Bad Boys-Public Schools in the making of Black Masculinity for 3/3

Article by Ann Arnett Ferguson

Ann Arnett Ferguson makes you want to go into schools and help children out. Reading her piece about bad boys at Rosa Parks Elementary school, I saw a piece of the passion that she has for her work. The boys at this school virtually dont have a chance. They are born not even being given a chance; because of their race and where they were born. The school that these young boys go to shapes the opinion that people percieve about them. I thought that this statement was extremely powerful, and goes along with themes about institutions we learn about in class; "...by school, through punishment...the power of institutions to create, shape, and regulate social identities." The school that these boys went to punished them without teaching them why the things they were doing were wrong. And the majority of these boys were African American. This fact alone taught those boys that based on the color of their skin, they would be discriminated against. Of course this is going to instill hatred in their hearts and make them want to rebel.
The area that these boys grew up was not very safe. It was sort of the foundation of a troubled life. It showed them that this is what is out there, and this is where you are, so this is what is right. The school was in the heart of a major drug-trafficking area in the city. "The area accounted for ten of the city's fourteen murders; one-half of the reported rapes; about a third of the robberies, and almost half of the aggravated assaults in the city." These facts were from 1991. Ferguson went to the school trying to help these boys out and show them that they could be alright, and their lives could be put on the right track. She also had meetings with the people that worked at the school and tried to help them.

thoughts on the "hip hop" class today

Hey guys...I left class today after seeing that movie like really angry inside for some reason. I think its just taking this class and the lower level women's studies class that has opened my eyes so much. I hated how the men were treating the woman in that movie. Honestly, I dont know how it was possible, how they were raised thinking thats okay to do. I just felt a lot of anger towards the hip hop nation; what it has instilled in mainstream america. I feel like my respect for it went down just because of the issues that were spoken about in the film. I also feel sort of angry towards my friends, specifically my female friends for some reason, that listen to it. Its so degrading, especially the music videos. I feel like when I hear it on the radio Im going to switch the station right away now.

CHOICE #1 for 2/25...Hidden Messages inside A Carefree Film

The film Juno is about a sixteen year old junior in high school who gets pregnant from having sex with her best friend once. She is faced with having the choice of abortion or adoption. At first she thinks that she wants to abort the baby, but once she encounters a peer from high school in front of the abortion clinic, "WomenNow," she is unable to go through with it. Su-Chin, her peer, informs her that her baby has fingernails, and this meer fact freaks Juno out. Juno is a free spirit who is an outcast at school. Her best friend, Paulie Bleeker is also an individual who is on the running team. They have a weird friendship because they like each other, but are not in a relationship. Once Juno decides to give the baby up for a closed adoption, Paulie is rarely seen in the movie and has nothing to do with the pregnancy. Her stepmother, Bren, and father, Mac, along with her best friend, Leah, all support Juno through her pregnancy. She finds her adoptive family in the Pennysavers, a young, wealthy couple who look perfect on the outside. Towards the end of the movie she realizes that Paulie is the one for her, that Vanessa (the adoptive mother) is a good person, and that she is stronger than she thought.
If you read my analysis you can pick out many different things in it that are wrong. For one, the abortion clinic is portrayed as a gross, rundown building that gives out flavored condoms. There are usually a ton of protesters standing outside of an abortion clinic yelling words extremely worse than what Su-Chin did. The fact that Paulie Bleeker is let "off the hook" of being involved in the pregnancy, and his parents do not even know that he got her pregnant, shows boys that it is ok for them. That it is all the girls fault and their responsibility. It looked easy for Paulie because Juno told him that he didnt have to be involved (even though he wanted to, and the viewer felt bad for him), but to young boys it looks like it would be this easy. The way the movie was portrayed it was sort of unrealistic, but I understand why it was like this. It is hard to fit in nine months of a situation into two hours.
Juno sort of goes on with her everyday life. She is often looked at and ridiculed at school, but as the viewer you feel as though this is normal for her, whether she is pregnant or not. It is a fairly simple pregnancy, and there was only one instance where she was looked down apon for being a pregnant teenager and that was when she was getting her ultrasound.
The couple that is going to adopt the baby is very wealthy. I think that this distinction between class says a lot as well. Set aside the fact that Juno is only sixteen; giving her baby to a wealthy family is saying that the upper-class is more well equipped to take care of a child. Juno and Mark, the adoptive husband, share a love for the same music and horror films. Towards the end of the movie he becomes "sketchy" and says that he is going to leave Vanessa. Juno realizes that perfect looking families on the outside may not be so perfect on the inside.
I was looking on Imdb.com at the Juno site, and came across the main actress, Ellen Page's information. She, "Considers herself to be a Feminist and tries to steer clear of the 'stereotypical roles for teenage girls' because she finds them to be 'sexist'." I think that her character, Juno, was definitely not a stereotypical role, like Belle from Beauty and the Beast, but the movie carried with it hidden stereotypical messages in it.
To read up more on the movie, click on this link...Juno 2007

