Dating Discourses and the Truth about men and women.

Found on Cosmopolitan’s website, Comedian Amy Schumer outlines ten ways in which woman can win over the heart of any man in under 10 seconds! To give a brief example, one tip she gives women is to cry uncontrollable in front of your man without explanation because “men love mystery”. I find this interesting because in my head I have decided what she is saying is totally absurd. Without even thinking, I recognize her advice as more of a joke than anything. Despite its comedic take on dating, this article brought up a legitimate point; there is a right and wrong way to date. As soon as I read the article, all I could think about was Foucault; I couldn't help but think of his notions of discourse and Truth. I wanted to understand the productive discourses of proper dating practices.

        For Foucault, the concept of discourse may be explained as a social process which involves the production of knowledge (Foucault, 1971). Certain forms of knowledge become known as Truths, those "common sense facts" which are taken for granted. When discussing the proper form of dating, a Truth could be that men always ask the women out. When asked why women and men act this way, the answer is often "because that is how it has always been". This practice is repeated and soon becomes a Truth. Similar to discourses surrounding homeless peoples, there too are discourses and Truths which center around dating. The fact that I have decided this article was written in satiric form is enough to prove Foucault's theory.  
            Back to Amy’s article now. It is very interesting to see such an ironic article posted on the website of one of America’s leading female publications. As I have already mentioned above, the article was meant to be a joke, however it was published for a reason. Perhaps women also find it a joke to constantly be worried about the proper way to date. Does it not seem odd that there are guidelines which women must follow in order to be date-able? This is not to say that women are once again the victims to men, however. Amy has taken a bold step to bring forward a trend in North American dating, where women are expected to follow certain rules in order to become attached. I wonder about the men who do not want to date women who follow guidelines and the women who have no interest in those men who expect them to. Could there be two or more sets of guidelines to be followed to meet your sweetheart? Is there even truly one proper guideline?

The Homeless Body, critical ref. # 5

The Homeless Body
        When I was really young, maybe seven or eight, I witnessed an extremely violent fight between three homeless people in front of the Sheppard’s of Good Hope. Two men were brutally beating a young woman on the streets while many people watched. My mom grabbed my arm and pulled me away and we left very quickly, along with many other people. I remember thinking “why didn’t anyone try to stop them?” I asked my mom why these people were fighting and all she could say was “because they’re homeless”. Despite being very young, I knew that assumption was wrong.
        As Samira Kawash (1998) suggests, the homeless person does not have a face, but instead is an imagined figure who is innately dangerous, filthy, dependant, and intrusive (Kawash, 1998). This imagined perception of the homeless body could explain my mother’s explanation for the fierce attack we had witnessed. It may also explain the lack of aid given to the woman who was being beaten by the two men. It is just assumed that this sort of behaviour is typical “homeless” behaviour. What the general public tends to forget, as Kawash (1998) points out, is the reasoning behind these individuals state of being (or not being). Over the past three decades, since the 1980s, states around the world have decided to cut funding and social programs for those who need them the most. Many scholars have argued that the same State that supposedly protects the public has also created the body which threatens it: the Homeless Body (Kawash, 1998). The safe streets act found in many cities throughout Canada (Hitchen, 2005) as well as the recent “Tent city” in response to the Vancouver Winter Olympics are perfect examples of this argument. In the safe streets act, the homeless body is assumed to pose a threat to the success of local businesses and their clients. The proposed act wishes to ban these bodies from inhabiting the streets surrounding these commercial properties. What this act seems to have left out is an alternative housing and economic plan which will be needed to support the homeless bodies elsewhere.

The Olympics as a Political Space

        Once again, the Olympic Committee is under the world’s magnifier. This is not a recent problem faced by the committee, however. We do not have to look too far back to notice the reoccurring pattern of political strife. In fact, in the history of the Olympic games, the world has witnessed many controversies. The 1972 Summer games in Munich, Germany, functioned as a stage for the political opposition between Palestine and Israel proper when members of the Israel Olympic team were murdered. More recent is the example of the tent city that went up in Vancouver to host- or more accurately to hide the city's homeless population. We look to the future now, where criticism surrounding the upcoming 2014 winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia has already surfaced.
        The latest buzz surrounding the 2014 Olympics focuses on the Russian venue which hosted the 1864 defeat of the Circassian people, who were brutally attacked and murdered by the Russian Tsarist military (Zhemukhov, 2009). Many Carcassians feel the defeat should be labelled as an act of genocide, for up to 97% of the groups population was believed to be systematically murdered (Zhemukhov, 2009). The focal point of the criticism is centered around one of the main venues of the Sochi 2014 winter games is said to be one of the historical battlefields where many Circassians were collected and deported to the Ottoman Empire. Even if one does not know much about the political history surrounding the Circassians, it would seem highly insensitive to host an international event at the same site where an act of genocide has occurred in the past. When confronted, the Sochi organizing committee released a statement where they said it was not their place to comment on the political or historical events of the 2014 venue (Reuters, March 2010). I realize the committee members may not have been directly involved in the genocide, but they are indirectly influencing the present situation by refusing to comment on the issue. Personally, as public figures in the global lens, I believe it is as much their responsibility to comment on the issue as it was Canada's responsibility to comment on our own nation's problems at the 2010 Winter Olympics.

