Response to The Role Religion Plays in Politics

This is a response to http://textsofchristandpc.blogspot.ca/ entry, The Role Religion Plays in Politics.  I agree that religion plays an important role in politics, but I think the role is intimate, and when it is it can turn on a candidate such as Santorum.  For example, Mitt Romney is a Mormon, although christian, Mormons are the outcast of the religious world.  However, his religion still conveys  human values endorsed by the Bible, values that conform to societies values and can form the backbone of a moral society.  The point is while I feel religion does play an important role in presidential elections, its because of the ideas that are attached to religion also become attached to that president.  When candidates such as Santorum demonstrate that their religious values are fanatical it no longer helps them but rather becomes a hindrance. 

http://textsofchristandpc.blogspot.ca/2012/04/role-religion-plays-in-politics.html

Response to Issues in Gender and Sexuality

This is a response to http://smc305h.blogspot.ca/ entry, Issues in Gender and Sexuality. The video you attached of the girl trying to figure out if she's pretty or ugly actually broke my heart. Unfortunately it's not only girls who feel like this.  Boys growing up often think that they have to have arms like Norman Reedus or they aren't considered manly.  The worst part of these boys and girls feeling this way is that they haven't hit puberty yet.  Not only should they not have to be worrying about these issues, there's nothing they can do about it because their bodies cannot physically rival those of grown men and women, and thats who they are comparing themselves to.  I know there are programs out there like that Dove campaign that attempts to elevate women's body image but these sorts of things highlight the facts that society finds these people ugly.  I wish people could find true happiness with who they are.

http://smc305h.blogspot.ca/2012/04/issues-in-gender-and-sexuality.html

Teen pregnancy shows have exploded over the past few years.  When I was a child, Maury would do paternity tests on his show but they were not exclusive to teens and didn't emphasize the theme of teenage pregnancy.  Now however, we have Teen Mom, 16 and Pregnant, and multiple other shows dedicated to the documentation of young mothers.  This abundance of programming on the matter of course led me to believe teen pregnancies were up, so when Professor Harris told us they were in fact down, it made me question why these juvenile moms have taken our culture by storm. 

This is my favourite teen mom

When I looked into the subject myself I found that not only had teen pregnancy dropped but teen motherhood rates were at their lowest in 70 years.  Of course there are negative connotations with this misrepresentation of teen pregnancy.  Most of these shows portray the mother as passive and the male as dominant, when education on the matter should empower females about their sexuality.  This gender stereotyping portrays a class of female victims who are unable to do anything about their current situation, something that just isn't true.  These shows say at the end that teen pregnancy is 100% avoidable however, how it's avoidable is rarely discussed in the show.  Furthermore, abortion, while controversial, is always an option but certainly not discussed in these shows.  Although I don't have any personal experience in the matter, I'm sure abortion at least crosses the mind of expecting teen mothers, so the issue should be addressed.  Professor Harris explained why abortion topics are avoided but it seems irresponsible to completely exclude an intense and intimate topic from programs that aim to help teen mothers.  Furthermore, the absence of abortion reinforces the perception of passivity for the female in the teen pregnancy shows and supports the image of a teen mother dealing with something that has happened to them.  Often the men are reluctant to deal with their children choosing to do things such as rodeo (yes this is a specific example from one of the shows) while the mother is left to deal with the pregnancy herself.  These narrow views of gender roles hinder faithful representations of relationships and promote stereotypes.

This is the teen mom who's boyfriends in the rodeo.  Yes, I watch these shows way too much

Despite these issues, I feel that these shows have contributed to the reduction of teen pregnancies.  Abstinence education, condoms, and other preventative measures have been around for a long time.  However, the presence of these shows, I believe, have created a generation that is hyperaware of how hard it is to raise a child as a teenager.  Education in our commodified was a big theme in the lecture this week, and California even thanked reality shows themselves for educating teens of the struggles of teen parenthood. (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/02/teen-pregnancy-record-low-rate-california-.html)  However, the toy of education made available is not sufficient in dealing with the issue of teen pregnancy and sexuality.  Education needs to focus on equipping teens with the tools to understand media and avoid distorted views of sexuality. 

