Film Review 5: Live Nude Girls Unite 3 Apr. 2012
In class on Tuesday April 3rd, we watched the film “Live Nude Girls Unite.”
The main thesis of the film is life through the eyes of an exotic dancer, and centers on a specific strip club, where all the dancers come together to stand up for their rights as human beings; as many people who are sex workers have their rights violated because of the stigma society has put on them: that they are deviant to society and those who do choose to work in the sex industry don’t deserve the same rights as others.
The main argument that supports the thesis is the dancers themselves stating what their lives are like. They discuss how they are dehumanized by society and that just because they make their living as a stripper, they are human just like the rest of us. Many dancers don’t necessarily always choose this lifestyle; a lot of the time this is the only way of life they know to support themselves and their families.
The thesis of the film relates to our class because being “deviant” is something exotic dancers are known for. Society doesn’t approve of sex workers; these women are treated like objects and just because they don’t have a way of life that is considered “moral” by the standards of society, it doesn’t mean they don’t work hard to make their money. They punch a clock before and after a shift just like the rest of us.
The argument I found most convincing was when it was pointed out that one of the main things that all strippers have in common is that they are in this industry for the money, and money only. Not only do they have that in common with each other, they have this in common with everyone else who is working a job they might not necessarily like just to put food on the table. You need money to live, and although many others may not approve, sometimes we all have to do things we don’t want to just to get by. I know that I have had to do things I never thought I would have to just to survive; many people have, although not everyone would admit this. Dancers will always be considered deviant by society, no matter what, even if they were entitled to the same rights as everyone else, as they should be. As discussed in “Why I Don’t Want Equality”, why would they even want to be considered equal when it is so well known how unequal dancers are?
I didn’t find any arguments unconvincing; I know several people who have worked as dancers, and many times, more than I can count, they don’t get treated like people, merely playthings. I thought that having the dancers explain from their point of view really makes a person see what it’s like to live as they do.
The point that stood out the most for me was the misconception that society has of these women just having it so easy and don’t know what it’s like to make a real living and work hard. That is definitely not the case in my opinion. Dancers work just as hard as anyone else, and once they are in this lifestyle it is hard for them to get out of it. As explained in “Exotic Dancers: Where Am I Going to Stop”, the dancers get used to making more money than you would at a typical nine to five job, so it is difficult to go from making hundreds an hour to minimum wage, even when it is a lifestyle that will take its toll on you eventually. In order to study this point more, I would like to be a fly on the wall to see what its like for them, how they are treated, and how, even though the money is good, these women can still keep their heads held high knowing what society thinks of their lifestyle. To do what an exotic dancer does takes a lot of courage, in my opinion. I have never walked a day in one of these women’s shoes, so I feel it is not my place to judge them for how they make a living; nor is it anyone else’s.
Works Cited
Wesely, Jennifer K. “Exotic Dancers: Where Am I Going To Stop?” Readings In Deviant Behavior. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston: Pearson, 2010.
“Why I Don’t Want Equality.” http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120403020654AASXwOQ
Friday, April 6, 2012
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Blog Post 4; Story Of An Illness: Anti-Social Personality Disorder
Blog Post 4; Story of an Illness: Anti-Social Personality Disorder: Joran van der Sloot, the Disappearance of Natalee Holloway, and the Murder of Stephany Flores
What causes a person to kill? How deeply deviant is a mind that can snap to the point of not considering the consequences of taking someone else’s life? More often than not, a deviant mind of that caliber will show signs of or be diagnosed with anti-social personality disorder.
Anti-social personality disorder (ASPD), as stated in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual’s fourth edition (DSM-IV-TR), is diagnosed as a Axis II personality disorder, described as, “a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood” (Anti-Social Personality Disorder, Wikipedia, par. 1). Psychopathy and sociopathy are considered subsets of ASPD (par. 4), psychopathy being an “abnormal lack of empathy combined with strongly amoral conduct, but masked by an ability to appear outwardly normal” (par. 16), and sociopathy being “persons with relatively normal temperaments; their personality disorder being more of an effect of negative sociological factors like parental neglect, delinquent peers, poverty, and extremely high or extremely low intelligence” (par. 20).
Joran van der Sloot, age 24, had shown signs of ASPD as early as the age of 15. He was consistently getting himself into trouble; stealing from his parents, compulsively lying, fighting with his brothers, and accused of violently and aggressively attacking others verbally and physically. His parents were becoming alarmed and sent him to a psychologist (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 22, par. 2).
