DADT

     I don't get why it is such a bad thing for people to be able to openly admit their sexual orientation....if this is a free country, then why do people have to zip their lips just because they are in the military???  Isn't that a contradiction in terms?  
     I don't get the whole DADT thing at all.  I mean, if someone is willing to fight for our country and defend our freedoms-one being that we are free to be gay, straight, lesbian, or whatever-then, why can't they be honest about who they really are?  Shouldn't we be able to respect them anyway.  I really do not get why in the military, these heroic men and women are not allowed to discuss their preference.  That is like saying, "Hey-you join the military and are not allowed to talk about religion or your family or your political views."  I think it is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of, and of course the crazy 80something year old man McCain is coming to the rescue of the repeal.  Why does he care?  It's not like men and women are going to be running around with rainbow fatigues yelling that they are gay and waving rainbow colored flags around instead of the US flag.  I mean, come on....
     This whole thing really pisses me off and makes me feel, yet again, like I live in a country with a bunch of closed minded cowards who will never really be progressive to change-at least when it comes to politics.  It is 2010 people....who the hell cares?!  Does it really bother people that much that someone who has the balls to go and fight for our rights is gay?  Why does it even matter and as far as I am concerned, it is none of our business and is irrelevant?  Why is this even something that is up for debate?  First, the government bans gay marriage and tries to define marriage and now they are trying to reSUPERban servicemen and women from being able to be honest about who they are?  Isn't it just a characteristic or quality-like eye color or religious preference.  Sometimes, I just want to take my daughter and move to Europe so that she doesn't have to witness such hate and mistrust and debate over stupidity.  I don't because I am not foolish enough to believe that it is THAT different anywhere else.  I would rather her grow up in an overly open environment where people aren't encouraged to lie blatantly about who they are.  We promote equality and say this is the land of dreams and truth?  Yeah-fucking-right.  This place is so backwards.  Don't get me wrong.  I love my country and I believe in the US, but something I have lost hope in is the "American Dream."  Sorry folks-that is a myth and what is left of it it is dying by the second.  

Media Fueled Frenzy

Ok, so as I already highlighted the influence that media has on the graphic images that we are exposed to as a culture, I am now going to discuss a story that has been pissing me the &%$# off but is directly related to the media spectacle.

     Rev. Terry Jones is an ass.  I get his point that he has the right to free speech and all, as we all do, but he needs to get a grip.  How can anyone, especially a "holy" man, justify the burning of ANY religious document?!  I think that is hypocrisy at it's best.  I have heard this over and over while hearing this story, and dammit George Stephanopoulos (oh, how I love his politics), you were right when you said it this morning...JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT.  Does he not realize it is a big damn deal when the General of the Army of the United States of America, who is in Afghanistan with our troops that are defending our freedoms right now, asks and nearly pleads in warning that he should not burn the Koran because it would put not only our troops overseas, but all of our country at risk for mass chaos and rebellion with the Islamic community and the international community as a whole?!?!?!  To top it off, he says that if any backlashes were to occur, that he wouldn't take responsibility?  What an idiot!!  I would normally not comment on things of this nature only because I don't like to sound like a political whiner, but I had to voice my opposition of his planned actions, or should I say his now "suspended" actions.  Even the President asked him not to go through with this....why would ANYONE feel the need to evoke this kind of anger and frustration only to get some attention?  As I am sure that he too has supporters, he needs to think about the implications that his actions could potentially have on everyone else.  If he wants to burn one in the privacy of his own home or church or whatever, that is fine....let him do it.  He has that right, as he has made abundantly clear to the entire world.  He does not have to make a huge internationally public spectacle over it, does he?  Did someone drop him on his head when he was little?  Maybe his parents didn't hold him enough....who knows, but all I do know is that I think he is a pompous, stupid, arrogant, self centered a-hole who is selfishly trying to make a point that most people just want to see go away.

     Why do people feel the need to breed hate?  I thought the purpose of most religions was to bring people together in unity, understanding, and peace, not to reek havoc on the whole country on one of the most sensitive days of the year to represent our resentment towards what happened on Sept 11th nearly a decade ago.  I am sure that if you asked a number of the victims' families that have suffered unimaginably immense amounts of pain, if they support his skewed vision of justice, they would plead with him not to go through with this.....it isn't going to bring any of the people who died that day back and it isn't going to bring any of the soldiers who have lost their lives since that day back either.  It is only going to fuel a fire that doesn't need any fuel and breed hate in a world that certainly doesn't need anymore hate.

     His worship center is called the Dove Outreach Center and has fifty members...really??  THIS guy stopped the world in its tracks and gave him this much attention?  I mean, he is getting what he wanted-look how pissed I am, and I am hard to get stirred up.  Although he has suspended his super cool plan for now, the fact that he even took it to this level is absurd.  He says he cited his belief that "the Koran is evil because it espouses something other than biblical truth and incites radical, violent behavior among Muslims."  I wonder if he even knows what a hypocrite is?  I guess him choosing Sept 11th as the day to turn the international community upside down is a mere coincidence....I mean, what is to be expected from someone who says the person he respects most in the world is George Bush?  Oops....did I say that out loud?  Yes, I know....I am a whimpering liberal.  Who knew?

