isn't this a Latino issue too? Also, what role does socioeconomic status have on the crimes in the city? Most of the crimes were committed on the South side of the city, the most poverty-stricken area.

Students offended when talking about racism

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/12/03/black-professors-essay-raises-questions-why-she-was-investigated-after-offending

This article is very interesting to me because it takes the perspective of how white people are reacting to lessons about racism.  I feel like most people don't address what the white perspective is on this issue which I am not sure is a good or bad thing. The white men in the article feel like they are getting attacked and they are being discriminated against because of their race and gender. They themselves may not be racist but because of racist white men before them they get the label that they are racist too. They don't see themselves at bad guys but they get that label because of some of the anti-racism teachings.

Black and white binary

When we watched the video in class about the Black Bruins (Spoken word) by the ucla students, it reminded me about the black and white binary character in the CRT book. In the video, the ucla students are only focusing on the black and white students it seems. They do not talk about non black minority groups. I am not sure what they stats are on the other races that attend ucla are but I think it would have been interesting to hear. In this video, the students are using their race as the central point to minority groups like the book explains. The book even suggests  an idea that if we can deal with racism against African Americans we could possibly deal with racism against all races. I am not sure if this is what the ucla students were thinking when they made their video but it seems to me that this video is a great example of the black and white binary.

Racial Messages in Visual Rhetoric

While talking about visual rhetoric in my writing one class, we talked about the strategies of symmetry and shape and how they can be used to communicate certain messages that our brains recognize but we don't see at first. The cover of the September 2008 issue of People Magazine was one example my professor made to prove people's brains are influenced by proximity and shape. The cover is of John McCain and his family. The title reads, "Meet the McCains; An intimate look at the trials and triumphs of a big, blended, not-so-typical family." The photo, is of all seven children, and Mr. and Mrs. John McCain. The problem that arose throughout the public, is that their adopted daughter Bridget, of Bangladeshi, is significantly lower in the photo and does not seem to be a member of the family. It also has all the males of the family at the top, which caused many viewers to question the views of John McCain.

This article may have tried to depict counter storytelling by showing that the sister is part of the family and is in the family photo, but the rhetoric message that most people in America who read People Magazine was that fact that the girl of dissimilar ethnicity was on a different level than the rest of the McCains. A more puzzling fact is that it happens once again in the actually article. Bridget is the only member of the family sitting on the ground, while the rest of the family sits on the couch or stands. An act like this could be perceived as racialization, interjecting the fact that she is of color into the main message of the photo and setting her apart.

I do not believe that this is purposeful or part of a hate crime because I do not believe that John McCain would let this go to print if he knew what its subliminal message was. However I wonder if the message that the photographer was trying to communicate in the placement and arranging of these photos was that of racism.

'The Butler' reflects America's racial conversations

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/showbiz/movies/the-butler-race

Discovered this article and I thought it would be a great topic to present about the impact that movies have on racial issues today. The articles covers the movie 'The Butler' and talks about how it reflects some of the racial conversations that go on today and have been apart of the past. Overall, what I want to get out of this blog is to see how my fellow classmates feel racial issues are portrayed through movies? Is it a good thing or bad? Are the issues presented well or poorly?

In my personal opinion I believe movies present the main point but fails to give all the details because in the end the producers are trying to make money. However, I also believe that there is some hope to racial issues being shown in movies because it vocalizes the issue and gives people a starting point to learn about some of the racial issues that occurred in the past and occur today. Do I believe movies being based on racial issues is a good thing? Yes. But I think it is important to have an accurate interpretation of the story so that the issue can presented in an effective manner. If not then I believe the message of the movie loses it strength.

Please read the article, watch the video, and read some of the comments at the end.  

I guess some races are just "too beautiful" to compete with...

                                                                                                                                                                   I noticed the other day that a friend of mine had posted an article on Facebook about Philippine girls not being allowed to compete in the competition for "Miss World" for the next year. I do not know how correct this article is, but it caused me to think of my US Cultural Studies class right away. This article claimed that too many girls from the Philippines have won for too many years in a row. The world knows how talented and beautiful that country is and it is time for other countries to show off and win too. It struck me that the way this article stated their argument was is a form of flattery, yet they were clearly rejecting these girls based on their race and no other reason.
It strikes me that if other countries want to win, shouldn't they just try harder rather than kicking an entire country out for being too beautiful? I find it a bit embarrassing that the world feels the need to kick out the "most beautiful race" in order to have a confidence boost. Each race has a unique look about them, and though this particular race is extremely beautiful, are not all of them beautiful?
As I said, I do not know how valid this article is, but I find it odd and embarrassing that it is even a consideration that a country should be kicked out of a beauty competition for being too beautiful. Isn't being too beautiful and tallanted the whole point of the competition?