Saturday, August 22, 2020

the crime genre and christianity

Crime, Christianity, and suspense, Oh my! Will Christianity and crime novels work together? Let's dive into that.


Christian books are somewhat restricted under the guidelines of the genre itself. Cussing is out the window if you are under this umbrella. Some readers love it, others avoid it, but it still exists. Crime and suspense are a tough tightrope walk for some authors and writers. Others are not afraid to scare reality into their readers by showing them the dark forces at their worst, then piercing it with light. The contrast is rather perfect, actually, and wonderfully effective. Some go fluffy and cozy. Some get intense. It depends on your author and their publisher. With brick-and-morter Christian book stores closing, they now have to compete with nonchristian books. 

An introduction to crime and suspense is in order here. We have books that are formulaic- ending with an episode of Scooby Doo-like relief every novel, and others that end with your jaw on the floor and your brain running like a caffeinated hamster. This, too, depends on your author and whether it is suspense or mystery. Mystery is the standard murder, evidence, detective, and solution seen in TV shows and cozy mysteries. Suspense is when your main character is in danger, and while there may be a mystery there, it doesn't end so logically. 

You can get too much of it

Dark crime is something you should not consume for too long. Cozy mysteries? Go for it! Standard Agatha Christies and Raymond Chandlers? Sure! Dark crime and serial killers? Probably not for a long period of time. Your mind, if drawn to dark things, will be a little weird if you don't throw in some cozy books and Nancy Drews between your dark crime. 

Why, you ask, should I not read this for too long? Glad you asked. Upon consuming this dark content on binge-watch mode your brain may skew your perception of life and create a little too much adrenaline and fear. Reading suspense creates adrenaline. When you add the edge-of-your-seat element you create an odd combination of fun, addictive fear. It's why you practically can't put the book down at that exciting climax scene, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Too much of it, however, and you begin to think the person beside you at the gas station is a serial killer (when the said human really just doesn't notice you at all). Simply put, if you are paranoid or can't sleep well you should put the book away and watch something light in content. Dark crime isn't a bad thing but it should be taken in small doses.

The interesting thing about suspense and mystery is that women are into it, majorly into it. Part of the reason why could be that we feel us women are more likely to be victims of crime. We want to know how criminals think and work to avoid harm. Identifying red flags of strangers and people around us can help us avoid being attacked or raped (extreme, I know, but look at our world). Unfortunately, if the criminals, police, and court systems are represented wrongly we get an incorrect picture. Dark crime is, personally, my reason for walking the mall with a man beside me - too many sexual predators represented by James Patterson roamed malls for victims. I am a living example of this concept. 

Comfort in Justice

Despite the dark crime aspect of things, cozy mysteries and classic mysteries can comfort us. Mystery is a structured genre where we can predict that someone will die, the detective will solve the case, and the criminal pays for their crime. Justice is served nearly every episode or book. Scooby Doo, Nancy Drew, Agatha Christie and several others operate on this principle. It is predictable, logical, comedic (sometimes), and every action is explained in full detail (generally, but not always). We want to know it will end well, much like when we watch Hallmark or a kid's TV show. Familiar patterns are what us humans like.


Suspense, on the other hand, can be less comforting and leave you with less explained, less understood, and a charged-up mind. Watch some Alfred Hitchcock to get the full picture. Suspense has twists and turns to it. You can have justice here, but it won't be the same presentation. You read this for thrills, like one rides a roller coaster for the adrenaline rush. If you dislike predictable this is your genre. Some come dangerously close to horror. There is a fine line between suspense and horror that several authors jump to either side on, or straddle. 

Violence - when is it too much? 

Here is where Christians can wrestle with conviction. What does God think of your reading material? You may not be sure, even with persistent prayer. With ratings and TV shows you can usually pick and choose what you want to see. Violence, to be completely honest, is not anything new. Don't blame it on your media, parents, because our sin nature created it much earlier. Some blame books, TV, movies, and video games, but I say it is centuries old and media forms are merely reflecting back our history. Dark crime novels didn't create today's violence; way back when you could read about Jack the Ripper from a newspaper. 

 Yes, some serial killers have patterned kills after fiction. Sadly, even if we stopped unbalanced people from getting inspiration from fiction, it wouldn't end their tendencies. They would find a new source of inspiration, like fevered dreams, newspapers, and social media. Most sane minds don't imitate their fiction, frankly, so please remember that for the future. According to Psychology Today, "The more violent entertainment we've consumed, the more peaceable and law-abiding we become." There is practically no evidence connecting violence and media. It seems that we need to worry less about violence in fiction and more about how to handle real violence well. Panicking out of fear and pain gives the perpetrator media attention and fame, feeding the rush they may get from crime.

