Women in the Loop

When broaching the topic of social justice issues gender and feminism is a good place to start. After all most people have a woman in their life in one way or another. By opening the conversation to women’s rights, society’s views on race, sexuality, and class becomes easier. One way these inequalities arise in a culture is through their media. So when women in film are portrayed as only able to fill a limited number of roles the transfer of that ideal to real life is understandable. To show the power of that women’s roles in film can have I turned to the films I enjoyed for analysis.

When we covered the Bechdel Test I thought about my two favorite movies, and whether or not they would pass. The first movie was a 1991 drama about an African girl’s experience in an Australian boarding school in 1965. This movie, while a great example of intersectionality and close to my experiences, didn’t truly capture modern identity or a wide variety of female characters. This was important to me because although history can be a great teacher it can also be used as an excuse for stagnation after small change. Because of this reality I looked at another movie: In the Loop, a 2009 satire. This movie portrays professional women in relatable modern circumstances, as they navigate the “boys club” of foreign policy. It also has some snappy lines.

In the Loop is a political satire where the invasion in Iraq is impending. When a paper written by Liza Weld against an invasion is cited it gets circulated in the UK and subsequently in the U.S.. A group from the UK’s International Development office is asked to go to the U.S. and there hilarity ensues. They uncover a “war committee” and the debate to go to war begins. The movie shows both governments clumsily picking up the pieces as Linton Barwick, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Policy, pushes for invasion. From the outset with Judy Molloy the Director of Communication for the Department of International Development in the UK, and throughout with Karen Clark and Liza Weld in the U.S. we are given examples of female characters who serve as integral parts of the film.

I looked at each of the three main female characters in this movie and deconstructed their character’s impact in the real world. Firstly Liza Weld, the assistant to Karen Clark, is has to continuously defend herself against a male junior staffer Chad, because he feels as though he can be rude to her. At the same time he follows the male U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Policy in order to appeal to him, while he spends little to no time with his real boss who is also Karen Clark. Being the assistant of another woman deviates from the archetype of “assistant. Weld stands up for herself in the mists of the “boys club.” Unlike Chad she does not step on eggshells around any of the men she interacts with. Within her age group she is by far the most mature in the film. She does sleep with one of the British men during the film but, unlike him, her arc is not affected by the relationship, and she stays professional as her partner is late to a meeting they are both a part of the next day.

In the UK Judy Malloy really challenges the recognizable trope of the “mother figure.” She is tasked with aiding the UK delegates, but often highlights the shortcomings of her colleagues. When the Secretary of State for International Development goes to the U.S. Malloy ends up providing much of the information as he fumbles in America. Even though she fills a troupe she, unlike the usual “mother figure,” has more than one dimension. She is a very strong woman who is able to stand up to the king of insults. A very loud and boisterous welsh man: the director of communications Malcolm Tucker, routinely belittles his employees. Malloy is one of the few people who are able to stand up to his antics, even when the men around her can’t.

“You’ve really got it in for me haven’t you.” Judy Molloy

She is a good example of a realistic professional woman. In many movies the personal life of a successful woman is focused on more than her work life. Molloy doesn’t let her personal life bleed into her work.

Karen Clark holds a very high position, but still needs to defend her efficacy as the males she interacts with even if they are working with her. Clark works very hard, but is continually belittled. She needs to defend herself to be heard which is a reality for many professional women. When she is unfairly challenged she keeps a level head as the people around her aren’t taking war very seriously. Her main goal in the movie is to expose the reality of the proposed invasion and uncover shadowy practices. The prospect of war is juggled in a cavalier fashion by Linton Barwick and Malcolm Tucker. Karen tries to bring the “Boy’s Club”’s decisions to light as she tries to work against war. All in all Karen Clark is a good metaphor for the experience many women have today. Whether it is dismissive comments or exclusion the themes are not just common in the movie but in the real world.

