Book and papers

Working on a research paper while starting my first chapter of my MA thesis. Just a few books checked out from libraries all over the country. I think there is room on my desk for a few dozen more.

Discourse and gender in today's society

In light of various discussions with several people, I have put a lot of thought into the subject of discourse. That is, the way of thinking that has permeated society, in music, literature, tv, etc to the point that the society believe it to be the norm. For example, (and the example that many have argued with me recently) we can look at the status of women in today's society. The discourse is one that is complex, with many overlapping layers that many of us have been exposed to, despite different upbringings and life situations, that lead us to believe that even in 2012, women are viewed as second class to men in society. Women are portrayed in commercials, music, television shows, literature, and blockbuster movies, as being domestic, taking care of the kids, cleaning, cooking, etc. For example, how many commercials do you see that portray women as the primary buyers of cleaning products? Case in point, the swiffer commercials that imply that without that product, a woman has no time to do anything else, and when her time is freed up by the product, she reads, drinks coffee, or pampers herself with spa products. Never do we see men cleaning. More than often, it is the woman who is taking kids to soccer practice, or picking kids up from school in these commercials. Reinforcing the idea that this is the place for women.
Even when women are portrayed as strong and in the workplace in television or movies, she is still faced with opposition from men. Jokes run rampant over the internet that imply that a woman's place is in the kitchen. At the same time, women are taught not to go out alone at night because men will assault, kidnap, and rape them. Instead of teaching men not to do such things, we are teaching women to be afraid. And the discourse is so ingrained in our society that this seems normal to us. So much so that men often blame women for their own behavior. It is the 'feminists' fault that 'chivalry' is dead. Instead of taking responsibility for not treating women with respect, they blame women for wanting equality and respect. We live in an interesting world where men and women continue to participate in a discourse which maintains a patriarchal hierarchy and most don't even acknowledge it.

All of this came from a question about discourse. Our society is permeated with it. From gender, to race, to ageism, from politics to social media. I can't help but wonder what the future generations will look back on this time and say. What will the historians say about the early 21st century?

You have to stand for something

Today I was faced with an interesting question. What is and is not okay to discuss on your own Facebook, Blog, etc? It is your outlet for freedom of speech. It is your page. People can either read it. Agree. Comment. Or Disagree. Comment. Or ignore it completely. You as the writer do not force them to read. You do not make them sit down and read every word you write. Ultimately, it is their decision to read your posts or blogs. Therefore, they are actively choosing to participate in your exercising of your right to free speech. Now, if they disagree, that is also their right. We are lucky enough to live in a county that allows these rights. There are some that do not. We are not the only ones that allow this, but that is for a different blog.

That being said, should I decide to respond to the actions that I have witnessed, both on the internet, as well as out in the world. That is also my right. I chose to participate in the freedom of speech that others have used and decided to respond to that with my own. However, I am always amazed at how so many infringe on the rights of others under the guise of exercising their own.

Using your freedom of religion to infringe on the freedoms of others is not the way it works. Using that same freedom to deny women birthcontrol, or benefit hate groups, or deny marriage to people who are unlike you. To stand on a street corner with a megaphone, screaming at the people going by that they are going to hell unless they believe in Jesus and repent to god. Countless times they invade college campuses under the guise of free speech to preach and yell and insult the students who mostly just want to get to their next math class. However, when that free speech is used in return, when someone starts to insult them back, when someone points out the flaws in their religious belief system, when someone stands up for what they belief in contrast to those crusading Christians... they claim that their freedoms are being taken away. That its their freedom of religion that we are now infringing on.

I stand against the double standard that this country has developed. Where it is ok for Christians to do whatever they want in the name of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion but that the rest of us cannot! I stand against the 78 billion dollars in tax revenue that could be collected from Christian Churches but aren't. We could reduce the national debt substantially if we collected that money. I stand against the hundreds of billboards and signs and offensive messages on Church signs that I pass daily. I stand against homophobia that is being propagated through the media and internet.

I leave with a question- How is it ok, for Christian hate groups to exist to the extreme they do, but its not ok for us to criticize them openly for it?

Todays debates

Its difficult as a historian to have an opinion about today's political debates. We have a certain amount of knowledge about the past where we can tell you how similar situations have resulted. We can show you how radical laws and ideas were originally opposed by the masses but how it all turned out well. How many laws that we have today, that seem so normal that we couldnt imagine our lives without them, were considered abonimations to generations passed.

However, at the same time, a historian also knows that you cannot predict the future. No two situations come out the same. We can only hope to learn from the past and not make the same mistakes twice.