 As Christians, we do have to consider (and obey) what God says. He is for justice and truth. He does care about our words. With that in mind, some advocate for "safe" TV and literature. Mystery is on a spectrum that goes from cozy to dark. You can find what you feel God approves there, for sure. It is up to what you feel God is telling you. Supporters of Christian mystery say that it teaches the gravity and unyielding nature of sin and how to restore harmony. Some look at the focus - whether it glorifies evil and the dark. It depends on what you can handle, too. If you can't handle it, it is wise not to pick up the book.

With writing, there are different styles of violence. However, without a purpose they are not worth putting on the page. It's like putting a sex scene in a romance that doesn't need it - it turns readers off and makes them want to return the book. Violence with purpose creates compelling stories, where God's light shines and obliterates darkness. Written well, violence can work toward a better storyline. You can describe it in great detail to make a gruesome point, or leave it up the imagination of your readers. (Jurassic Park is an example of leaving it to your imagination.)


"I think that the best books leave as much as they can to a rich reader imagination. So rather than spend my time focusing on the corpse or a murder scene, I spend time writing the perspective of my sleuths encountering that scene and usually it is enough to see it through their eyes to strike a reaction rather than a visceral description." - Rachel McMillan


In Conclusion

Hear me out before you close this webpage. The long quote below is from Ted Dekker, a Christian author that is as far from tame when it comes to thrillers.

"In my opinion, any gratuitous use of violence for affect alone is wasted space on the page. But worse is the inauthentic state of many gray novels which only pretend there’s no dark conflict in our world. Avoiding the valley of the shadow of death only leads Christians into inauthentic faith which denies the power of the light to abolish darkness. Did Jesus turn away from the leper’s sores because they were too gross to look upon? No. He kissed their faces. Did those closest to Him hide from his gruesome death? No. They stood by and watched with deep compassion. Delicate yet poignant use of violence is appropriate if it makes the reader cringe and then rise triumphant when that darkness is defeated.  But if you have no darkness in your story, the light is lost. This is the fate of all gray novels. Christianity is the triumph of good over evil. Light into darkness. Let us not make a mockery of that triumph."

 "I have no problem with Christians who find violence disturbing—it should be. We all find ourselves in different stages of life, and it’s perfectly fine to turn away from that which bothers us. I would only suggest that they not judge others who will benefit greatly from facing their own fears though a novel—a safe place to do so. We have to ask ourselves this question: Why are we afraid? Why do we fear the storm? The question is at the heart of true Christianity in which light has overcome all fear. To that end, all my novels resolve in staggering love and peace. So then, I would speak peace to all, regardless of their personal preferences." 

I can't say it much better than Ted Dekker, dear blog readers, so I will leave you with one more quote, one that you can ponder this week. 


"The horror story, beneath its fangs and fright wig, is really as conservative as an Illinois Republican in a three-piece pinstriped suit…It's main purpose is to reaffirm the virtues of the norm by showing us what awful things happen to people who venture into taboo lands. Within the framework of most horror tales we find a moral code so strong it would make a Puritan smile." - Steven King

Pictures:

Ebay
Book Riot
Family Fiction


Sources:

https://crimereads.com/christian-suspense-a-roundtable-discussion/
https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/article/why-christians-should-read-detective-fiction/
http://hopefulforhomemaking.blogspot.com/2013/01/should-christian-read-mystery-novels.html
https://www.familyfiction.com/suspense-panel-writing-crime-fiction-christian-authors/
https://www.beliefnet.com/entertainment/books/whats-too-violent-for-christian-readers.aspx
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-storytelling-animal/201301/does-fictional-violence-lead-real-violence
https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blogs/soapbox/article/61222-minds-of-their-own.html
https://www.beemgee.com/blog/crime-fiction/
https://dc.cod.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1631&context=essai
https://www.bustle.com/p/what-happens-to-your-brain-when-you-read-true-crime-19348955
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/can-t-we-all-just-get-along/201904/do-you-love-murder-mysteries-youre-not-alone-heres-why





Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, August 15, 2020

Christian Fiction Genre Stereotypes

The Christian genre is a somewhat cursed genre - even amongst Christian circles - due to it's predictable, unrealistic nature. Hallmark channel uses this genre often because it is not upsetting and goes under the category of "easy watching" or "feel good" films. You don't see cussing, intensity, or shocking images in it. Let's dive into why it is a somewhat cursed genre. 




First of all, I will defend some authors and films in the Christian genre. Ted Dekker is a thriller and suspense writer that reaches intensity levels that keep you on the edge of your seat. He is making good points on Christianity while avoiding Hallmark levels of unrealistic. The films by Sherwood pictures are also realistic and aren't cheesy. That being said, Christian genre fiction and nonfiction can be a bit cheesy, ignorant of reality outside the Christian bubble, or be a self-help book in disguise. Not all authors and directors go under this genre, including C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, and still represent Christ in fiction - and they did better without the genre attached to them. 