So how do these fictional women impact the real world? Well if people reflect what they see in media consciously or subconsciously the way women are represented and treated can heavily influence people especially men. Because of the impact sexism in media has on men it is important to change the media if we want to see a change in the core of our culture. The opinions we see in media can and do proliferate into our understanding of gender and gender roles. Surrounding yourself can help to undo negative constructs and help to build positive and fair views. Movies like these not only benefit women, but change the world around them.

Armed with this knowledge the next time you are watching a movie pay attention to the women, or lack thereof, because as Lieutenant General George Miller said: “Unofficially this apears to be bull shit.”

The Tug-of-War of the “American Dream”

American individualism has affected the way Americans see their place in the world. Manifest destiny and the threat of the Red Scare are examples of the oppositional forces presented to us. This simplification of what leads to success has bled into the way we act towards not only one’s own situation, but also the situation of the very rich in the country. Even though there are many examples of a mix of Capitalistic and Social practices working very well the “American Dream” mentality and the polarized political system keep many people who could change it from ever questioning it. When we are mediated to think that people who can’t make rent need to work harder, or people that can move their mansion back a few yards away from the shore don’t need to work any harder we loose sight of what the real issues are. The system is broken not the people.

As someone in the middle class, and therefore with a certain amount of privilege, I never really thought about what that really meant. For years I was under the impression that the middle class spanned from the poverty line to somewhere around three quarters of a million dollars. In reality the middle class has been self reported as anywhere between $35,000 and $100,000. Once you see the actual data it puts celebrity wealth into an unbelievable category.

When the “99%” movement was started in mid 2011 it was meant to highlight the income disparity between the classes. In the U.S. if you think of big names in music or film they earn more than even the top 0.01%. With all of these numbers floating around things get a little tricky. When we have unclear lines of where people stand in the scope of wealth in the U.S. it draws attention to the issue, but at the same time distracts from possible changes. Distraction from the real issues has been a huge player in the widening income gap.

When arguments over how many millions or billions people bring in makes the news, and the buying and selling of exorbitant properties makes the tabloids the carrot of untouchable wealth is tied tighter to its stick. What really should be making the news is the funding of campaigns by the top 0.01% of earners on both sides of the aisle. This perpetuates the legal and educational systems that keep people from questioning their financial situations. If the picture you get of wealth is enough money to do whatever you want it is much more than that. Extreme wealth in this country is enough money to change the world around you to fit your needs. This type of wealth is certainly achievable, but the issue arises when a few people are able to change their environment with wealth to the detriment of others. So just like with the threat of Communism and the examples we have seen of it’s failure we are also able to look to our own society for the issues with unfettered capitalism, and see its effects on wealth and class in the U.S.

Why do unfair class systems exist in “The Land of Opportunity?” It may be just that. The hope that the U.S. promises has lead to the demise of the very people seeking it. In order for everyone to be able to achieve “the American Dream” there needs to be equity. Equity is different than equality because equality does not ensure fairness, but equity does. Individualism only supports equality, which only works in a homogeneous society. On the other hand equity gives people the same opportunities as anyone else. Equity has been associated with communism and thus the red scare, when in actuality equity negates corruption. In conclusion the picture of the “American Dream” can not include complete individualism, because they work towards two different realities.

Conditioning

People have two basic influences on the way they see the world: intuitional and conditional. On one hand we have been trying to decode how humans actually intuit the world around them, and this can be seen in the form of the bond between a parent and their child, or the will for self preservation. The other way a person builds their view of the world is conditioning. This is a charged word that is usually only used to describe salivating dogs, and mice in mazes. In actuality it means so much more than that. Anything not encoded in your DNA is conditioning: your home environment, the schools you go to, and even the climate you live in all contribute to how you see the world. When it comes to race, conditioning is much like socialization. Humans are naturally social creatures and in order to navigate our world we have created social systems. Whether race is born through tribalism or geographical luck the concept has been conditioned into the identities of everyone on the planet.

