Muted Group Theory

I remember those days back when I was in elementary. It was the time that our English teacher taught us about proper use of pronouns that if nothing of the subject is stated, the masculine pronouns should directly be used. She taught the lesson stiffly as if it were very serious. Now, to think about it, she being a woman did not have side-comments or reactions to it or so it seemed to be. I believe she experienced and hopefully is not anymore experiencing the false consciousness that men goes first even in language. I remember the times I forced myself to use "he/she" instead of just "he" in writing my sentences for I don't know what reason but still after checking, my teacher just crossed out the "she" part. It is a sad fact.

The Male Gaze

In this present world that celebrates masculinity, do men really look down on women as less capable? Physically, maybe yes but with a good reason that men grow up in sort of "harsh" conditions. But isn't Eve made out of one of Adam's ribs? She is taken from his side to be equal to him, under his arm to be protected by him and near his heart to be loved by him. I, myself actually do not see them any less human. Isn't it obvious in school that girls get higher grades? They always have the front row seats for them. I see guys all around carrying their bags or holding an umbrella up high to shade them from that powerful sunlight infused with UV rays. Women are loved and protected by the males. About the manifestations that push women to use their bodies to market whatever, it is true that men do have intense sexual desires, but not all of them. Do women have these also? I think they may share the same feeling but I believe only males are stupid enough to blabber about it and make it a big fuzz. Unlike women who prefer discretion.

The Last of Com11 - Cultural Hegemony

I understand how media plays a very important role in society. The moving force that influences masses in short spans of time. Cultural Hegemony stands on the belief that dominant groups within the society control or direct where the path of influence is going. But that influence did not really start with the whole group. An individual inside it must have proposed it or shared it to them and what does it take to be dominant? Money and fame? It doesn't take much. A lot of movie actors and big stars came from the lower class. So, anyone can be of influence in this society. Anyone can be that dominant force that guides the influence if they really wanted to.

The Political Economy of the Media

The media is controlled by a few which are called "the elite". Through which they hold great power over vast audiences. In a way it falls dangerous since the path of influence is narrow. Narrow in a sense that it is not open to many opinions. In this way these few guide the mass and the outcomes are relative to their intentions. As media has a massive audience, to use it to advertise products and goods is nothing but common sense, instant information relayed to the audience. In fact, it is very effective, though expensive, many still think it is ideal. That is how the media keeps itself running, short advertisements will cost thousands or even millions on the television. But does it really cost that much to run itself? Surely there are lots of profits behind. The media also have its eyes on every corner of the globe. In that way they are always updated and informed of the latest news and trends. These are what they use to control the masses. Such a good business, controlling us through ourselves.

Cultivation Analysis Theory

This theory explains the media as a mind setter. It is evident in our world today that media has great influence over the people and how quickly people conform to the information they receive. Just a realization, it is clear that the upper class of this country are the ones into trends and the latest styles though it may be the availability of resources, it is them who always dwell on such. The lower class on the other hand is not so concerned about trends;there are only a few social climbers at hand. About the influence of media on sex and violence, it is actually the upper class who are deeply affected. We may see the poor with children but that is just half the story. They don't have the resources for safe sex but as you look into the conversations of the upper class, sex seems to be a big deal these days. As for violence, some of the poor commit such crimes out of survival instincts, but the ones who are not experiencing any form of poverty are also into such crimes. Take for example the Maguindanao massacre. It was a ruthless act of injustice and they were the kings of their land. We can conclude that indeed the rich are more exposed and therefore more influenced by media's nets of sex and violence and the poor are just too busy working their asses off to dwell on such subjects.

Merchants of Cool

What is cool exactly? Is it simply the thing we call what is "in"? How exactly do we know what is "in"? I believe nothing is. What we may call cool maybe funny and completely awkward to another group. For example, I grew up as a simple kid, with casual shoes, a normal shirt, short cut hair and a taste for soothing music. Other kids may see me as a family boy, a mommy's boy, uncool and ordinary. In my point of view, they are the one's who need judging. Kids with baggy and loose jeans, extremely large tops, phat caps and with lots of chain hanging around seem pretty irrational. Being a gangster requires a lot of pulling pants up. Goths and what they call "emo" people also have this weird taste. They have black as the dominant color and for fashion they have skinny jeans, one-sided hair, leather bracelets with metal studs and at extremes they wear eye liners. Boys with eye liners? That's over the line. For sure there are more groups that exhibit their wild imagination and style. Is cool then relative to an individual? Where is the media taking the youngsters? Or better where are the youngsters taking themselves? I myself am not a follower of trends nor am I a trend setter. I see what's happening as pure brainwash. Youngsters now create their own worlds and live by their ego. What's worse is they will forget reality and lose rationality.

Culture is not what an organization has but what an organization is.

Dating back a little more than a year ago, I entered my freshman year in the Ateneo staying as a boarder at the residence halls. I was naive and under the weight of culture shock. In the residence halls we have our own definition of what OrSem means. Old folks usually call it the "initiation". It was a week of hard work and a lot of dancing and singing in front of a whole crowd. Rules were said and sanctions were given to those who disobey. The line that I could vividly remember was "the failure of one is the failure of all". Not only when we failed did our batchmates make up for it but also the heads of the event shared the sanctions. Now, all we thought during our participation was that this is bull**** and a complete waste of precious time but at the end of it all, I found myself a place in the system. I was and still am someone in this organization which is, by the way, ARSA. It stands for Ateneo Resident Students Association. I also noticed that every time my class ends, if I have nothing better to do, I automatically walk back to the dormitory. Good or bad it may be but I find myself at home with these people. Looking back into the "initiation", not only was it a big entry cost but also it was a view of what the organization is by living it. I guess it all boils down to it that that way of living was in itself the organization.