The Standard

Christian genre usually includes standards that other genres don't. This includes making the main character upright and wholesome, but not caring what other characters do. It also includes, in some cases, no alcohol. They cater to the Christian audience. The books are supposed to promote good over evil, family, and generally Christian values. Sex and language are out, and if sex is had out of marriage either they repent or face consequences. 

The main formula you see is a near-perfect young woman with personal issues, maybe a mystery to solve, a man to come along and solve everything, and reconciliation with morals, family, or God. In other words, not relatable to anyone that is outside the Christian bubble. Given they are aiming for that bubble, it makes total sense. Writing can usually come off as fluff or bible-thumping, depending on how one writes it. Unless you are Ted Dekker, then you are as far from fluff-writing as you can get. 



The Audience

The Christian bubble is a subject all by itself, but I'll sum it up here. It is a group of Christian people who tend to stay within the Christian culture without looking outside of it. They tend to dance around issues, in my experience, instead of addressing them. They are not horrible people, but may be ignorant of the world outside them. They are the main target of this genre because of this fact. A language-less, sex-less, cozy novel is just what they want to enjoy on an average afternoon because it is comforting to them. They look for "safe" TV, most times, so Hallmark is right up their alley. With this explained, I'll go on. 

Our audience for this does, for real, want culturally relevant issues and hope in their movies and books. They want comfort and family, to know God has a plan and is there in all the chaos. They want to know they make an impact on their community. They want to know God cares. (He does, in case you're wondering that yourself.) 

You see historical fiction and Amish fiction often. Some have, however, noticed that  Amish is sometimes just a "good person" and Amish life is misrepresented. Historical fiction is usually a good way to avoid fluff or bible-thumping. World War II and Great Depression are common eras to use here. Fantasy is also a good fit here and is an awesome way to avoid the fluffy, cheesy writing. The challenge here is to create culturally relevant, realistic characters that give a message of hope and faith - all while avoiding the fluff and hitting readers over the head with bible concepts. It doesn't sound so easy. Add to that trying to get diverse readers and it makes anyway break out into a sweat while editing the genre. 

The Audience That Avoids The Christian Shelf



I will confess this to you now - I tend to avoid this genre and I am a strong Christian. I do not watch "Safe" TV and would rather know what is out there, instead of ignoring real-world issues. I don't believe we can help others and be ignorant of what is going on in the world around us. This doesn't mean cozy mysteries don't show up in my library (they do, they make good breaks between dark crime), but it means most of my library comes from outside that shelf. I say it is a cursed genre because even some of us Christians avoid it due to the formulas and cheesy perception of it. 

There are some, like me, who advocate for reading both (in my case) with the knowledge of what we believe in our minds. The idea is that we were never supposed to live JUST in the Christian bubble, not all the time. Nothing wrong with faith fiction - we just shouldn't read that alone. We can develop better faith if we know what is going on around us. Outside this genre we can have a challenged faith, thus creating empathy for different points of view in an effort to understand others. Portrayals of reality open our eyes to what we need to know about while living in the world.

In the case of some Christians they are not abandoning their faith, but are advocating for abandoning the Christian Fiction genre. If it is in fact avoided by the general public in favor of other genres, it is losing money. Writers can be labeled as Christian, but not books or movies. Yes, they can connect to Christian ideas, but they don't have to be cursed with the label of "Christian genre" and "Hallmark-like". Amish fiction, however, may have a whole shelf. Walk into Amish country and walk around the shops and you will see they sell. Other aspects of the genre, though, not so much. 

When I say Christian Fiction, I don't include nonfiction, devotionals, and Bibles. I want to clear that up before you ask. None of those are fiction. Those are the part of the Christian genre that can clearly be classified as Christian. Christian fiction is novels, cozy mysteries (not all, but some), and any fictional writing that includes God and faith in it. The fiction is what some publishers have abandoned, and it doesn't surprise me that they would. 





Pictures:
Faithfully Magazine
Mike Duran
Redeeming God

Sources:
https://therideronline.com/stories/2019/10/stereotypes-of-christianity/

Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, August 11, 2020

playboy bunny history

Playboy bunnies, a subject you would never expect from me. Except that I started watching Drunk History and I was inspired by one that showcased Gloria Stienem doing an expose on 1960s Playboy clubs. What was it like to be a bunny for Hugh Hefner? Let's dive into that. 