This is how i feel about the health care debate. This is why its so hard for me to talk about. We cannot know if it is a good idea or a bad idea because its never been put into practice. We cannot predict its effects. But the system we have isnt working, that much can be generaly agreed upon. So what are our other options? That is what i want to ask those who are opposed. What do you suggest we do with the people who have health problems but cant currently get insurance? Those with untreated lupus or diabetes or back and knee problems? Give me another option that is better than this one.

Until then, i will continue to point out that radical laws have turbed out for the best in the past and at the same time we cannot predict the future. So in understanding these two things maybe we can stol arguing so much.

Thoughts

Its been almost a year since i last posted. But look for a new post about advances in my thought processes from the last year in graduate school.

On Constructs and Nations

On Constructs and Nations

                One thing I can definitely say about Graduate level classes is the discussions are very interesting and often heated debates over topics. Particularly, today, after reading Myth of Continents by Martin Lewis and Karen Wigen and Imagined Communities by Benjamin Anderson, a discussion exploded through the classroom.

                These books challenged the constructs that have been so ingrained into our education since elementary school. We are taught that there are a specific number of continents and they are Europe, Asia, North and South America, Africa, Australia and Antarctica. But the argument is made revolving around the question of ‘Why?’ Why are these the continents? How do we determine this? What are the distinguishing factors? Are they actually relevant?

                In other countries in other parts of the world, they are taught completely different things. In Russia, there is no distinction between Europe and Asia. They are the same thing. In many views, North and South America are one continent that includes Central America that is often overlooked in the American view. So who decides what continents there are? And does it even matter? Do we need continents? And if we do, then why?

                This argument can even be brought onto a smaller scale. A discussion about borders of countries or states. Essentially they are arbitrary lines drawn around a space and claimed by or given to a specific group of people. Now they are by no means imaginary as that people are often willing to die to defend these borders, but are there really any reasons for where they are?

                Imagined Communities continued this discussion about imagined constructs in society. It is even said that society itself is an imagined construct. That isn’t to say that it isn’t real. But instead that the concept that everyone in the community or society could actually know everyone else in the society is impossible. He goes on to explain that it is perceived connections to other people, things that bind them together, like language, religion, or other similarities, is what creates the sense of community.

                This led to a discussion about Nations and how you cannot be a true community because there is no way for everyone to know everyone, but they are bound together in a perceived or constructed community. From this the discussion of patriotism developed. An argument can be presented that in many ways, especially in the United States, that Nationalism and Patriotism has replaced the binding force that had been the Catholic Church in Medieval and Renaissance eras.

                During these time periods and even up until the 1800s, the argument can be made that what held societies and communities together was the connection to the Catholic Church. People were willing to die for their belief in their religion. Thousands of men traveled out of their countries in order to, as they saw it, defend their community, their religious community, from outsiders. Today, soldiers do the same thing, do they not? They travel away from their homes in order to protect their sense of community, their nation, from the ‘other,’ and they do so under the name of Patriotism. (I know that I have blogged about Patriotism before). Just as Catholics of the Medieval period were passionate about their religion being the best religion out there and that all others were wrong and were willing to die or kill to prove it, so are many today inspired by Patriotism.

                Once again, I have probably offended someone, but these are merely my thoughts after reading the books by Lewis & Wigen and Anderson and after the discussion presented in my class.

"Good Artists Borrow, Great Artists Steal" - Pablo Picasso

In response to a recent discussion with a friend, I felt like I needed to write down my thoughts on the matter of 'plagiarism'. Pablo Picasso supposedly said that "Good Artists Borrow, Great Artists Steal". This leads one to think about the concept.

First, I would like to discuss the idea of owning property. This is a HUGE thing in Western Culture and Capitalism. It is a normal concept to us that you own property. Be it that barbie doll or action figure that your sibling just stole and ran off into the other room with, or a house, or the book you just published. This is a seemingly normal way of life. It seems to just make sense and be the 'correct way'. We go so far as to punish those who do not conform to this idea.

From there we have to understand that this is not what the entire world thinks. In many cultures, in Asia and Africa, the concept of knowledge being 'owned' by someone is completely foreign. In Asia, quoting something from an authority on the subject is considered being the greatest respect that can be owed. Knowledge is owned by the society as a whole.

It is an interesting concept. Something to think about. It can be argued that the concept of owning knowledge, art, and such only adds more problems to society then they aid. Of course it is wishful thinking that society would change enough to allow such a thing. But it is something to consider when we start thinking about people who 'steal' copyrighted items, or download music, books, etc, or share a piece of artwork on a different website than the one it was posted on, or want a copy of a picture from a photo studio but don't have the money to pay 250 dollars for the copyrights to their own child's face that's in the picture.