In response to issues swirling in the comments to the previous post:
It's correct that we cannot blame the media for "violence itself." But this isn't really the point. Let's admit straight off that violence has always been a part of human behavior and culture. Does this mean that we should embrace and foster it? Is this the part of ourselves that we want to encourage and develop?
The hostility in the world is not a fixed quantity; it can be increased or diminished by the choices we make--as individuals and as a society.
Furthermore, it's erroneous to think we are either psychopaths or little lambs in some manichean universe. Of course it's true that listening to a particular artist won't flip your personality to something it wasn't. But, as we already admitted, the potential for violence is in people; we can choose to feed it or let it starve.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I also put this comment under another topic but wasn't sure if my question would get answered, so here it goes again...I was wondering what exactly you are expecting from us for the Media Abstinence paper? I guess I don't know how to go about it. And is it due next time we meet for class, March 4th?
What I want, exactly, is a write-up by you showing what insight you can bring in a discussion of your experience foregoing electric media.
Violence must be embraced, fostered and then controlled. Violence is not a little devil that lives inside us. The idea that, if we starve him of violence he will go away, is a bit silly. If everyone in America gave up watching violence of any sort, would things be better? Yes I think they would, but there would still be violence. The over all hostility may be reduced but nothings changed, the world is still the same. If we want to end violence ignoring it, sheltering ourselves from it wont work.
Lets take people that live in violence, someone that grew up with abusive parents and lived in a bad part of town. Statistics show that this creates a cycle of violence passed down thru generations. This is only one example of many. How do you end these cycles? If humanity can embrace our violent side and yet not become violent the cycles will be broken. Control and accountability should be are goal. When we shelter ourselves from violence we give up control. We say to ourselves “ I cant be trusted to do the right thing so I better protect myself by repressing part of my nature” I want a society that has the control and accountability for its action. When humans can be surrounded by violence and not act violently we will finally have peace.
We have to be careful what we teach our children. Teaching our children that violence is acceptable to me is not the way to go. I am sure others have said this as well. I think children should not be exposed to violence until they develop a clear knowledge of right and wrong. A psychiatrist told me that inside us there is a Parent, Adult, and Child always. When you put a child in the driver's seat, disaster is emminent.
Emanuel C.
March 4, 2008
March 4, 1981
!!! Happy 27th Birthday !!!!!
Happy Birthday, Emanuel.
I have some concerns about the ideas being put forth as to the effects of TV. Let us start with an easy target. “Body image” From what I can gather the consensus is, that we have been conditioned by the media to a specific form of beauty and if you don’t look like a supermodel your some how less of a person. Media is telling us we need to look a certain way to be happy. Why then are people getting fatter, if that goes against everything the media is telling us to be? I can tell you for sure there is no major media that preaches obesity.
The objectification of women in the media has led to a climate where women are thought of as things not people. When we constantly see women in a sexual way it causes hyper sexuality. Then why are violent crimes against women lower today than in 1973. (rape is also at a lower per capita rate today than in 1973. statistics available at the Bureau of Justice statistics)
So far from my point of view TV has a power but not the amount of power that has been suggested by our class material so far. I think TV should take some of the blame for the problems but only in a small degree. The rest we should blame on collage professors :)
I am glad you brought this up, anonymous, I agree with you for the most part. Television is not responsible for the "objectification" of women. History shows that women have always been treated as objects. Marriage, for example, was in the past primarily a business transaction between father and groom. (This is why brides wear veils, to keep the groom from backing out on the deal.) And women have more freedom from objectification today than ever.
And I agree with you that the issue of body image, as it's generally presented, [models + young girls watching = low self esteem] is far too simplistic. But the truth of the critique of advertising messages is that they constantly inform you that something is wrong. And not only that, but that these wrongs have quick fixes. They encourage an inner conflict.
Post a Comment