The late Hugh Hefner and his wife Crystal Harris Hefner


Gloria Steinem wrote on the less-glamorous aspects of the Playboy club, such as sore feet, pay lower than promised, and crude comments from customers. According to Drunk History, the club members could date the bunnies if they held a membership key, though I can't find any reference to this anywhere else. I'm not saying that Drunk History has any reason to lie, but I can't find it in writing. I seriously doubt they'd advertise something so close to prostitution in their "Bunny Manual" if it happened.

A little bit of history on the Playboy Club is in order. Only 21 percent of members even came in the door, mostly because they only needed the key itself to boost their status in 1960. Nowadays that is not a bragging point, but instead counts as a skeleton in a closet. The bunny costume was designed by a woman and took some convincing to get Hefner's approval. While the costumes are, in fact, extremely revealing, the policy of "look, don't touch" has always been in place. In practice this is probably hard to monitor when men come in to lust after women over a drink. For some it is hard to respect a woman in a bunny tail and ears, especially while drunk and rich. The club closed in 1991. One thing to note on Hefner was he was not tolerant of racism. When a few of his clubs didn't let blacks in the front door he took them over and changed it. He gave Aretha Franklin her start at 18. 

Hugh Hefner died at age 91 in 2017. His family and Daren Metropoulos (owner of the Playboy Mansion) control his company. Hefner said he'd stop releasing nudes in 2016, but his son reversed this in 2017. The stream of internet porn makes Playboy look tame, by comparison. Playboy is very much alive today in the form of casinos and clubs, as well as jazz festivals. 

Playboy Bunny Rules


Starting with terms for the bunnies, a playboy model is a playmate. Playmates are not bunnies. A bunny is a waitress or bartender. They had bunny mothers as supervisors. Jet bunnies are stewardesses for Hefner's plane "the big bunny" or "hare force 1". There are door bunnies, cigarette bunnies, cocktail bunnies, and floor bunnies. I probably missed some, but I think you get the point. While working they are referred to as Bunny (name here). Bunnies can also refer to being a girlfriend of Hefner. These ladies get breast augmentation money, free hair care, a weekly allowance of 1000 dollars, and a room in the playboy mansion. 

Some of the rules included specific times and how to smoke, no gum chewing, and not being allowed to date customers, coworkers, and members. These members were not allowed to touch the women, in writing. They addressed men as Mr. (name here). To get this job you had to learn how to garnish 20 cocktails and identify 143 liquor brands. You can't be dim-witted to get this job. You even had to walk like a bunny, one leg over the other. To master the bunny stance, you put your legs together, arch your back, and tuck your hips under. You "bunny perched" on the back of chairs. There was a bunny bow to serve drinks elegantly. 

When it came to costumes, you could get demerits for certain things, including failing to "bunny bow". If your appearance was unkept, tail was dirty, lipstick too pale, worn shoes, or didn't look "bunny perfect" you were given demerits. Merits could cancel those out, like being good at service, but it was a little odd, to be sure. However, if you want to find an original costume, just to try it on (good luck - they were tailored to the women who wore them) you will have to break into a museum to do it. The bunnies turned them in afterward and only a handful of museums have the costumes from 1960. 



A 1960 uniform included cufflinks, a bow tie, a satin one-piece, tights (with pale tights under them so all looked like the same legs), a bunny tail, and bunny ears (which sometimes gave women headaches). It took an hour before work to put on the uniforms (and the hour before was not paid, sadly). They were measured and fitted for the uniforms and given two with choice of color. They were told if they arched their back during the fitting it would fit better. Colors varied and were matched to the women's skin tone and eye color. It included padding and some stuffed their bras to fit it.  The whole costume was also a tax deduction. The black costume was earned. Nowadays the bunnies are wearing two pieces and body paint, as of 2000s. 

Expose vs. Good Memories

As much of a sex symbol as these women are, Gloria Stienem's views are challenged by a book called The Bunny Years by Kathryn Leigh Scott. She claimed that they had flexible hours, paid more than average jobs in the area, and were given financial freedom. Scott claims plenty of women went on to intelligent careers in entertainment, science, and other areas because they could work and pursue education. 

Steinem, on the other hand, said they were not paid what they were promised, the costumes were uncomfortable, and customers were rude. She said it was awful, in direct contrast to Scott. She also claims there may have been a prostitution ring going on and the club members could do whatever they wanted and date the bunnies. 

What view was true? Well, historians have no reason to lie, and neither did Scott, so maybe both. It is possible different management did different things and, as mentioned before, "members can do anything" is not likely to be put in writing for the cops to find. I will not confirm or deny the possibility of prostitution. Given that bunny reunions are held even today, it may not have been awful for every bunny. To put it bluntly, a job is a job. If you were needing a job and that was the only one you could find it wasn't the worst job you could have. Not the best, honestly, but not the worst. What's worse - being a walking sex symbol or poverty (in the most extreme circumstances)? 



https://www.businessinsider.com/playboy-bunnies-history-2017-9

Pictures:
Pinterest
E! Online
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, August 1, 2020

The Real West vs. The Movies


The old west has been used by Hollywood to show a wild time when gunfights were common and outlaws were rampant. From 1803 to 1890 is considered "the west". Let's dive into that and see what it really was. 




