HEY GUYS!!

Hey, is Nibia's show tonight??

Sorry to upset the academia of this here BLOG, but this is the only thing we ALL check!

Anyone know if it's tonight, what time, etc??

Post Blog: The Ethnography of Sex on Chapelle's Show

In class, we have been discussing the ethnography of sex, and how various social spaces and respectability are an important component of this. Joane Nagel's introduction in "Race, Ethnicity, and Sexuality : Intimate Intersections Forbidden Frontiers" talks about how race and sexual relations are intertwined concepts making up the study of race ethnography. She attributes this area of interest to being linked with the "white flight" from some major cities. Particularly she alludes to that of Cleveland, Ohio. When I was watching re-runs of the sketch comedy show Chapelle's Show I saw something that reminded me of the Joane Nagel piece as well as our class discussion on Tuesday. It was the sketch about the Mad Real World a parody of the popular MTV show The Real World, where a group of young adults live together in a house and hold jobs in particular cities. The collections of individuals that are usually portrayed on The Real World are typically multiracial, though still a majority white. The Mad Real World creates a parody of the show where all the people on the show are African-American except for one semi-wimpy white guy. This sketch is typical of the one's you see on Chapelle's Show which pokes fun and satirizes race relations in America. Here is is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvAEKX54GgA&feature=related

In this clip, it seems that the white individual is being portrayed as weak, naive, and extremely law-abiding. His girlfriend is supposed to portray the stereotypical white girl who is innocent but can be corrupted. Christian Finnegan, who plays the white guy on the show, is supposed to be the whiteboy who is unable to satisfy his girlfriend in the same way as his black room mates can. Lysol and the room mate played by Charlie Murphy are supposed to be stereotypes of black men who are seen as hyper-sexual.

It is also interesting to note that the sketch takes place in Philadelphia, as shown by the different shots of the skyline. Philadelphia is a city that has experienced what has been called "white flight" from the major urban centers. I think that the sketch is also parodying race relations in Philadelphia, and satirizing ideas of naive white boys like Christian Finnegan as being unable to prosper in environments like Philly. Do you think that this sketch is just a stereotypical portrayal of sexual ethnography or that there is any truth to it at all? Do you think that sexual ethnography and fluctuations in the racial proportions of cities are related to each other? And finally, do you think that Dave Chapelle was making a statement when he wrote this sketch or that it is just a way to commodify notions of African-Americans and white people?

The Varieties of Sex Work in the Media

Media discourse on sex work and its relationship to class has been evolving slightly in recent years, as attention has been brought to upper class, educated women working as sex workers by choice. "Belle de Jour: Diary of a London Call Girl" was an extremely popular anonymous blog by a British woman who had worked as a prostitute. The blog inspired a series on Showtime, "Secret Diary of a Call Girl." After years of speculation her identity was revealed as Dr. Brooke Magnanti, a research scientist at Bristol University. Her website is now brookemagnanti.com, and it includes the article from Times Online (where her identity was first revealed).

After reading about institutional attitudes toward prostitution as a marker of the "other," I'm interested in these kinds of representations. Why do you think this narrative has caught on with so many readers/viewers? Is there a significance to the semantics used in the sex industry (prostitute vs. call girl).

(Post Blog) To Shave or Not to Shave the Goodies?

After being in class today and having such an extensive discussion regarding body hair and the importance of it in the formation of sexual practices, feelings and ethnic identities, I feel as though the performative act of having hair (in general) is one that aids in the definition of our social sentiment as a country and society. This topic has truly made me wonder about the optimism and ability of our perspectives to adjust to those that are more reminiscent of developing ideals where we're encompassing a gender neutral and more understanding conceptualization of how the opposite gender is feeling. When Nagel speaks of sexuality and race, she states "Urban racial segregation is only one of a number of areas of social life in the United States and elsewhere where the sexual underlies and even magnifies the racial (3)." Therefore, in the midst of this dialogue regarding sexual behavior and shaving of the "goodies", we must also contemplate the discourse that's created when the ideas of sexuality and the markers of such are openly pending on social accountability and policing.

In addition to the above, the thought of parallelism is also creeping into our discussion atmosphere as it's appearing that we're moving toward gendered homogeneity. Both men and women shave multiple areas on the body, depending upon the culture, but there's a split in the dichotomy regarding reasoning, cultural goal in the shaving and when the shaving's appropriate. Therefore, the question that I pose to you all is whether or not we're moving toward a society of previously separated gendered practices that are now becoming more homogenized? Or are the hegemonic authorities slowly changing our perception of what it means to truly be either male or female and how the performance of those roles are evolving?

Pre-blog The Politics of Hair

This weeks readings on sexual citizenship, pornography and the racing of sex and sexing of race, got me thinking about the growing and very popular trend of shaving “down under.” Shaving pubic hair has a long history going back to ancient Greece, which has now become a controversial topic and act that is increasingly being done and debated. With little representation of what an actual and everyday woman is in pornography and the media, who can really know how many woman are being influenced by this idea of how a women’s sexual parts should look like. The argument on anti-shaving comes from the idea that shaving is a media and male created model of what female beauty is, which probably comes from the representations of woman in pornography.

Today, woman and men see not shaving pubic hair as a big, “no no.” Women who do not shave down there are often seen as women who does not take care of themselves, as well as being vulgar and dirty. Today’s culture has made it clear that for women who have hair anywhere other than the top of her head is gross and unacceptable. Shaving pubic hair is also seen as women making themselves and presenting themselves as weaker and vulnerable, since shaving pubic hair makes you completely naked and child-like.