For me my conditioning is fairly typical for a upper-middle class girl with my interests, until you add the fact that I am black. Growing up in private schools, and in places like Wellesley, MA and East Providence, places where 85% of the population is white, my experiences have primarily consisted of white people. From the confusion I felt after going to a friend’s Seder dinner and realizing I was in fact not Jewish to navigating as the only black kid in my middle-school-grade I have always had to live not just as a person, but as a black person.

In the middle of fifth grade I was the only one left. As I signed the card and posed for the group pictures I didn’t realize what was happening. My classmate with a silent “N” in her name was going to live with her extended family in a country skinnier than the state I lived in. I was alone because until I went to Putney I would be the only black person in my grade. At the time this meant very little to me. I knew everything: what was and was not racist, the entire history of American slavery, and even everything about the complicated world of “black hair.” I was an unaware token student who was “white on the inside” and didn’t listen to rap. In some ways this was a facade, but as I look back on it I realize it was simply how I was conditioned. I was conditioned through my surroundings, and I wasn’t the “wrong type of black” I just was. Now that I am no longer alone I feel in some ways more lonely. Not quite part of one side or another I just am.

With my new realizations I have been able to answer the question: “Is that racist?” more holistically. But in order to get to that place I had to go through the very formative experience of middle school. When I was in sixth grade I had U.S. history. This included learning about slavery, and because I went to a progressive private school our teacher gave us an accurate portrayal of it. We read out loud from books as my class played a game of who will have to say “nigger” out loud. I would look around after it was read as people avoided eye contact with me and pushed through the material. As my encounters with answering for my race have changed so has the way I’ve dealt with them. I am now able to answer questions and confront prejudiced actions and remarks as a self aware black girl, not as a the “white on the inside” and doesn’t listen to rap girl.

With my new reflective identity I am able to see the reason behind the questions and actions: conditioning. As of now there is not racist or bigoted gene, it is purely a creation of societies. Because of this I can, in some ways, understand why I have to answer for my race. This is because the conditioning I have that is an ever-present feeling of my race is not in white people. They instead need to experience race through others. This leads to the questions, but what leads to the bigotry and racism? That is something not only I would like to know, but something the world needs to know.

They Told Me: A Deeper Look into Gender Identification and Feminism

As I look at the world I see it through the eyes of a cis gender woman. This means that I can only speak for myself when it comes to gender. Something that has been really important for me in the recent future has been feminism. Feminism is a term that comes with many connotations. One that I wanted to delve into was the idea that feminism is not only for women, but it is for everyone. In order to get another perspective on this I was able to talk to Putney’s very own Charlie, a gender neutral student in my dorm. This was important for me because I wanted to be able to get a well rounded understanding of how feminism relates to gender identity. Charlie was a valuable source not only because they are gender neutral, but because both feminism and gender identity are topics they are passionate about. Once I figured out who I was going to talk to I was able to sit down with Charlie and have a chat. Out of this I came to a few conclusions about how interconnected these labels really are.

By definition gender identification and feminism are connected, but it is an important base to understand when thinking about their symbiosis. Both have elements of the want to express yourself. This means that our society has expectations for gender that hinders self-expression. This can be very damaging to a person’s sense of self. Not only can you suffer mentally from not being able to be yourself, but as Charlie pointed out there can be harsher “consequences: social pressures and sometimes violence.” Violence against feminists is not as widely known, but as Asa pointed out in class if you choose to speak out like Anita Sarkeesian violence is a very real possibility. I asked Charlie what they thought a solution for this could be, and they said that if we wanted to change our culture needed to be able to break away from the “arbitrary rules” that we have for people and realize that it isn’t as important as we make it. Completely changing how we look at categories was not something that I had thought of before, and it got me thinking: Why is this the case? Who would actually be negatively affected by that fundamental change? This was the next avenue I explored.