To be fair to Hollywood and various others in the film industry, there were gunfights. That wasn't a lie. What is a lie is that the gunfight at OK Corral happened at OK Corral with rifles. Truthfully, it happened with handguns, beside a photography studio, and lasted 30 seconds. They were all six feet from each other or closer. 

Westerns portraying the 1900s and violent times are significantly less accurate, too. The west was cleaned up far more by that time. It is around the first settlements that it was the roughest. Imagine single men with guns bought from the gold rush cash they acquired, all of them scarred from the Civil War and dealing with Native Americans defending their homes. Add the raiding parties and bandits, then we have a violent time. Most traveled with all their possessions, too. 

The other most prominent lie we hear in film is the term "cowboy" as positive. It was derogatory, actually, and the good cattlemen preferred "herder". Rivalry and scuffles came with being a cattleman. 
Billy the Kid most likely became an outlaw by being on the wrong side of a rivalry. It was possible to find yourself in that position if loyalties became strong enough. Forget the cowboy hats, too - they didn't wear them. 


The Civil War

From 1861 to 1865 the war over slavery was less prominent in the west, but make no mistake, it still existed there. That war churned out raiding parties and experienced killers that later wreaked havoc. Jesse and Frank James, whom the Pinkerton Detectives couldn't catch, began their experience with a pro-confederate raiding party led by Quantrill (William Quantrill). Quantrill was one of the worst raiding parties of the Civil War and ran through Missouri and Kansas recklessly. 

The other issues around the Civil War included PTSD that no one knew could exist, being desensitized to violence, and too many weapons out there. You can come home from war with your gun and your PTSD, in essence. No one wants that, but it happened. The training and trauma created outlaws and unhinged men in the process. Did everyone come back shooting up towns? No, but a few did and found friends to help. Most outlaws were opportunistic, driven by greed and alcohol, and lacked any restraining force.

Jesse and Frank James


Law and Order 


The Pinkerton Detective Agency took care of some of these outlaws. Their failure to get Jesse and Frank James was possibly their worst failure. Law had a hard time keeping track of everything, understandably, as more land was acquired. The Hole-In-The-Wall pass that several outlaw gangs used was never penetrated by the law. The Goldrush didn't help. The only outlets for social activity were saloons, brothels, and gambling houses. For the most part, each town had their own rules and sent posses for the outlaws around them. Vigilante justice and lynching were common. In 1851 the San Francisco Committee of Vigilance was created. This group consisted of 700 citizens and passed judgment immediately without a fair trial. Many were shot or hung. Similar groups began in several states and lasted for a long time. Some cities, like Tombstone, enforced the rule that no civilians can have guns in town. 

Railroads

Late 1860 brought railroads, and then the first transcontinental railroad. They combined the Central and Union Pacific Railroad. When you see buffalo hunters being paid to hunt the buffalo they are being paid by the railroad. Not only did it feed railway workers, but it also made it possible to keep laying track on land where wild bison got in the way. They nearly killed the buffalo and starved Native Americans, who were eventually forced into reservations. 

Camels

Did you just read the word "camel"? Yes, you did! The US Army ordered 75 of them to the tune of 30 grand. They were meant to help tame the west because of their durable constitution. They were originally only used in Texas for supply travel. They worked so well that they wanted more, but Congress killed that dream of getting more. Confederate Texas ended up letting the animals graze. One went to battle and died in battle, another was pushed off a cliff, and several were caught and sold. Some even ran around feral (wild). 

Sources:
https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/wild-west-how-lawless-was-american-frontier/

Pictures:
Society Pages
History

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, July 27, 2020

Men and visual minds

Men are visual. A phrase that most women have heard every time they wear short shorts at summer church camp. That phrase is not entirely understood unless you look at the situation from a man's point of view. Shall we dive in?



Based on the research I found, it is irrefutable and I have no doubts. Men are far more visually stimulated than women. Unfortunately, it is a fact used (sometimes) to make dress code violations one-sided. Men can control their actions. They are not animals. However, we should be as kind as possible to them in what we wear (and I'm not just saying this to be restrictive). To be entirely fair to men here, they can't just turn it off. There may not be much we can do, truthfully, to help when the advertising world is making it hard to avoid.

There was an experiment proving this done at Emery University Health Sciences Center. The men processed visual stimulation differently than women and you can read about the whole study by clicking my first source link. The basic concept is that men responded quicker to visual cues compared to women who saw the same visual cue. I highly suggest reading the study release. It is fascinating!