Role of the Critic

    It is my belief that the critic has multiple functions and roles in society, as well as responsibilities.  The more general understanding of the role of a critic would be implied…to criticize.  I feel that is not entirely accurate, nor is it the most relevant way to interpret the need for this role, not only in analyzing literature, but in a culturally significant aspect as well.  The critic should analyze, interpret, reveal, look, listen, and use all of their senses along with reason to inform and educate others or even if for the sole purpose of educating themselves.

            Most dictionaries would define a critic as being a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something or as a person who judges the merits of literary, artistic, or musical works.  While these definitions serve to be true, they do not encompass the entirety or the importance of the critic.  A critic should examine and evaluate all of the elements of a culture in detail in order to present ideas with a varying lens of the culture in seeing it from all possible and relative perspectives.  It is significant that a critic take views from as many perspectives as possible because it creates a newer medium for which others can gain insight.  Using this approach also allows for the critic to avoid creating a bias perspective in which they may deter the masses from seeing the truth that lies within a concept.  A critic should not analyze in vein, but rather envelope the purpose of mutual understanding-whether in terms of agreement or disagreement, acceptance of denial. Further, these are the responsibilities that a critic is accountable for in interpreting certain experiences. 

            What makes one critic relevant or more relevant than another?  What qualifies someone to openly criticize anything?  Does it come down to education, wealth, status, or is anyone qualified to be a critic?  In my understanding, if someone is going to criticize anything, whether it be art, literature, music, tradition, etc…. they should have viewed the subject from different stances, so that their understanding can translate to the general public-from the most common of people to the most elite.  Criticisms open an avenue for discussion, controversy, and diverse understanding.  A critic should present material to a culture in a way that they may not have seen it before-to show them something new that they had not perhaps even considered. 

            The role of the critic is often misused and misinterpreted as being one that only holds relevance in dissecting a particular piece of media or as someone holding some sort of authority voicing an opinion that may be the only “right” one.  I feel strongly that the critic has a duty to the public to be wise and thorough in their review of information before voicing a particular stance as their interpretations may influence one person or many people in a way that they may not have anticipated.  They also have the responsibility to be able to support their ideas in presentation, voice, and to also have answers for those who will ask the inevitable multitude of questions.  A critic has the power to influence the people, and being given this power by the people, they should be mindful of their power to create, destroy, or dispute any ideology they are attempting to represent or refute.

Porn As We Know It

     As we were assigned our artifact selection, a million different ideas ran through my mind, but the one that I was not able to escape was one Professor Herndon brought to the attention of the class…pornography.  Not pornography as we may typically see it-on cable, under our brother’s mattresses, on billboards, Jesse James’ and Tiger Woods’ ladies on the side.  No, not that kind of pornography….rather, the other graphic images that we, as a global culture, have come to accept and even desire.  The kind of intrusion upon such private moments that it makes me nauseous to think about that kind of unwelcome violation.  We have all seen it on the shelf at the grocery store as we wait in the endless checkout line while the guy in front of us argues about some coupon with the grocery clerk….you know what I am talking about “HOW SHE LOST 15 LBS IN 15 DAYS,”  “BRANGELINA ON THE ROCKS,” “SURI AT THE PARK-ARE THEY GETTING DIVORCED,” “ANOTHER ONE OF TIGER’S LOVERS COMES OUT OF THE WOOD-WORK.”  Yep, the good old fashioned gossip column that snowballed into front page headlines that grew into websites, billboards, covers of almost every magazine possible, and even entire shows dedicated to these “celebutant” good for nothings famous for the sake of being famous. 

            The other porn that I am talking about, another one of our guilty pleasures, is the kind that we all want to deny being entertained by.  It’s the kind of sick, perverted, mindlessly twisted enjoyment that some get from witnessing someone else’s strife and struggle.  Perhaps the images of people running from falling buildings covered in soot and ash-unrecognizable to anyone who knew them before the planes hit those buildings that day ring a bell, or maybe the images of helpless Americans sitting on a halfway collapsed roof, awaiting help that never came as the deceitful waters devoured everything that they once called their own, including their pride and sense of self—maybe that rings a bell??  I am talking about the graphic images that we as a culture have become obsessed with, can’t pull ourselves away from, and can’t get enough of…. the kind of images that creep into the experiences of people enduring the most hellacious amounts of pain imaginable all for the media’s disgusting attempts at reeling in viewers.  Does it work?  You bet it does, and it does with a consistency so sharp that you would think reporters are just waiting around tapping their pencils with their fingers crossed wishing that they could will a disaster of some sort to happen on their watch, or even better, that they are the first ones to arrive to crack the story. 

            Pornography is still defined, according to Merriam Webster, as “printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.”  How-might you ask-does this apply to the images I have presented?  We all stop and watch these train wrecks, whether it be a celebrity’s latest break up or drug habit or if it’s an oil leak that won’t quit or a hurricane that won’t back down…we all watch, but for what reason?  Perhaps it is because we have some convoluted craving for others’ hurt because it means that it isn’t happening to us.  Maybe for some of us, we do become somehow aroused by the thought of hell on Earth, as long as it doesn’t request our involvement…maybe even more so if it does.  Either way, this idea has always been intriguing to me, although I too have gotten sucked into this alternate reality of headlines and “breaking news.”  I want to see where I can take these ideas and how much I can uncover to this very real and very legal form of perversion.  I am going to take the “zoomed out” version of these ideas, and place emphasis on the issues that press at me the most.  I want to highlight the tragedy our culture faces as we obsess with pain that doesn’t belong to us.