Gender identity and feminism are both perpetuated by people who don’t believe it pertains to them, when in fact both apply to everyone. As Charlie said: “It’s a moral issue, it’s a people issue.” The first step to ending the consequences people face would be propagating an understanding of everyone’s role in this negative system. In order to change a part of our society we need to start with the way we see ourselves and others. The fact that feminism applies to everyone not only women is lost on many. Similarly gender identification is seen as something only for trans people, even though it pertains to everyone even cisgender people and gender fluid people. When you view human rights issues as a chore you need to deal with it looses it’s meaning. In order to live in a more functional society we need to not let the way others express themselves affect our lives.

So what do we do with this realization of necessary inclusion and tolerance? We need to change our perception of our media which is filtered through the eyes of a straight cisgendered white male. Instead of seeing that type of person as a “blank slate” on which layers of oppression are tacked on we need to be able to see people for who they are. This tired saying usually falls on deaf ears, so the reasonable thing to do would be to start with small things like equal pay and equal civil rights. Only then can we begin to reflect on ourselves, and how we perpetuate these hierarchy.

The New Millennial

Millennials or Gen Y are a very distinct generation for many reasons. Millennials are the biggest generation alive today and in history. This is because of one large factor: we are, for the most part, the children of the baby boomers. Once the largest generation now their children are coming of age and are more demanding of the world. We are also the most diverse generation, which may contribute the different world view that millennials seem to have. The world is becoming smaller, and this is largely due to the internet. Because millennials can easily access the world outside of themselves they tend to want more than just “the American dream.” Because of the changing nature of education in the US Gen Y has seen college as an inevitability towards their goals. As a product of a smaller world due to the internet, and the rising need for a college education Gen Y is very intelligent. These reasons have consequently led Gen Y to have a negative connotation by older generations.

Technology is advancing at an exponential rate that has provided many positives for the world. It has also had some negatives. With more demand for resources in general, as Millennials get older, and rising prices of raw materials the decades of early adulthood for them is increasingly expensive. In a cycle of adaptation more people are going to college than in past decades. College has gone from: if you work hard you can go, to: if you work hard, rack up debt, or fork over tens of thousands a year you can go. And even if college was expensive for people in the past you used to be able to make a living off of degree-less jobs. Now you need unheard of qualifications like a degree in business to be a commercial farmer. Today Gen Y is faced with a dilemma of living with debt. This debt, and the confusing new world of technology has led to an unfavorable view of this smart, diverse, and caring generation, because they are seen as lazy and unmotivated.

During the last century in America the idea of eras became too general to classify people by age as the “Lost Generation” saw their coming of age heavily influenced by the first world war. As the century progressed we saw generations established by changes in the world, and at home. All of the generations up until millennials have been punctuated by war. Millennials are the first ones to have a different influence, and that has been growing up with the spread of technology. Because they have not been defined by tragedy, but by a modern day “space race,” older generations tend to see us as coddled dependent people: The programmed image of a college grad with a degree in communications living with their parents. This may be true for many young people, but it is a product of a larger issue. Because of these judgments Millennials have been driven to achieve great things, whatever that may mean to them.

Because of this growing want for knowledge many millennials have found that their path to knowledge is through college. A very prevalent issue for young people has been student loans. Many parents of Gen Y also have student loans, but their children are doing even worse. Because of this, and the market crash of 2008, Millennials have lived most if not all of their adult life with the idea that debt is a normal part of being an adult. When it comes to fostering education in different countries we seem to be leaning on our ivies and research universities for credibility. Consider this list: Kenya, Greece, Scotland, and Finland. They may seem like countries who have won gold in some obscure olympic event, but you would be wrong. They all have free post-secondary education (college.) As a result of the increase of college grads the job market has been flooded with highly qualified workers who have student loans to pay. This have created a culture of fluidity when it comes to careers. Young people are taking up many different occupations by necessity, and not following the strict path of “vocation” that older generations have. Over all education plays a big role in how millennials see the world, and how they decide to contribute to it.

Whether or not the choices, values, and environment of Gen Y is a positive one they are still a very new group marked by change. The shrinking of the world from technology has caused a wave of awareness, for better or for worse, that has marked a whole group of Americans. As a new age group grows up the world will slowly change to accommodate them, and this has just started for millennials.