Going into more detail

Curiously enough, whether the men around you are gay or straight doesn't matter here. They are still responding quicker to visual cues whether they are dating women or men. They are triggered by the image both physically and psychologically, with no way to turn it off. Looking at advertisement images can tell you that advertisers take this and run with it. Sex sells. Images that have only body parts without faces reflect how much men can focus on parts of the body. These images don't always have to be connected to emotional intimacy - which can confuse women, most of whom connect emotional intimacy to a lot of things.

 To make things harder on men, this quick catching of visual cues is involuntary and isn't going to shut off, especially if they have been addicted to porn at some point. Women should probably think before lumping all men into the image of the lustful pig. Some women end up being hard on men for simply noticing other women, and mostly because they don't understand how men are wired. I am not saying a woman should tolerate a man that is actively flirting with every skirt. Let's be clear. I am saying that noticing a woman with less or tight clothing is a visual cue and thus an involuntary action. Actively staring or whistling, on the other hand, is a step past that.

I almost don't want to put this in here, but let's talk about sound and visual cues together. Understanding men is my overall goal in writing this post. If you are a married or sexually active person you know what sex sounds like. Not to be too crude, but take those sounds and pair those with an image of a seductive woman. This is even more powerful than an image alone. Ladies and gentlemen, I now present the porn industry taking advantage of men's wiring. I don't think I need to elaborate. It really messes with men's heads. 

Things to note: The man's smug smile, the woman's submissive pose, and how she's pressed against him. Basically, the man is the boss, and you are the boss if you wear these jeans.


I'm also going to acknowledge how the "perfect" man is represented in media. One of my primary sources mentioned something I never would have thought of before. Men's underwear ads have more, well, manhood represented. Again, not trying to be crude, but they are representing men as more than average. Not only that, but the six-pack abs of the models probably don't help the average man feel good about themselves. The underlying message here is that the perfect husband is attractive, muscular, and "packing". Marketing says that you wear it and you are a greek god. Subconsciously it affects men. I think this also applies, somewhat, to any pants ads you see for men. In both cases, some include women in them who are extremely attractive (thus playing off of visual cues) and imply that if you buy those jeans or underwear you get a woman. I don't want to show you an underwear ad, so here is a jean ad that shows a man who is clearly the boss (because power makes anyone feel good) based on his facial expression. (On a comical note, I hope he doesn't move because that lady will fall when he does.) I'll let you analyze the rest of it yourself. 

Different men - different sensitivity

Christian culture, as a whole, advocates staying pure until marriage. Christian men tend to have a harder time doing that when media parades women in bikinis and tight clothing over social media, billboards, comic books, and TV. It is hard to find a film, especially when aimed at men, that doesn't have a revealing costume for the women or a sex scene in it. I refer you to Fast and Furious, a franchise aimed at men who like cars, explosions, and action. Women's films, on the other hand, show women in a more-clothed manner. Little Women has a vastly different costume department compared to Fast and Furious.

That being said, some men don't care to shield their eyes. They enjoy it. No guilt at all. Some don't see porn as a problem. There is a Friends episode where Monica gives the guys porn. Some guys have a low sensitivity, while others are high sensitivity. Some don't try to divert their minds from it, while others actively do so. It depends on how you were raised, as well as active choices made as an adult. Those who had trouble with porn in the past have an even harder time than most and had to go against their wiring to get help. 

Now, what does "scantily clad" mean for men? Depends on the culture. If it is a culture where women cover up most of their body it would most likely be any part of the body that gets revealed. The woman showing the most skin gets the most attention. Different times in history have women covered more or less. (It explains why ankles, at one point in time, were considered sexy. It is the only part of their body not covered!) According to one of my sources, it is, in fact, impossible to be a reasonably attractive woman and not be noticed, no matter what you're wearing. Yes, the most skin is noticed first, but you will be noticed because men historically notice women.




More information 

Before we assume men are only attracted to physical beauty, I have two sources and multiple personal experiences that say that is not the case. Men are not animals, by any means, and can control their actions. They care about personality, emotional intimacy, shared values, and intelligence. They care about more than a good body, ladies. They do care about us.

What we wear does matter. They didn't lie to us at church camp. If you thought they did and wanted a blog to prove it you are not going to find one. The scientific studies and first person sources don't lie. Showing skin effects them, and so does tight clothing. If I'm honest, I did not realize just how much men are made uncomfortable. Again, I will say that some will soak it up with no guilt, but others? Not so much. It is hard to focus on a sports game when you can't unfocus on the volleyball shorts. 