What van der Sloot’s parents didn’t know was that their son was already at the age of 15 starting to really embrace his dark side, and drinking liquor might have contributed to that. He drank regularly, and liked to brag about his ability to out-drink his friends (p.23, par. 4). He would often try to excuse any bad behavior by blaming others or justifying it, and often saying it was because he was drunk; so alcohol was indeed a factor (Peralta, p. 217, par. 1). According to “Scoring Drugs: Drugs That Cause the Most Harm”, new studies are showing that alcohol may be the most harmful to a developing brain, especially one that may already be mentally disturbed or showing signs of instability (Economist.com). These all should have been red flags to Joran’s parents, Paul and Anita van der Sloot, who had never denied their son anything. But no one could have known what horrors Joran van der Sloot would show the world that he was capable of.
On Tuesday June 1st, 2010, in Lima, Peru, Hotel Tac receptionist, 19 year old Adeli Marchena, had no idea what she walk into when she went to work that day. After receiving a phone call inquiring about the guest staying in Room 309, which had been registered to a Dutch citizen named Joran Andreas Petrus van der Sloot, born August 6th, 1987; a tall, quiet, strikingly handsome, pale-skinned Dutchman, who kept to himself and stood out because of his commanding presence and his 6 foot 5 frame; especially since people in Peru rarely hit the 6 foot mark in height (Pulitzer and Thompson, p.2, par. 3). When Marchena opened that door, she saw something she would never forget: “The ghastly scene she uncovered would not only launch a murder investigation, but spark an international manhunt for a manipulative and callous fugitive connected to a tragic event on a small Caribbean island exactly 5 years earlier” (p. 4, par. 4).
Natalee Ann Holloway was born October 21, 1986, and was last seen on May 30, 2005. She was declared legally dead on January 12th, 2012. While on her high school graduation trip on the island of Aruba with 124 other students from Mountain Brook High School, located in Mountain Brook, Alabama, Natalee vanished without a trace on the last day of the trip from a bar called Carlos n’ Charlie’s in Oranjestad, Aruba, May 30, 2005. She was last seen by several of her classmates leaving in a car with Joran van der Sloot and 2 of his friends, brothers Deepak and Satish Kalpoe. During the investigation, van der Sloot was arrested 2 times and the Kalpoe brothers 3 times each for suspicion of being involved in Natalee’s disappearance. Not having substantial evidence, they were released with no charges every time (Natalee Holloway, Wikipedia, par. 2).
What caused Natalee Holloway to be so reckless and leave with Joran van der Sloot that night, a boy she had just met in a strange country? She had parents who loved her, and was 18 years old with the world at her fingertips. Natalee had just graduated with honors, she was a member of the National Honor Society, and had just been awarded a full scholarship to the University of Alabama as a pre-med student (par. 4). How did she fall prey to van der Sloot’s charm? According to eye-witnesses, the 2 had been flirting and drinking all night, first while gambling at a casino, then at the bar Carlos n’ Charlie’s, and she left with him around 1:30 am. Despite a thorough search of the island and surrounding waters, there was nothing (par. 6). She was just gone.
Joran van der Sloot has told numerous stories about Holloway’s disappearance, and every time he has a new story to tell, the media jumps on it like flies on shit, and not only do they pay his self-centered ass, they give him the attention his narcissistic personality craves.
Joran van der Sloot is a pathological liar, and always has to fit in or one-up someone; whether it be drinking, gambling, bragging about his accomplishments or sexual episodes, or partaking in whatever drug happened to be on the scene (Pulitzer and Thompson, p.23, par. 4). His drug use may have also been a contributing factor to his psychological downfall; as it has been discovered that the bigger the hype about a drug, especially in the media, the bigger the attraction, especially to a young and impressionable or warped mind (Goode, p. 223, par. 1).
Since Natalee’s disappearance, van der Sloot has claimed she died from a seizure and he dumped her body, and then later said that was a lie and he had actually sold her into human trafficking for $10,000 (Natalee Holloway, Wikipedia, par. 3). He has also tried to blame others, saying his father had helped him dispose of the body after he had struck her in the face and she fell and hit her head on a rock, which resulted in her death (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 3), and numerous other stories; too many to even count. His lying is another symptom of ASPD, “blaming others or to offer plausible rationalizations for their behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society” (Anti-Social Personality Disorder, Wikipedia, par. 7).
Joran van der Sloot was on a downward spiral for years following this media sensation; from being constantly in the headlines with his lies, then losing his father to a heart attack in 2010, he was a ticking time bomb. His father’s death hit him hard, and his drinking and gambling increased. He blamed himself for his father dying; telling people it was due to all the trouble he had caused in the last five years (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 17).