Response to: Role of The Behemoths

This is a response to http://wordofmouse999.blogspot.ca/ blog entry, Role of  the Behemoths.  I also found this lecture to be one of the most thought provoking of the year. Using real and imagined challenges to develop our ethical convictions is a vital role monsters play in our popular culture. I had always personally thought that the employment of monsters for these roles were generally used in ancient and medieval times, an often failed to serve their purpose as many people began t believe in these monsters.  However, as you pointed out not only are they not exclusive to medieval and ancient times, you used the example of Where the Wild Things Are.  Regardless of whether or not people believed these monsters were real or not they still played an important role in peoples understanding of ethical convictions.  Monsters created a means of hypothetically rehearsing trials and tribulations that people struggled with themselves.  The importance of monsters were not in whether they actually existed or not but rather in their role in illuminating our ethical convictions and developing our societal and personal values and morality.

To see the original article click here: http://wordofmouse999.blogspot.ca/2012/03/video-games-monsters-and-death.html

Is Rick Grimes from "The Walking Dead" a Christ Figure?

Thanks to Prof Harris, I've been hooked on The Walking Dead.  I literally havent been able to stop watching it.  I've come to admire the main character Rick who for those of you who don't watch the show is the sheriffs deputy and the main character of the show.  I believe that he represents a Christ figure, and I think this is an important characteristic of the show, clarifying the relationship between monsters and humans.

soooo good

The first thing that caught my attention was his blue eyes.  The digital colour correction used in the show emphasized this trait and I wondered if this was possibly done for a reason.  I went back to my notes for the lecture where this was discussed and the number of traits that match up are astounding.  He is an outsider who had a decisive death(or perceived death) and resurrection.  His simplicity is striking and characterized by innocence.  When he was found by the black man and his son (I can't remember their names at the moment) he was tied to a bad, roughly in the form of a crucifix.  He has demonstrated mu;tiple times he is willing to sacrifice himself, and although I haven't seen the show enough to verify this (I just finished episode 5) I believe Shane may represent his betrayer associate.  Furthermore, his service to lesser others, symbolized by his role as a police officer, and accentuated when he executed the suffering bisected zombie crawling through the park, only after apologizing that this happened to her.

Not to mention the sexually identified female

The reason I felt that this Jesus figure was important was because while the monsters are broken beings striving for redemption, I felt that the presence of Rick symbolized that no matter how damaged we are, Christ can save us.  The people in the show fear becoming like the zombies and follow the Christ figure, allowing them to adhere to their humanity.  Everyone in the show has their own failings and shortcomings, such as racism or anger, but these flaws are purged by the presence of zombies.  Our own society has become zombified in a sense, we've lost various aspects of our morality, whether it's by buying clothes made by third world children or ignoring the devastation we've inflicted on our environment.  However, the ethical narrative of the show depicts that despite these dire circumstances we are able to regain our humanity.  These metaphorical monsters reflect the good in ourselves despite our shortcomings and one way we can retain our humanity is by following Jesus.  Even if we have fallen to the depravity of modern society we are still human and can avoid the pressure to adhere to corrupt standards, no matter how pervasive they are in our society.  After all, in the show the whole world has fallen to the zombie apocalypse.  I'm not sure if I'm just grasping at straws here but either way I love the show.  I'm looking forward to see where it goes so if you choose to respond please try to avoid spoilers.

Bleiber

Forgive me for posting so late, I'm sure everyone's been busy considering its nearing the end of the year.  I wanted to talk about the hate Justin Bieber got a couple weeks ago for his music video "Pray".  I honestly thought it was a really good message, most of the problems people had I felt were problems they created.  The whole self promotion thing was a non-issue.  He obviously has to make an appearance in his video and the video is about helping those in need and the power of prayer.  It wouldn't make sense if the video had included Justin doing anything else really.  It's not like he was giving you a big, condescending bullshit motivational speech, expecting you to back flip out of bed and charge into the world.  Justin Bieber gets too much hate, for proof just look at the Rotten Tomatoes page for his movie.  He got a 1.5 out of 10.  That's lower then Adam Sandler's Jack and Jill.  I saw both movie's and let me tell you Never Say Never is not only better, its phenomenal and inspiring.

Pure cinematic gold.

Not only did the music video have a great message, but it was a great way to deliver the message to kids and get them to become more aware of issues. Focusing on all the problems in the world and how long it will take to see a visual difference makes it easy, especially for children, to keep putting it off or giving up all together.  However, Justin shows a world full of people with good intentions, helping in whatever way they can.  Even if its just at a local level, visiting a hospital and donating some time.  When you're finished helping and you look back at what you've accomplished, these people can see the difference they've made, instead of thinking the world is too big a place for them to help.

If you think this is negative, you sincerely need to seek help.