"A Style Nobody can Deal with: Politics, Style and the Postindustrial City in Hip Hop" for 2/25

Tricia Rose paints a wonderful picture for us in this excerpt from Black Noise. Although the piece is from 1994 and a little outdated, I think it gives a good background to a topic I don't know anything about. It was interesting to read this, but I have to say that it was wordy. I found myself daydreaming a lot because of the repetiveness of it, and the monstrous sentences. I understand a lot of what she was saying-the strife that a culture had to go through, and the idioms and idealogies that are attached to it. She says that hip hop is "the tension between the cultural fractures produced by postindustrial oppression and the binding ties of Black cultural expressivity that sets the critical frame for the development of hip hop." Hip hop developed more at the time of civil rights. People were striving to be independent and free and found voice and freedom through expression. Rose speaks specifically about New York City, but towards the end of the piece explains how hip hop has been influential and has expanded to other cities in the United States.
Hip hop has three central forms which are graffiti, break dancing and rap music. I knew of these things as separate entities, never considering them to fall under the same category, or be related to each other. The 1970's brought a lot of poverty on the city of New York. Because of the black out, stores were being looted and the people of Harlem and the South Bronx were being blamed. Rose also blames the growing technology on why people are out of work. When I read this part of the article it reminded me of the Prensky piece. Digital technology is growing immensely and people are out of work because computer's can now perform the jobs that hands used to perform.
To be honest I had a hard time reading this piece. I felt lost. I dont understand a lot of what she said. If anyone could help me out, that would be great. I think she was just saying that hip hop has changed and transformed a culture so greatly that it still has strong influences today? The hip hop culture has influences over style as well. I cant wait to talk about it further in class.

"Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants" for 2/18

In Marc Prensky's article, "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants," he gives new language and meaning to the growing differences between the old country and the new country. Children have changed radically, a growing normality throughout schools and houses. Society has changed so much that our parents did not grow up in the same way that we have. It is hard for them to understand us, and it is hard for us to understand them. The other day my mom wanted me to help her put pictures on the computer so she could send them to her parents. I told her how to do it slowly over the phone because I wanted her to be able to do it herself. Needless to say, she did something wrong and some how the pictures were erased. I was so frustrated with her because she didn't do it right, but my frustration shouldn't be because she didn't grow up with the skills to know how to do something like that. It is a very different world today than it was back then, and both the parents and the children compromise to see that. It is when you get to your grandparents that you have a problem.
Prensky talks about the change that has taken place as being a "singularity," defining this has being "an event which changes things so fundamentally that there is absolutely no going back." He says that the singularity that has taken place in society today is the arrival of digital technology. There is no doubt that the ever changing and advancement of technology has caused generation gaps to become even bigger. I have to admit that I can't even keep up with the new and growing technology. You cannot teach children the same way that you taught children back then. Childrens brains are different because of what they have been exposed to; learning patterns have changed, as did teaching styles and curriculum. Our generation is known as the "Digital Natives." "The 'native speakers' of the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet." People who are older and did not grow up being exposed to the growing technologies are known as "Digital Immigrants." When Prensky puts it into meaning like that, you can't help but agree with him. People talk about the gap between technologically advanced children and their parents who don't even know how to turn on their cell phones, but never in such terms. Our generation thrives off of knowing this quickly. We want instant gratification. Cell phones are not used for making calls anymore. Text messages have taken the place of something that gave us information quick, even more quickly.
Obviously the times have changed. Schools have changed dramatically. Computers fill classrooms and learning is accomadating to everyone. Digital Immigrants have to learn how to teach in different styles. Children learn extremely differently, and Digital Immigrants have to accomodate to the changing times. Everything that Prensky was saying makes sense to me. It is cut and dry. You see these things, but Prensky is putting it into terms that you can understand.