How to Win Over a Guy in 10 Seconds

How to Win Over a Guy in 10 Seconds

Posted using ShareThis

Environmentalism: Religiously Ecofriendly in a Secular Nation.

   
        I must admit the only Television I watch these days is online. Of course even online T.V involves commercials (how else will people get paid right?). One of the commercials revealed the new "Cascade Extreme", a 100% recycled, chlorine free paper towel which will change your "environmentality". The purchase of this towel is apparently going to clear the air, save the trees and protect the lakes and rivers, says Cascade.
        I brought up this commercial for two reasons. First, I would like to applaud Cascade for being "environmentally friendly". However, why can't we all just use a washable cloth instead? If Cascade truly wanted to save the trees, clear the air and protect the waterways they would realize that paper towels are absolutely wasteful. They should learn a thing or two from the people over at www.greenlivingtips.com
        
Now, before you go and call me some freaky hippie chick- hear me out. 

In light of the recent Oscars, 2010.

I have found an interesting article discussing the existance of racism, inequality and imperialism in highly successful motion pictures. The author argues that while it is great to shed light on issues that would otherwise go unseen, they are once again told through the middle-class man's story.

The state of Exception

 Law without Law: the State of Exception

       The October Crisis (1970) rattled the bones of many Canadians. The war measures act was put into place, allowing police officers to arrest without warrant. Martial law was also put into place, allowing the Canadian Military to temporarily rule the country. What is interesting is the general public’s willingness to cooperate, despite the fact that they themselves could possibly be stripped of their rights
(Clément, 2008). After the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, the Bush Administration administered similar measures to that of the War Measures Act, which exist almost ten years after it’s installment; Guantanamo Bay for example detains international prisoners, providing them with little knowledge as to the crime they have (or have not) committed ( Irons, 2009). In both cases, it is easy to see the potential for human rights violations by those in power. Knowing this, why is it that the public so freely gives its consent? As Antonio Gramsci (1971) suggests, the key to submission is found in the "spontaneous consent" of the masses; the Intellectual is used by the dominant group as a medium to render support of the masses (Gramsci, 1971).

Milgram Experiment

Milgram Experiment

Gramsci and Submission in a Nutshell.

Antonio Gramsci, the Italian philosopher imprisoned by the Fascists in the late 1920's believed the key to submission could be found in the "spontaneous consent" of the masses. Who are the Masses one might ask? The Intellectual- used by the dominant group as a medium to render support of the dominant class (Gramsci, 1971). For Gramsci, Hegemony was not a top-down state of power; state authorities did not barge into homes forcing individuals to submit to their power, (not in all cases). Instead by consent and coercion. Gramsci's theory of spontaneous consent raises a  puzzling question: Why do we consent, knowing the outcome offers little to no benefits to us? 

In keeping with Nomadic vs. Sedentary lifestyles...

When thinking about this weeks critical response, two things came to mind that could not be integrated into the response, so here they are as a sort of side note I guess...
.
Pastoralism in Kenya
As you may or may not know, Pastoralists live and profit off of the livestock they raise. Because of different harvest times and droughts, Pastoralists are forced to migrate. This would mean that Pastoralists lead nomadic lifestyles. One could imagine the dangers of entering a strangers territory; the Pastoralists could be interpreted as enemies attempting to attack, when they are simply looking for water and a grazing pasture. Like Malkki (1992) suggests, the state of liminality Pastoralists fall into is a consequence of their lack of "place within a space".

Also, an interesting ethnography that ties in with an idea presented in Malkki's article, where indigenous people become the land, as apposed to the land becoming people. Malkki raises the question: if an indigenous person wanted to leave their "homeland" would their identity be left behind as well?

The article is titled "The Shifting Middle Ground: Amazonian Indians and Eco-Politics", (Conklin & Graham, 1995).  

Transplantation and Uprootedness: Dangers of the Nomadic Lifestyle

          In Up in the Air (2009), George Clooney plays the character of Ryan Bingham, who spends 320 days out of the year travelling around the country for work (IMDB, 2009). Bingham is a corporate downsizer for an American company; in simple terms, he fires people. To most people, such a career would lead them to depression, but Ryan Bingham is not like most people. The “corporate downsizer” lives out of a suitcase, spends most of his time on airplanes or hotel rooms leading a nomadic lifestyle. If it weren’t for Bingham’s devilishly good looks, his character would be the antagonist. In a sense, the audience feels pity for him. However mundane Bingham’s life may seem to the audience, the character does not look for sympathy, in fact he seems to enjoy the nomadic lifestyle.