For all the criticism Justin got for visiting sick children in hospitals (I can't believe I just typed that) keep in mind one of the symptoms of success is that more and more people demand your time.  Justin has reached a point where no matter what he does it's documented and I genuinely think he does a lot of charity out of the goodness of his heart.  He just happens to be photographed no matter what he's doing.  And besides, even if it was self promotion, its a great way for kids to visually see how they themselves can make a difference.  Every criticism people had about this video was so insignificant and as people kept criticizing the video it snowballed to the point where no one really wanted to counter that mountain of cynicism.  But be honest with yourself, if this video was made by anyone else other then Justin Bieber would it have received anywhere near this amount of hate? I felt just his presence distorted your perception of the video in the first place, and after that it's incredibly easy to get buried under the thousand little things that would otherwise mean nothing to you.  This video had such potential but in the end it's message was wasted on a bunch of cynical students. 

 

Haters gunna hate players gunna play

19 and Counting

When trying to understand the relationship between media and religion it's important to understand all the various elements involved.  It's difficult to develop different religious and theological perspectives through television and media because there are so many subjective attributes to these environments.  In Christy Mesaros-Winkles article, "TLC and the Fundamentalist Family: A Televised Quiverfull of Babies", she comes to the conclusion that Christians believe in large families for various reasons such as a rejection of birth control, the need to populate the world with Christians, ect.  She also used the feminist approach to see the subjectification of women to men in a Christian dominated atmosphere.  I felt that this article relied on a perception about Christianity and misrepresented the themes and undertones of the show, grasping at straws.  While many of us understand the vagaries of religion, I felt like this went unobserved in Mesaros-Winkles article.

The cast of "19 and Counting"

At the beginning of the article Mesaros-Winkles states that, "In subsequent seasons, the religious beliefs of the family are downplayed as the show shifts its focus to the family’s large size and the daily difficulties of managing such a large family. Therefore, this analysis will focus on episodes from the first season, 17 and Counting."  It is unfair to look only at a certain aspect of the show that conforms to your argument.  While introducing the characters to the show, one reason they talked about their religious beliefs was because that was part of who they were, however, it didn't describe how religion translated into their everyday lives.  This would be more prevalent in subsequent seasons where their religious affiliation is established and the family acts as they normally would in everyday life.  This creates a limited perspective of the subject, something that can be seen in her various examples in her article.

The belief of a male headed family and wifely submission is widely explored in this article.  Mesaros-Winkles acknowledges the Duggars portrayal of "a serene, pleasant picture of life in a big, Quiverfull family."  However, she believes that this is done to captivate secular and Christian audiences alike with the family’s devotion to their children and the family unit. The courtship of Anna by Josh is used as an example of the undertones of the show.  She states there is a focus "on the male dominance of the courtship experience. The decision to date and marry is not left up to the girl, but is instead decided by her suitor and her parents."  Many viewers are indifferent to this aspect of the show, seeing it as a sweet gesture, knowing that the couple is already in love and marriage will probably happen regardless of what the father says.  The process of asking the father for permission is merely a formality.  However Mesaros-Winkles and a certain percentage of her fellow viewers seem to ask, "What kind of a female subjecting, religiously addled Christian is so ignorant and indifferent to women's rights that he must get her fathers permission to wed his daughter?"  Meanwhile, I'm almost positive that the prospect of marriage has crossed Anna's mind.  Does everyone Christian avoid the woman's regards when making decisions? No, in the end Anna still has to agree to the marriage. By choosing to force your ideas into the otherwise innocent actions of good people,  you've upped your odds for finding women subjecting not just in Christianity, but everywhere in society.

I cropped out the handcuffs

The main issue I took with this article, was that the author was bringing in personal biases rather then looking at the show in itself and attacking Christianity, not focusing on the show itself.   It's mentioned in the article that, " [The movement] places importance on creating the“right” type of Christian families, which takes on a decidedly racist overtone. This image is made up of middle-class, Caucasian families who will try to out-populate the Muslim, African and Latin American countries to keep “enemies from the gate.”"  In the episodes we watched in class I didn't see any attacks on these groups of people or any mention of anything like this.  This whole idea is coming from her own personal biases.  I failed to see how Mesaros-Winkles saw other ethnicities as enemies in the show, this was her bringing in her own bias and making them conform to the show.  The reason for this large family is established as God wanted the family to have this many children.  God's will is in no way limited to white people, Mexicans, Africans, and Asians are all subjected to God's will in determining the size of their family.  The thing that frustrated me about this argument is that it doesn't fucking matter.  Throwing out these beliefs makes perfect sense as an argument about Christians who believe that they are at war with Muslim nations, but it doesn't apply here.  The argument was so aggressive and misguided that I'm pretty sure that she was her own worst enemy at this point.