What's really interesting is how you can google the word pubic hair and be linked to many different websites and resources about how to trim your hair, how to dye it, style it and how to shave it all off. And of course, America is now seeing minor industries popping up everywhere that sell woman products and services to achieve this certain look.

As Nagel says in her article, she talks about how ethnic boundaries and sexual boundaries join together to form barriers that hold some people in and keep others out, “to define who is pure and who is impure, to shape our view of ourselves and others, to fashion feelings of sexual desire and notions of sexual desirability, to provide us with seemingly “natural” sexual preferences for some partners…” I understand this may be a “too much information” type blog entry, but how do you think the readings tie in to this particular topic? Does a women shaving her pubic hair give her some type of sexual citizenship? What does this popular social practice say about woman and the social constructions of sexuality in today’s society?

Pre-Blog: Something New

"Something New" is a film written by Kriss Turner and directed by Sanaa Hamri. This is one of my all time favorite movies. I chose this movie for the blog because it supports the conceptual framework of Joane Nagel's introduction (Sex Matters) which is social constructionism. This movie focuses on interracial dating as Sanaa Lathan plays the star role of Kenya Denise McQueen who is working toward being partner at a well known accounting firm in Los Angeles, California. She and her female friends often discuss their need to establish relationships in spite of their economic status which seems to hinder the longevity and quality of their relationships. Kenya, is in search of a relationship but ends up getting something new but not something new historically in our three-dimensional space. After she and her friends decide to adapt a new lifestyle which is evident in the phrase "Let go,let flow" and "lower their standards" to being open to any and all forms of heterosexual relationships, Kenya really wasn't expecting to be matched on a blind date with Simone Baker who plays Brian- a white male. The story line is a romantic comedy that adds to the discourse of how race is indeed sexed in which Joanne Nagel discusses within the introduction of her book called Race, Ethnicity, and Sexuality: Intimate Intersections, Forbidden Frontiers.

Nagel makes it clear that when she says sexuality she is referring to both sexes only through a social perspective and she goes on to say "genitally defined individuals with culturally defined appropriate sexual tastes, partners, and activities" (pg 8). This definitely goes to support the social constructionist approach which questions the authenticity of the way things exist socially and looks for the subliminal reasons behind the way human interactions are produced in the same way and then put into action (pg. 5). Nagel then makes a clear point about how these same ideologies about sexuality and sexual practices are repeated throughout history and presented as normative activities operating under the very nature of hegemony. Nagel directly states:

...There will be a dominant or hegemonic sexuality that will define socially approved men's and women sexualized bodies (fat or thin,strong or weak, black or white), approved kinds of sexual desires for approved numbers and types of sexual partners (e.g., a monogamous relationship with an opposite sexed, same raced partner), and approved sorts of sexual activities at appointed times and places (e.g., vaginal-penile intercourse in the bedroom, out of public view).(pg.8)

"Something New" is definitely a visual representation of how race and sex are intersected and played out. The fact that Kenya finds it very difficult to be with this man because he is white is due to social influences about what the dominant way sex should be practiced which includes (but not limited to) a monogamous relationship with a person of another race. This is very important when you consider the statement that she concludes her introduction with which is "sex is raced and race is sexed" (pg. 10). Sex is not excluded from the idea of race and there is constant debate over whether or not scholars should include sexuality with any mention of race or ethnicity. This gives birth to the term ethnosexual in which power is distributed within the involvement of people of different races and things are given meaning because of this intersection (pg. 10). Also, the sexuality of Sanaa Lathan is apparently limited due to the fact that she is under pressure from her friends and family (societal influences) because she over steps her boundaries, so to speak, because she chooses to have a romantic relationship with a man that is not of color. I know there are many things to take into consideration with this film, however, this is the one thing that sticks out the most to me in relation to Nagel's article.

When you see the clip from the movie, what other movies or visual representations come to mind that support the intersections mentioned previously? Would you say that this interracial relationship is commodified for the same reason it is given visibility? How is power distributed within this movie and how is hegemony being presented to us as consumers of this film? Do you think this film is a good example of eroticizing the "Other" or does it add a new layer of complexity that takes on a different perspective with respect to the social constructionist approach?

Asian Alike Theory

In our class discussion, the racial formation theory is a concept developed by Michael Omi and Howard Winant to deconstruct the term race as it exist now. Race is seen as unchanging physical or genetic term. The racial formation theory is still being criticized by the Internet servers. Recently, I surf the Internet and found a website that justify that all Asians are seen the same way as the race regardless, if their Korean, Japanese, and Japanese.

http://www.alllooksame.com/
http://alllooksame.com/exam_room.php

The person who created the website wanted to see how people would respond to different examination of faces, tradition architecture, modern art, urban scenery, and food. The creator of the website is also classified as Asian, but he doesn't see the difference between his culture and other people who are classified as "Asians." He felt like the people would see his website as promoting racism perspective or upcoming issues. Nakamura in Digitalizing Race, emphasized a quote from Stuart Hall,"getting lost in the more global identification of cultural trends and their epic narratives of transformations of consciousness in the rubric of postmodern culture(Nakamura 12)." The All Look Same website indicates that the creator accept the categorization of being Asian because he's aware that the Asian Alike Theory is stereotypical action. He believe that he can conclude that physical appearance can't be justified by Asians. Now we are going back to where we start from about the deconstruction of race.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg-zSQZj8uM

This is an Asian that oppose the theory that creator of All Look Same website.


What is your reactions about the website amd youtube video? Who do you think is the audience? How is the racial formation theory criticized? Do you think that the creator is colorblind about racial identity?