:: The Bitch Girls ::

Where the Personal becomes the Political at our whim...
:: Welcome to The Bitch Girls :: bloghome | bitter at thebitchgirls.us ::
[::..update..::]
:: We've moved! Come visit us at our new home. However, for those days that Dreamhost pisses us off, this is our backup site.


[::..archive..::]

:: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 ::

Wow! Less than 24 hours and I feel like I have missed a lot on the bolg. At least Bitter isn't blogging or I would have to read gun articles for half an hour to catch up on what is going on. But you know, it is kinda good in a way because I have to say that I am more aware about various and sundry issues because of the blog and all the oustide reading I have to do to keep up with it.


So, let's recap. Spooky, I have to say that Chris definitely gets bonus points in my book for being Southern seeing as how I am partial to my Southern gentlemen and all (of course extra bonus points if he is from the Deep South)!


I kinda have a complaint that is related to what First Bitch said about sitting on her ass and consuming all the stuff (family site, you know...) that is spewing out of the TV. One of my classes discusses social issues of the 1980s and we are given multitudes of analytical essays and whatnot to read on said issues. The only thing is that we are given very one sided essays. I more often than not find my self wondering whether or not I would agree with the author if I read a similar essay taking the opposing side. That is kind of why I like Crossfire on CNN. It gives a little more of both sides of the issue, plus Tucker and Carville freakin crack me up! But at any rate, I always see a little of both sides of the issue and I feel like my prof just wants us to see things either one way or the other. As much as he preaches that we should think for ourselves, we only can do that if what we think is either what he thinks or in basic accordance with what the author of the piece we are reading thinks. For example, we read a piece on AIDS policy and what the Reagan administration did and didn't do about it. He expected that we be enraged, but frankly we are so removed from it that I find it difficult to pull out such emotions. Besides, I am sure that there are essays out there that would argue for the defense of the Reagan administration's handling of the AIDS crisis. So I guess what I am getting at is that if we are supposed to have classroom discussions about these social issues, we should be exposed to both sides of said issues rather than just one. That way it is a true discussion and not just regurgitation of what the author of said essays have already stated.


On a separate note, I came across something in the aforementioned class by Henry Louis Gates, Jr.'s "TV's Black World Turns but Stays Unreal." In the bit of the article that I read, Gates discusses the portrayl of black Americans on TV in the 1980s. I came across this passage which is kind of humorous in writing style, but thought provoking in substance. It reads:
"[The] process of paternal domestication [of blacks], in effect, made Cliff Huxtable's character a logical next step. In fact, I think of the evolution of the Huxtable character, generationally, in this way: imagine if George Jefferson owned the tenement building in which Florida and her family from 'Good Times' lived. After John Amos dies, Jefferson evicts them for nonpayment of rent. Florida, destitute and distraught, tries to kill George. The state puts her children up for adoption.
They are adopted by Mr. Drummond ('Diff'rent Strokes') and graduate from Dalton, Exeter and Howard. Gary Coleman's grandson becomes an obstetrician, marries a lovely lawyer named Clare, and they move to Brooklyn Heights. And there you have it: the transformation fo the charter type of the black male on television."

So my take on race relations is really misconstrued as a result of growing up in the South in a predominately white town on the outskirts of the suburbs, but going to school in on the south side of the city in an area that is, at my best guess, upwards of 85% black (mostly lower middle class and lower class homes). But I found this take on the evolution of the portrait of black Americans in 1980s television to be pretty interresting, so I thought I would share it. Any comments on this or race relations between blacks and whites would be much appreciated.


Also, we have been discussing feminism. So, I want to throw this question on the table: Do you label yourself a feminist? Why or why not? In what ways? What is your definition of a feminist?


My personal take on this is that I tend to stray away from ists and isms because I typically am not willing to accept all of the baggage and conotations that come along with such labels. There are few things that I am passionate enough about and have strong enough convictions about to warrant bearing the heavy cross that comes with these groupings. I mean, check out this for example. I actually think it is a kinda funny portrait of the feminazis. Then again, this raises the question of is feminism a bad word? If if has so many negative conotations, why don't women reclaim the word and make it their own, after all third wave feminists supposedly aren't as crazy as they are made out to be...

...
:: Baby 12:11 AM [+] ::
...
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?