In late March of 2010, he again told another story, as he was desperate for money, claiming that he would finally tell the truth about the location of Natalee Holloway’s remains for $25,000. He arranged this through John Q. Kelley, attorney for Beth Holloway, Natalee’s mother. After accepting a portion of the money, he contends that he buried her in the foundation of a house being built. Upon investigation, it was discovered that at the location he said he’d buried her, there was no houses under construction in that area at the time of Holloway’s disappearance. He was charged with extortion by the FBI, but before he was arrested he fled with the money. This was how he came to be in Peru in May of 2010 (par. 18).
Stephany Tatiana Flores Ramirez, born July 7, 1988, was less than a year from graduating from the University of Peru as a business student when her body was discovered on June 1st, 2010. Her father, Ricardo Flores, was former president of the Peruvian Auto Club, and a well known businessman. He had also run for president in 2001. With such a prominent media figure for a father, the shocking news of Stephany’s murder spread that much more quickly (par. 22).
Stephany Flores had been acquainted with Joran van der Sloot for a few days before her untimely death in the early morning hours of May 30, 2010, exactly 5 years to the day of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. At 3am on that morning, there was video surveillance of the 2 gambling together at the Atlantic City Casino in Lima. They are seen leaving together on camera just before 5am (par. 25). “Stephany appeared nervous on the tape, as though her instincts were telling her to walk away. But the Dutchman’s charm was almost hypnotic” (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 21, par. 5).
Joran had been successful in luring another smart, pretty, young girl into his clutches. Just after 5am, security cameras at the Hotel Tac show van der Sloot and Flores entering his room together. A short time later, van der Sloot is seen leaving the room by himself, in different clothes, to get coffee and pastries and then returns to Room 309. At around 9am, he is again caught on camera leaving his room alone, but this time with his bags, and before exiting the hotel, left strict orders at the front desk for his room not to be cleaned that day because his girlfriend was sleeping (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 26).
On June 1st, 2010, when Stephany’s body was discovered, the news rocked the headlines worldwide, due to the infamous Joran van der Sloot being the prime suspect, and the brutality of the murder. “There was blunt force trauma which caused a brain hemorrhage and a cranial fracture” (par. 27). She was covered in bruises from head to toe (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 103, par. 7). There were also signs of asphyxiation. Stephany had endured a horribly painful beating that had ended her life; a tennis racquet that had been found in the room was originally thought to be the murder weapon (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 27).
Due to the advanced decomposition of the body, the exact cause of death was hard to determine, being that it had been in that humid hotel room for several days, “in a state of putrefaction that makes an autopsy difficult” (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 106, par. 4). The cause of death was finally determined as “the combined result of damage to the brain and cervical trauma due to choking.” It was then determined that that the murder weapon had not been the tennis racquet, but van der Sloot’s fists (p. 106, par. 5).
When van der Sloot was apprehended in Chile and extradited back to Peru on June 3, 2010, he stated he had flown into a rage when he discovered Stephany snooping around on his laptop and had found information about his connection to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. He then beat her to death, took her money, and fled (Joran van der Sloot, bio.com, par. 14). Following his interrogation and confession, he was then transferred to the maximum-security Miguel Castro Castro prison in Lima. On June 21st, 2010, van der Sloot retracted his confession- stating that it was coerced. However, a judge and the Peruvian law states it wasn’t and he was convicted of 1st degree murder in the death of Stephany Flores (par. 17).
Criminal profiler Pat Brown spoke about van der Sloot on an interview that aired on “The Joy Behar Show” soon after details surrounding Flores’ death started to emerge; discussing the viciousness of the attack, his blatant disregard and obvious hatred towards women, and the fact that he shows little remorse for his actions; his erratic personality shows classic signs of ASPD. Along with truTV’s “In Session” correspondent Jean Casarez, and forensic psychologist Dr. Brian Russell, she breaks down the components.
“On January 13, 2012, Joran van der Sloot was sentenced to 28 years in prison for the murder of Stephany Tatiana Flores Ramirez. Within hours, he was transferred to maximum security prison Piedras Gordas, located north of Lima” (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 48).
To date, the body of Natalee Holloway has never been found. No one has ever been charged in any way whatsoever for her disappearance. She is linked forever with Stephany Flores through Joran van der Sloot; he was the last person to be seen with both of these beautiful young women when their lives came to an abrupt end on the very same day exactly 5 years apart. What might have happened if Joran’s parents had seen the warning signs of the path he was heading down? Would diagnosing him with Anti-Social Personality Disorder have saved the lives of Natalee and Stephany? Sadly, we will never know the answer to that question, for I believe Joran will never tell the truth.
Works Cited:
“Anti-Social Personality Disorder.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Online. 15 Mar 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder.
Goode, Jennifer L., Inciardi, James A. “Oxycontin: A Prescription For Disaster.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 223, par. 1. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston: Pearson, 2010.