Sports and dance is a sticky issue, especially sports that require freedom of movement that makes it difficult to wear more clothing. I ran cross country, a sport that had a culture around it that was anything but modest. Some of us women probably don't want to hear this, but be careful what you wear. It does impact men around you. Going into this topic was a journey where I didn't know what I'd find. Now that I can see what men are seeing, I am questioning what cosplays to wear, what media I consume, and what I wear on a daily basis - because I was oblivious to everything before this blog post was researched in full. If this had been explained to me in this much detail a long time ago I would have done some things differently. 


What now?


If you are now wrestling with all this information as a woman I'm right there with you. What do we do with all this and should we change? What do we do in response to be kinder to our men and their brains? I don't quite know, really, and some men don't tell you a lot of this oftentimes. It is mostly talked about by women because it is better presented by women most times (if there needs to be a conversation about it). That being said, some women can be overaggressive about modesty-patroling, so if you had a bad experience with this you aren't alone. 

Part of the problem I am seeing in this world is that us women have been taught sexy is beautiful, then clothing stores (most of the popular ones) follow. That gives us clothing that covers less, leading to less modesty and more temptation for the men. Media role models teach us what beauty is, so we follow like sheep without knowing it sometimes. To make this harder on those who want to be modest, the clothing stores that have modest clothes that don't require layering are hard to find. Layering works - don't get me wrong - but I would prefer to not layer, if possible (just me, personally, especially during summer). So, women are taught to change themselves to be sexier, men are told to "suck it up" and deal with their wiring being taken advantage of - and here we are! Aren't we a big happy family (to be taken sarcastically). This is not just one person's fault when you truly logic all this out. Our society has done both genders wrong, really, but we should be helping each other out. 

Now we come back to the question of what we do about this mess. Well, what convicts you personally has a lot to do with it. If you feel you shouldn't wear something in front of someone, don't. If you feel no conviction about your outfit at all, it's okay. It has to do with where you are, too, to a degree (as some places are more tolerant), so it may be you feel okay wearing your low v-neck at home while Netflixing, but not at bible study or college study group. You may run in a sports shirt that covers in the Canton area, but run in sports bra and shorts on back roads. It has a time and a place, in essence. It also helps to consider what you are showing someone in film and media (for example, will it cause them to have to resist their wiring to focus?). Yes, some men don't care what they soak in, but just as many do care, especially if they had previous issues with porn. We may be showing them something they never wanted to remember, or worse, trigger more unwanted images. Take the temperament of the men around you into consideration, as well as history. If they regularly don't care, well, they don't care. If they are super careful with movie choices watch what you show them. Use common sense, in short.



Pictures:
Glamour
Show Biz Cheat Sheet
Slideshare



Sources:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/03/040316072953.htm


1st person sources:
Since I am not sure who wants to be acknowledged and who doesn't, you know who you are. I realize some don't want to be. Thank you, those who helped.




Posted by at No comments:

Monday, July 20, 2020

News and media- making money off of our distress

False news! Misinformation! Controversy and shock! Let's talk about how reliable your news is. Did you ever wonder how much power your local news station held over you? You'd be surprised how much it dictates your thoughts. 
 


Now, your news may not tell you what to think, but it is biased. No human is entirely without bias. I blog and I can tell you that bias is everywhere. Including here. And, to boot, your news tells you what is important and should be discussed. During the coverage of George Floyd you may remember Covid 19 going into the background real quick, and that was because the news stopped covering Covid 19 when a less-stale lead came up for them to follow. 

Is this anything new? No, they've been doing this for years. Sensationalism? Yellow journalism? It is still out there. Look at war newspapers and tell me what you see. One can quickly come to the conclusion that there is nothing new under the sun. The media still tells us what to focus on and converse about. People-watch and keep an eye on the news. With no prompting, see what the people around you talk about. Do they focus on Floyd? Covid 19? Black Lives Matter? Yeah, we're being led on a leash, and the media hold the end of it. 

A look into how they do it

For starters, they may do what I do on occasion - tap into trends to get more views. Do you want honesty from me? I do this more often than you may realize. Occassionally I find trends on my own, on accident - like the people-watching blog posts, but most of the time I keep an eye on twitter and the conversations around me. 

Click bait, catchy headlines, trending topics - and all get more people to buy news to get more of it. This is especially so if the bias is in the direction of your opinion. They need money, rates, and advertisers to make their business go. If you think reality TV and social drama is stupid, well, think about the amount of money thrown at it. This is because people feed it. We feed and fuel what we want to see. So, sex and drama sell. There was an experiment done once that proved that the public responds to negative and danger-related words quicker than good words. In some ways, we feed what we see online and on television. A word of caution on breaking news, though - it is sometimes put on without being fact-checked, then corrected later. 