Another soldier in the fight against communism

It is an inescapable reality that you will find people who will microanalyze the relationships between people on television shows and find their own realities when reading in between the lines.  However, when I read this article I felt like it was a highly generalized and exaggerated claim from an author that is obviously anti-Christian and likes finding situations where they are wrong and females are subjectified. I honestly would like to here what other people's view on this program is.  I know this sort of entry could fall under a reading summary but I didn't opt for that and this article really irritated me.

Gog and Magog

This is loosely based on what we have been discussing in class, about the representations of Christ in televisions and movies.  I was curious about the representation of other Biblical figures in our culture.  I decided to look at Gog’s and Magog’s.  For those of you who don’t know Gog’s and Magog’s are they are generally believed to be the people who bring about Satan’s will on Earth, and will flourish around the end of days.  

 A Persian miniature depicting the erection of an Iron Wall to keep the barbarian Gog and Magog from civilised peoples.

In 1971, during a dinner address to state legislators President Reagan said "Ezekiel tells us that Gog, the nation that will lead all of the other powers of darkness against Israel, will come out of the north. Biblical scholars have been saying for generations that Gog must be Russia. What other powerful nation is to the north of Israel? None. But it didn’t seem to make sense before the Russian revolution, when Russia was a Christian country. Now it does, now that Russia has become Communistic and atheistic, now that Russia has set itself against God. Now it fits the description of Gog perfectly."

I know that there were other reasons to portray Russians negatively during this time period, but I was curious as to whether or not television of movies actively promoted the idea of Gog’s and Magogs as synonymous with Russians.  There is no lack of Russian villains, there’s the evil Russian ducks in  Duck Tales, the Russians in Red Dawn, and numerous James Bond villains.  Unfortunately, there is not a lot of description about Gog’s and Magog’s, just that they come from a land that’s north of Israel and that they generally cause trouble.

                                                  

                                                                                  Rocky IV is the best Rocky

The reason I thought of this at all is because I read an article where George Bush was said to have invaded Iraq because he believed that Gog and Magog were at work in the Middle East. (http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/08/agog_over_bushs_comments_on_go.html)  This happened during a time where there is infinitely more negative imagery of the Middle East on television then about Russians.  Possibly the  influence of popular culture is occasionally reversed.  Instead of letting our interpretations of the Bible influence popular culture, perhaps popular culture is influencing our interpretation of the Bible.  Don’t forget these aren’t crackpots these were Presidents of the United States.

Personal Jesus

This week in class we learned that no matter how faithful a retelling of a gospel story was it was still nothing more than a Whose Jesus - metaphorical popular language.  Something as faithful as retelling a gospel story is an interpretation.  There is no literal telling, you make a fundamental category error believing this.   The idea that everyone has their own Jesus really makes you wonder who is Jesus.  Just looking at the two modes of Christic representation demonstrates that large figures such as Obama (saviour mode) to people like war heros (redeemer mode) can be  interpreted as Jesus.  It really made me look back on previous weeks on subjects such as Justin Bieber and Kanye West and see them not as people just delivering a message but people representing Christ figures.  Especially when the professor gave us the 25 characteristics of Christ figures, that truly convinced me that Christ figures can be found everywhere.  My personal favourite item on that list was "the initials JC."  At first I thought this would be a rare occurrence but sure enough it can be found quite often.  John Connor, James Coffey, and James Cole just to name a few.  Surely this is no coincidence.  Personally, I like to see how deep Christianity penetrates popular culture.  To me it means that even though sometimes it may be hard to find, there are positive messages and themes integrated into our favourite shows.

In response to http://christandpopcultpolitics.blogspot.com/, 

I really liked your idea that women were rarely portrayed as someones personal Jesus and instead were given destructive roles.  It doesn't just end with Eve though.  Jezebel, Salome, Delilah, and Herodias, just to name a few, are examples of numerous women who represent women as negative rolemodels.    Your analysis of Eve, however, I feel is the most important because she establishes women as inferior to men in creation and in social roles.  I know there are a lot of negative male roles in the Bible however, women in general are seen as negative not only because of their actions but also because of their bodies, which can be seen in Leviticus which describes women as physically inferior because of their bodily functions, making them impure in the eyes of God.  I really enjoyed your perspective and it made me really think about why women rarely take on the role of a personal Jesus. Thank you.

First Post

Hey, my names Liam.  I'm getting into the blogging thing a little later then most but I've still got my six weeks so I'm not too worried.  I'm in my third year at the University of Toronto.  I'm looking forward to reading other students interpretations on the class in general and contributing to discussions.   Hopefully my  blog can help you as much as yours help me.