“Joran van der Sloot.” 2012. Biography.com. 24 Mar 2012. http://www.biography.com/people/joran-van-der-sloot-573934.
“Joran van der Sloot.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Online. 17 Mar 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joran_van_der_Sloot.
“Natalee Holloway.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Online. 23 Mar 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalee_Holloway.
Peralta, Robert L. “Hey Don’t Blame Me….Blame the Booze.”
Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 217, par. 1. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston: Pearson, 2010.
Pulitzer, Lisa and Thompson, Cole. Portrait of a Monster: Joran van der Sloot, a Murder in Peru, and the Natalee Holloway Mystery. 1st ed. New York: St. Martins, 2011.
“Scoring Drugs: Drugs That Cause The Most Harm.”http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_cause_most_harm
Word Count: 2415
What causes a person to kill? How deeply deviant is a mind that can snap to the point of not considering the consequences of taking someone else’s life? More often than not, a deviant mind of that caliber will show signs of or be diagnosed with anti-social personality disorder.
Anti-social personality disorder (ASPD), as stated in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual’s fourth edition (DSM-IV-TR), is diagnosed as a Axis II personality disorder, described as, “a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood” (Anti-Social Personality Disorder, Wikipedia, par. 1). Psychopathy and sociopathy are considered subsets of ASPD (par. 4), psychopathy being an “abnormal lack of empathy combined with strongly amoral conduct, but masked by an ability to appear outwardly normal” (par. 16), and sociopathy being “persons with relatively normal temperaments; their personality disorder being more of an effect of negative sociological factors like parental neglect, delinquent peers, poverty, and extremely high or extremely low intelligence” (par. 20).
Joran van der Sloot, age 24, had shown signs of ASPD as early as the age of 15. He was consistently getting himself into trouble; stealing from his parents, compulsively lying, fighting with his brothers, and accused of violently and aggressively attacking others verbally and physically. His parents were becoming alarmed and sent him to a psychologist (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 22, par. 2).
What van der Sloot’s parents didn’t know was that their son was already at the age of 15 starting to really embrace his dark side, and drinking liquor might have contributed to that. He drank regularly, and liked to brag about his ability to out-drink his friends (p.23, par. 4). He would often try to excuse any bad behavior by blaming others or justifying it, and often saying it was because he was drunk; so alcohol was indeed a factor (Peralta, p. 217, par. 1). According to “Scoring Drugs: Drugs That Cause the Most Harm”, new studies are showing that alcohol may be the most harmful to a developing brain, especially one that may already be mentally disturbed or showing signs of instability (Economist.com). These all should have been red flags to Joran’s parents, Paul and Anita van der Sloot, who had never denied their son anything. But no one could have known what horrors Joran van der Sloot would show the world that he was capable of.
On Tuesday June 1st, 2010, in Lima, Peru, Hotel Tac receptionist, 19 year old Adeli Marchena, had no idea what she walk into when she went to work that day. After receiving a phone call inquiring about the guest staying in Room 309, which had been registered to a Dutch citizen named Joran Andreas Petrus van der Sloot, born August 6th, 1987; a tall, quiet, strikingly handsome, pale-skinned Dutchman, who kept to himself and stood out because of his commanding presence and his 6 foot 5 frame; especially since people in Peru rarely hit the 6 foot mark in height (Pulitzer and Thompson, p.2, par. 3). When Marchena opened that door, she saw something she would never forget: “The ghastly scene she uncovered would not only launch a murder investigation, but spark an international manhunt for a manipulative and callous fugitive connected to a tragic event on a small Caribbean island exactly 5 years earlier” (p. 4, par. 4).
Natalee Ann Holloway was born October 21, 1986, and was last seen on May 30, 2005. She was declared legally dead on January 12th, 2012. While on her high school graduation trip on the island of Aruba with 124 other students from Mountain Brook High School, located in Mountain Brook, Alabama, Natalee vanished without a trace on the last day of the trip from a bar called Carlos n’ Charlie’s in Oranjestad, Aruba, May 30, 2005. She was last seen by several of her classmates leaving in a car with Joran van der Sloot and 2 of his friends, brothers Deepak and Satish Kalpoe. During the investigation, van der Sloot was arrested 2 times and the Kalpoe brothers 3 times each for suspicion of being involved in Natalee’s disappearance. Not having substantial evidence, they were released with no charges every time (Natalee Holloway, Wikipedia, par. 2).
What caused Natalee Holloway to be so reckless and leave with Joran van der Sloot that night, a boy she had just met in a strange country? She had parents who loved her, and was 18 years old with the world at her fingertips. Natalee had just graduated with honors, she was a member of the National Honor Society, and had just been awarded a full scholarship to the University of Alabama as a pre-med student (par. 4). How did she fall prey to van der Sloot’s charm? According to eye-witnesses, the 2 had been flirting and drinking all night, first while gambling at a casino, then at the bar Carlos n’ Charlie’s, and she left with him around 1:30 am. Despite a thorough search of the island and surrounding waters, there was nothing (par. 6). She was just gone.