Also, think of politics. Political agendas, and many nonpolitical ones, are dictated or set by current news issues. What issues do government figures talk about, even debate on? The ones that are talked about most, of course. The loudest person gets heard. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, as my late great grandmother used to say. It isn't a new idea, really.

Fear and News

Now that we know how the news sometimes functions (not always, sometimes), we connect our current issues to it. Covid 19 and Black Lives Matter are popular topics, as of right now. The news can set the tone of what to think about just by wording, so seeing fear-related words in the news is nothing new during this season. It sets a tone that says "danger! danger!", whether it is dangerous or not. To be clear,  I  am not calling either topic fake. I am simply saying that you should probably assess what truly is dangerous based on evidence and common sense. Keep this in mind when the breaking news bulletin comes in or Dewine speaks on anything. 

I said this before and I will say it again - news needs views to keep their business going. Expect to hear about nothing but Covid 19 until it is truly over or replaced by a more compelling news topic. As long as people seek information on any topic (obsessively or moderately) the news will give the people what they want. Do you want to cut down the hype? I would suggest (kindly and honestly) that you stop adding to the hype. Less demand equals less supply. It is a common-sense theory that just might work. I look on facebook and see nothing but debates on masks, politics, and Black Lives Matter, with Defund Police added to the mix. We are trying to scream our opinions at people without listening. You want it to stop? Stop screaming and start listening. 

The dark side of what is already dark is that we divide ourselves with the help of the news. We create loyalty to causes, some of which are good and some of which are bad, that result in lines in the sand. We were not formed by God's hand only to fight constantly over every social issue known to man. Fear is nothing new, sadly. It is a function we discovered all by ourselves. Fear can make someone a human weapon and steer us places we didn't know we could ever reach. I'll put this as nicely as possible - cut the leash that media and fear holds over you and imagine everyone as God's own child, then make decisions. Don't blindly follow what your news station tells you. 

Pictures:
Jstor daily
State of Digital Publishing



Sources:

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, July 6, 2020

The Boston Police Strike of 1919 - a look back at history


Boston, Massachusetts. Sept. 9th, 1919. That was the day that the police force in Boston ran out of negotiation options and went on strike. After the first night of quiet, the city went crazy and militia were called in. Murders, property damage, rape, and looting were rampant. The volunteers (scabs) taking the officers' place were in way over their heads. 





I thought I'd bring you some long-forgotten history today, and maybe some perspective. The police force in Boston had wages that hadn't risen since the Civil War, and the war wages that were promised to rise if they waited, didn't rise. They were denied having a Union to speak for them, most of them were immigrants (Irish, mostly), and working conditions were awful. They had to try to afford expensive uniforms that cost around  $207.25 on a $21.90 weekly salary.  

How bad were working conditions? Try rats in the bunkhouse and one day off for every fifteen days on the job. 12 hour beats ( walking routes) on the streets. They did speak up. They tried to get provided uniforms, higher wages, and better work conditions for months. Then Edwin Curtis became commissioner and forbid any outside clubs aside from American Legion. 19 officers were suspended for going against his orders and creating an AFL chapter (on Aug. 15th). The vote on Sept. 8th on walking out on the job was 1,134 (for) to 2 (against). 




Sept. 10th Arthur McGill was shot on Howard Street when Scollay Square was cleared. Four hours later, three men were shot dead or fatally wounded elsewhere. Sept. 11th Richard Reemts, a striking officer, was shot dead. Raymond Barnes was killed 11 am. that day for curiosity at a group of craps players being moved (more than 30 of them). That night two young men were killed after finding either a craps player or a man picking up a manhole. The final death was Sept. 13th, when Gustave Gaist (WWI veteran) was shot trying to seize a soldier's rifle. 

At the end of all this violence -when a majority of officers walked off the job - returning service men replaced them and got everything they had gone on strike for. Calvin Coolidge, the current governor, was quoted saying "There is no right to strike against public safety by anybody, anywhere, anytime." This meant that no striking officer recovered their jobs, and they struggled long after to continue making income. Their last resort to get heard cost them everything.

Why remember this?

 Defunding police is a big issue nowadays. This time some of the public wants to cut funding to police, or disband them entirely. This could potentially resemble what our world may look like if it happens. Less police mean less help for the vulnerable. Do you want to see a world where you are afraid to leave your home at night? Or even during the day? The images of this historic strike may give you some idea of what disbanding police may look like and how Irish (or immigrant) police officers fought to make a living. Let's not forget our history lessons. 

Also, if you want a good representation of this historic event, I suggest the historical fiction The Given Day by Dennis Lehane. It is an excellent picture of this event and time period. The link for the book on Amazon is below. 






Pictures:
UMass Boston Blogs
Universal Hub



Sources:
https://www.britannica.com/event/Boston-Police-Strike


Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)