          When looking at the example of Ryan Bingham, one could ask why so many people seem to feel pity for the corporate downsizer, and not the people he is firing. In National Geographic: The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity Among Scholars and Refugees (1992), Liisa Malkki notes the important link between person and place. In her article, Malkki suggests that it often isn’t until an individual is transplanted or uprooted that they discover the importance of their place within a space (Malkki, 1992). One could even go as far to say that such “places” are vital in the maintenance of the social order; in the case of the British Columbian “Safe Streets Act”, one individual accuses homeless peoples as “aggressive” beings who take part in “unlawful behaviour” (Hitchen, 2005). Similarly, refugees are viewed as “amoral, without any sense of personal or social responsibility” (Malkki, 1992). Although the homeless and the refugee have different causes for their displacement, they do possess a commonality; whether temporarily or permanent, they do not have a place within a space to call their own. As Malkki suggests, they have been “uprooted”, away from their “homeland” perhaps, or erased from their “family tree”. As one may notice above, the importance of person and place is often described by using arborescent terms, comparing an individual to a tree and his or her origins to a trees root, which is deeply rooted into the land or soil. Perhaps now we can understand the pity we feel for Bingham’s nomadic lifestyle.

Re-thinking the “Education” System

Re-thinking the “Education” System

        One of the famous thinkers of our time, Paulo Freire suggested that knowledge may only arise when questions are raised, theories are tested, and content is invented and reinvented (Freire, 2000). Rather than using the traditional “banking system”, where the teacher “deposits” knowledge into the brain of the student, Freire suggests we take on the “Problem-Solving” approach by which the student is actively engaged in the subject rather than simply memorizing. The problem with the banking system, Freire proposes, is that the student does not consciously understand the subject, but rather sees it as a separate object with no relation to other objects. Another problem with the banking system is found in its biases; the information one student receives will mirror the information given to another student. Furthermore, that information deposited into the students mind has been previously conceived as important knowledge, leaving no room for any creativity and flexibility in the curriculum. Thirdly, the banking system leads the student to believe that he or she is not capable of individual thinking, for he is a student, who passively waits to be taught by the teacher. There is a danger in this feature of the banking system; the student comes to understand knowledge as something only attainable with the help of a teacher, who ultimately filters information before depositing it into the mind of the student. By the time that student has graduated, if he or she is fit to graduate, he will have been predisposed to many of the subordinate middle class values and motivations.

Homelessness and the Olympics. Cause and effect?

I found an article that is relevant to both this weeks lecture on homelessness, and the overall theme of state control, colonialism, and imperialism.



According to network member and blogger Gord Hill: "The Olympics have a long history of association with fascists, colonialists and authoritarian regimes ... Since the 1980s they've displaced over three million people and contributed to massive increases in homelessness, as we've seen in Vancouver."



Check it out, let me know what you think...

http://www.vancouversun.com/travel/Louder+madder+more+prepared+Here+come+protesters/2466810/story.html

Cowboys and Indians

Cowboys and Indians

        In my grade ten history class, I was required to learn about the Indigenous peoples of Canada. Our class decided to focus on the Mohawks, who were known as the warriors. The textbook told stories of the Mohawks fighting neighbouring bands and even fighting their own people at times. The picture the textbook painted was simple: the Mohawks were a “savage”, violent group of people who could not control themselves. Of course, what the textbook left out was the fact that much of this “savage” behaviour was due to the onset of European colonialism. The reasoning behind the violent dispute is not important, however. As a nation, we turn a blind eye to the truths of our past, and instead focus on the story we are taught as a child; the white people came to save the “primitive”, indigenous population from themselves.

        Michael Yellow Bird describes such stories as the one above as a master narrative (2004). Yellow Bird explains that such stories depict Indians as “savages”, who cannot control their behaviour. This story also emphasizes the Cowboy’s defeat over the Indians in past battles. In the United States Army for example, the term “Indian Country” is used to describe hostile territory (Silliman, 2008). The use of this term by the
American Army is used to describe “hostile, unpacified territories in active war zones” (Silliman, 2008). One could ask why the American Army uses such a degrading term like “Indian Country” to explain war tactics, in areas such as Vietnam and Iraq which do not have a substantial Native American Population. Silliman suggests that through the story of Cowboys and Indians, American soldiers and the general population alike have come to understand any enemy as the Indian, whom they must conquer and defeat (Silliman, 2008). By using this term to describe hostile enemy ground, “Indian Country” suggests that Native Americans remain the American enemy. As Yellow Bird (2004) illustrated with the Cowboys and Indians childhood “toys of genocide”, children are taught from a young age that the cowboys are superior to the Indians, identifying themselves as the cowboy who always survives, defeating the Indian.