Joran van der Sloot has told numerous stories about Holloway’s disappearance, and every time he has a new story to tell, the media jumps on it like flies on shit, and not only do they pay his self-centered ass, they give him the attention his narcissistic personality craves.
Joran van der Sloot is a pathological liar, and always has to fit in or one-up someone; whether it be drinking, gambling, bragging about his accomplishments or sexual episodes, or partaking in whatever drug happened to be on the scene (Pulitzer and Thompson, p.23, par. 4). His drug use may have also been a contributing factor to his psychological downfall; as it has been discovered that the bigger the hype about a drug, especially in the media, the bigger the attraction, especially to a young and impressionable or warped mind (Goode, p. 223, par. 1).
Since Natalee’s disappearance, van der Sloot has claimed she died from a seizure and he dumped her body, and then later said that was a lie and he had actually sold her into human trafficking for $10,000 (Natalee Holloway, Wikipedia, par. 3). He has also tried to blame others, saying his father had helped him dispose of the body after he had struck her in the face and she fell and hit her head on a rock, which resulted in her death (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 3), and numerous other stories; too many to even count. His lying is another symptom of ASPD, “blaming others or to offer plausible rationalizations for their behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society” (Anti-Social Personality Disorder, Wikipedia, par. 7).
Joran van der Sloot was on a downward spiral for years following this media sensation; from being constantly in the headlines with his lies, then losing his father to a heart attack in 2010, he was a ticking time bomb. His father’s death hit him hard, and his drinking and gambling increased. He blamed himself for his father dying; telling people it was due to all the trouble he had caused in the last five years (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 17).
In late March of 2010, he again told another story, as he was desperate for money, claiming that he would finally tell the truth about the location of Natalee Holloway’s remains for $25,000. He arranged this through John Q. Kelley, attorney for Beth Holloway, Natalee’s mother. After accepting a portion of the money, he contends that he buried her in the foundation of a house being built. Upon investigation, it was discovered that at the location he said he’d buried her, there was no houses under construction in that area at the time of Holloway’s disappearance. He was charged with extortion by the FBI, but before he was arrested he fled with the money. This was how he came to be in Peru in May of 2010 (par. 18).
Stephany Tatiana Flores Ramirez, born July 7, 1988, was less than a year from graduating from the University of Peru as a business student when her body was discovered on June 1st, 2010. Her father, Ricardo Flores, was former president of the Peruvian Auto Club, and a well known businessman. He had also run for president in 2001. With such a prominent media figure for a father, the shocking news of Stephany’s murder spread that much more quickly (par. 22).
Stephany Flores had been acquainted with Joran van der Sloot for a few days before her untimely death in the early morning hours of May 30, 2010, exactly 5 years to the day of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. At 3am on that morning, there was video surveillance of the 2 gambling together at the Atlantic City Casino in Lima. They are seen leaving together on camera just before 5am (par. 25). “Stephany appeared nervous on the tape, as though her instincts were telling her to walk away. But the Dutchman’s charm was almost hypnotic” (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 21, par. 5).
Joran had been successful in luring another smart, pretty, young girl into his clutches. Just after 5am, security cameras at the Hotel Tac show van der Sloot and Flores entering his room together. A short time later, van der Sloot is seen leaving the room by himself, in different clothes, to get coffee and pastries and then returns to Room 309. At around 9am, he is again caught on camera leaving his room alone, but this time with his bags, and before exiting the hotel, left strict orders at the front desk for his room not to be cleaned that day because his girlfriend was sleeping (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 26).
On June 1st, 2010, when Stephany’s body was discovered, the news rocked the headlines worldwide, due to the infamous Joran van der Sloot being the prime suspect, and the brutality of the murder. “There was blunt force trauma which caused a brain hemorrhage and a cranial fracture” (par. 27). She was covered in bruises from head to toe (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 103, par. 7). There were also signs of asphyxiation. Stephany had endured a horribly painful beating that had ended her life; a tennis racquet that had been found in the room was originally thought to be the murder weapon (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 27).
Due to the advanced decomposition of the body, the exact cause of death was hard to determine, being that it had been in that humid hotel room for several days, “in a state of putrefaction that makes an autopsy difficult” (Pulitzer and Thompson, p. 106, par. 4). The cause of death was finally determined as “the combined result of damage to the brain and cervical trauma due to choking.” It was then determined that that the murder weapon had not been the tennis racquet, but van der Sloot’s fists (p. 106, par. 5).