When I was 13...

When I was thirteen I was in the eighth grade. I was wearing a full mouth of braces, about to get spectacles and was the class clown. Braces were the fad back then and everyone wanted them. haha. I got along great with my teachers and the kids. I liked being the funny one, and that definitely followed me through high school. I could be shy at the same time. I played sports all the time. Thats basically all I did. I was one of the boys. Growing up the only girl in my neighborhood I knew how to hold my own. I would play street hockey, and was kind of tough. If someone was messing with me, I messed with them right back. That has definitely changed now. I am not a fighter. I had a great group of friends and we formed our own clique called "the tent peeps." We called ourselves this because we slept in a tent one night. haha. I look back at thirteen and wonder how anyone could have dealt with us. I was happy to get out of my first year of teen hood and move onto high school. Middle school wasn't the best time. Me and my best friend were often ridiculed as being lesbians together, which we are not, but when you are that young you don't understand why people would say something like that and you don't know how to diffuse what you feel inside about it. I have definitely learned and grown up a lot since then (you would hope haha), but the person I was back then still resonates inside of me.

"Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us" for 2/ 11

I enjoyed reading Linda Christensen's piece this week. Her opening paragraph really grabbed my attention and instantly I was entranced. "I was nourished on the milk of American culture." How can you not laugh out loud at that? I agree with what she was saying, and how she conducted her Contemporary Literature class. She brings up the point that society teaches children from an early age "how to be," what is deemed exceptable. Christensen speaks of society as a "secret education," the everyday things that kids see that have an effect on their frame of mind. Children are exposed to movies and books that show the "domination of one sex, one race, one class, or one country over a weaker counterpart." If you think about it, and from her examples this is absolutely true. Children grow up watching movies designed especially for them, but within these videos are hidden messages of sexism, racism, etc. At an early age we see these things from a certain point of view, and certain stereotypes are instilled in us. We are also taught certain things by watching the TV. For example, murder shows, and things of a violent nature show kids that it may be 'cool' or 'okay' to do that. I was watching TV the other day with my grandparents and my grandfather was watching a show on murder, like a CSI or something like that, and my grandmother commented that children will see this and get ideas from it. And it is so true, children who see something like that who's brains aren't developed will build off of that and think its okay because he/she saw it on the TV.
I absolutely hate how women are portrayed in movies, TV, etc. Christensen touches on this in her article and it definitely hits the spot in me that is frustrated with women's portrayal in the media. My women's studies class last semester spoke a lot about this. In every movie, TV show, anything, the main female character is skinny with blonde hair and undoubtably sexy. She's selling sex. Attractiveness sells. And this is true in children's media as well. Christensen says, "When women do appear, they look like Jessica Rabbit or Playboy centerfolds-even in many of the new and "improved" children's movies." When children see this they unconsciously think that this is how they are supposed to look. Last semester in my women's studies class I learned that in the 1970's a new "sleepover Barbie" was released. It is appalling what came with this staple of American culture. A scale came that was set to 105 pounds, and a booklet about how to lose weight. It said, "don't eat." Honestly, I have no words because it is ridiculous.
There are a lot of things that could be said in regards to this article. I think that Christensen did a great job of articulating the 'problems' of American society. Her class probably walked away with a greater understanding of issues and ideals that lie within our large culture because of the project they were asked to do. I would love to read more of her pieces.

Sample humilation in class

THIS IS MY BLOG ENTRY WOOOOOOOOOOOO