When van der Sloot was apprehended in Chile and extradited back to Peru on June 3, 2010, he stated he had flown into a rage when he discovered Stephany snooping around on his laptop and had found information about his connection to the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. He then beat her to death, took her money, and fled (Joran van der Sloot, bio.com, par. 14). Following his interrogation and confession, he was then transferred to the maximum-security Miguel Castro Castro prison in Lima. On June 21st, 2010, van der Sloot retracted his confession- stating that it was coerced. However, a judge and the Peruvian law states it wasn’t and he was convicted of 1st degree murder in the death of Stephany Flores (par. 17).
Criminal profiler Pat Brown spoke about van der Sloot on an interview that aired on “The Joy Behar Show” soon after details surrounding Flores’ death started to emerge; discussing the viciousness of the attack, his blatant disregard and obvious hatred towards women, and the fact that he shows little remorse for his actions; his erratic personality shows classic signs of ASPD. Along with truTV’s “In Session” correspondent Jean Casarez, and forensic psychologist Dr. Brian Russell, she breaks down the components.
“On January 13, 2012, Joran van der Sloot was sentenced to 28 years in prison for the murder of Stephany Tatiana Flores Ramirez. Within hours, he was transferred to maximum security prison Piedras Gordas, located north of Lima” (Joran van der Sloot, Wikipedia, par. 48).
To date, the body of Natalee Holloway has never been found. No one has ever been charged in any way whatsoever for her disappearance. She is linked forever with Stephany Flores through Joran van der Sloot; he was the last person to be seen with both of these beautiful young women when their lives came to an abrupt end on the very same day exactly 5 years apart. What might have happened if Joran’s parents had seen the warning signs of the path he was heading down? Would diagnosing him with Anti-Social Personality Disorder have saved the lives of Natalee and Stephany? Sadly, we will never know the answer to that question, for I believe Joran will never tell the truth.
Works Cited:
“Anti-Social Personality Disorder.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Online. 15 Mar 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder.
Goode, Jennifer L., Inciardi, James A. “Oxycontin: A Prescription For Disaster.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 223, par. 1. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston: Pearson, 2010.
“Joran van der Sloot.” 2012. Biography.com. 24 Mar 2012. http://www.biography.com/people/joran-van-der-sloot-573934.
“Joran van der Sloot.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Online. 17 Mar 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joran_van_der_Sloot.
“Natalee Holloway.” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Online. 23 Mar 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalee_Holloway.
Peralta, Robert L. “Hey Don’t Blame Me….Blame the Booze.”
Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 217, par. 1. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston: Pearson, 2010.
Pulitzer, Lisa and Thompson, Cole. Portrait of a Monster: Joran van der Sloot, a Murder in Peru, and the Natalee Holloway Mystery. 1st ed. New York: St. Martins, 2011.
“Scoring Drugs: Drugs That Cause The Most Harm.”http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/11/drugs_cause_most_harm
Word Count: 2415
Friday, March 9, 2012
Film Review 4: Generation Rx 8 March '12
Film Review 4: “Generation Rx” 8 March ‘12
In class on March 8, we watched the film “Generation Rx.” The main thesis is the discussion of how different prescription drugs affect children; especially medications prescribed for ADHD and depression, and that the medications may do more harm than good. The argument is presented by many different professionals in the medical field.
One of the main arguments that supported the thesis was the actual accounts of families who have dealt with this issue; and in many unfortunate cases lost their children to suicide or an overdose due to the side effects of drugs like Prozac and Zoloft. Another argument that supported the thesis was seeing the actual statistics of how many child deaths have resulted from children being on these drugs, and the numbers are very high.
In my opinion, the film relates to the course in the aspect that deviance is pretty much straying from the norm; and in this case, parents often agree to have their children put on these medications because society (and their children’s doctors) tells them this is the best and quickest way to fix any behavioral problems you may have with your children.
The arguments I found most convincing was the fact that there were actual doctors that have evidence that things aren’t all what they seem when it comes to putting your children on these drugs. Although there were other professionals in the film arguing for the use of these drugs and not against them; these professionals were not able to support their argument, which is relatable to the audio clip, “What’s A Mental Disorder? Even Experts Can’t Agree” (www.npr.org), because as much as we’d like to think that everything is black or white, medical professionals have very different opinions on what is accurate and what isn’t.
I am hesitant to say there were any arguments that were unconvincing; however, the fact that there are so many disputes in the medical field about this issue makes me feel like I can’t trust doctors all the way, which is something that is quite scary to me.
The argument that stood out the most to me was when the question, “Are we sacrificing our kids to make them consumers of these psychiatric drugs?” was asked. That is something I would be very interesting in knowing. Instead of having the parents be the ones to be the spokespeople, I would be more interested in hearing from the kids who were on the drugs and how they feel they were affected. These kids have been told that they need this medicine to be normal. But as pointed out in the article “Being Sane In Insane Places”, anxiety and depression will always exist but it doesn’t mean you aren’t normal or there is anything wrong with you (Rosenhan, par. 3). How sad for these kids to feel that no one understands them, and they need drugs in order to “fix” what’s wrong with them.
Works Cited
Rosenhan, David L. “Being Sane In Insane Places.” Readings in Deviant Behavior. p. 133, par. 3. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
“What’s A Mental? Even Experts Can’t Agree.” http://www.npr.org/2010/12/29/132407384/whats-a-mental-disorder-even-experts-cant-agree
In class on March 8, we watched the film “Generation Rx.” The main thesis is the discussion of how different prescription drugs affect children; especially medications prescribed for ADHD and depression, and that the medications may do more harm than good. The argument is presented by many different professionals in the medical field.
One of the main arguments that supported the thesis was the actual accounts of families who have dealt with this issue; and in many unfortunate cases lost their children to suicide or an overdose due to the side effects of drugs like Prozac and Zoloft. Another argument that supported the thesis was seeing the actual statistics of how many child deaths have resulted from children being on these drugs, and the numbers are very high.
In my opinion, the film relates to the course in the aspect that deviance is pretty much straying from the norm; and in this case, parents often agree to have their children put on these medications because society (and their children’s doctors) tells them this is the best and quickest way to fix any behavioral problems you may have with your children.
The arguments I found most convincing was the fact that there were actual doctors that have evidence that things aren’t all what they seem when it comes to putting your children on these drugs. Although there were other professionals in the film arguing for the use of these drugs and not against them; these professionals were not able to support their argument, which is relatable to the audio clip, “What’s A Mental Disorder? Even Experts Can’t Agree” (www.npr.org), because as much as we’d like to think that everything is black or white, medical professionals have very different opinions on what is accurate and what isn’t.
I am hesitant to say there were any arguments that were unconvincing; however, the fact that there are so many disputes in the medical field about this issue makes me feel like I can’t trust doctors all the way, which is something that is quite scary to me.
The argument that stood out the most to me was when the question, “Are we sacrificing our kids to make them consumers of these psychiatric drugs?” was asked. That is something I would be very interesting in knowing. Instead of having the parents be the ones to be the spokespeople, I would be more interested in hearing from the kids who were on the drugs and how they feel they were affected. These kids have been told that they need this medicine to be normal. But as pointed out in the article “Being Sane In Insane Places”, anxiety and depression will always exist but it doesn’t mean you aren’t normal or there is anything wrong with you (Rosenhan, par. 3). How sad for these kids to feel that no one understands them, and they need drugs in order to “fix” what’s wrong with them.
Works Cited
Rosenhan, David L. “Being Sane In Insane Places.” Readings in Deviant Behavior. p. 133, par. 3. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
“What’s A Mental? Even Experts Can’t Agree.” http://www.npr.org/2010/12/29/132407384/whats-a-mental-disorder-even-experts-cant-agree
Friday, March 2, 2012
Film Review 3: Tough Guise
Film Review 3: “Tough Guise” 28 Feb. ’12
In class on 28 Feb, we watched the film “Tough Guise”. The main thesis of the film is a look inside the male mind; why are boys and men expected to be so tough? Since the beginning of time, it has been drilled in a mans’ head pretty much since birth that they have to be tough to be a real man. Suck it up, no crying; that makes you a pussy, flex your biceps, and most importantly, you had better not be afraid to fight, because being violent is important if you want to be a real man. This has always been a part of society when it comes to the ideal image of how a man should be. But why?
The arguments that supported the main thesis of the film was were when the film shown different males discussing what has always been expected of them as men; you can’t cry, you need to be tough, and you better be ready to fight to prove how tough you are. These were young men, but they knew this was something that men are expected to be. Another argument that supported the thesis is the fact that statistics were actually shown about how often violence crimes are committed by males as opposed to females. That’s what society expects, so that what the male species gives us; 80% of murder, 90% of assaults, and 95% of dating violence are all committed by men.
The thesis of the film definitely relates to the course; in fact, in the film, one of the statement made was, “Violence really isn’t a deviation for men, it is an accepted part of masculinity, and violence isn’t typically talked about as a gender issue.” These are topics we have discussed in class all semester, and things we will continue talking about in class; it’s all about what is considered deviant by our society.
The arguments I found most convincing were when different crimes were discussed; such as the Columbine high school shootings and the hate crimes that are often committed against gay man for not being masculine enough and because of their own manly insecurities; the Matthew Shephard murder being the focus. As discussed in the article, “We’ve Seen This Movie Before” by Stanley Fish, he discusses some of the more high profile acts of extreme violence that have occurred in our society, which were all committed by men, and from my understanding, points out how these kind of deplorable acts seem to have a pattern; they are all committed by men, they have a huge media backlash, and we, as society seem to eat it up with a spoon (Fish, par. 1 and 2). It happens over and over again….we have definitely seen this movie before, and that was very convincing to me.
I didn’t find any arguments in the film to be unconvincing. All of the examples discussed in the film are issues that slap society across the face everyday, so if one has any understanding of violence in the media, and how often men are responsible for these acts of violence, there isn’t any way one could find the arguments in this film to be unconvincing.
Something that really stood out for me in the was the high profile male figures that plainly show us the ideal image of what a dominant masculine image is supposed to be according to our society. Rush Limbaugh is chosen as an example; the idea of men not being secure in their masculinity, so, as a result, they will discredit strong women and degrade them. Howard Stern is also an example of this; in his ideas that sexually degrading women are to be ridiculed. In the article, “Shame, Guilt and Violence” by James Gilligan, the point of the article is when one isn’t secure with themselves, the person most assuredly will be ashamed of it, and uses violence as a way to make themselves feel like they have one up over others they feel threatened by, and often use the excuse that the reason behind their violent act is that they felt disrespected (Gilligan, par. 1). This makes a lot of sense to me, and if I were to research this topic, I think I would use a tactic similar to Gilligans; what better way to really see how the dominant male figure feels than to hear that persons’ point of view and compare it to other males who feel similar or the same way? I don’t think there is any other way to really understand the topic without hearing from one who has the firsthand life experience with something like this.
Works Cited
Fish, Stanley. “We’ve Seen This Movie Before.” NY Times (2010). http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/weve-seen-this-movie-before/
Gilligan, James. “Shame, Guilt and Violence.” Social Research: An International Quarterly of Social Sciences. (2003) http://internationalpsychoanalysis.net/wp- content/uploads/2009/02/shamegilligan.PDF.
In class on 28 Feb, we watched the film “Tough Guise”. The main thesis of the film is a look inside the male mind; why are boys and men expected to be so tough? Since the beginning of time, it has been drilled in a mans’ head pretty much since birth that they have to be tough to be a real man. Suck it up, no crying; that makes you a pussy, flex your biceps, and most importantly, you had better not be afraid to fight, because being violent is important if you want to be a real man. This has always been a part of society when it comes to the ideal image of how a man should be. But why?
The arguments that supported the main thesis of the film was were when the film shown different males discussing what has always been expected of them as men; you can’t cry, you need to be tough, and you better be ready to fight to prove how tough you are. These were young men, but they knew this was something that men are expected to be. Another argument that supported the thesis is the fact that statistics were actually shown about how often violence crimes are committed by males as opposed to females. That’s what society expects, so that what the male species gives us; 80% of murder, 90% of assaults, and 95% of dating violence are all committed by men.
The thesis of the film definitely relates to the course; in fact, in the film, one of the statement made was, “Violence really isn’t a deviation for men, it is an accepted part of masculinity, and violence isn’t typically talked about as a gender issue.” These are topics we have discussed in class all semester, and things we will continue talking about in class; it’s all about what is considered deviant by our society.
The arguments I found most convincing were when different crimes were discussed; such as the Columbine high school shootings and the hate crimes that are often committed against gay man for not being masculine enough and because of their own manly insecurities; the Matthew Shephard murder being the focus. As discussed in the article, “We’ve Seen This Movie Before” by Stanley Fish, he discusses some of the more high profile acts of extreme violence that have occurred in our society, which were all committed by men, and from my understanding, points out how these kind of deplorable acts seem to have a pattern; they are all committed by men, they have a huge media backlash, and we, as society seem to eat it up with a spoon (Fish, par. 1 and 2). It happens over and over again….we have definitely seen this movie before, and that was very convincing to me.
I didn’t find any arguments in the film to be unconvincing. All of the examples discussed in the film are issues that slap society across the face everyday, so if one has any understanding of violence in the media, and how often men are responsible for these acts of violence, there isn’t any way one could find the arguments in this film to be unconvincing.
Something that really stood out for me in the was the high profile male figures that plainly show us the ideal image of what a dominant masculine image is supposed to be according to our society. Rush Limbaugh is chosen as an example; the idea of men not being secure in their masculinity, so, as a result, they will discredit strong women and degrade them. Howard Stern is also an example of this; in his ideas that sexually degrading women are to be ridiculed. In the article, “Shame, Guilt and Violence” by James Gilligan, the point of the article is when one isn’t secure with themselves, the person most assuredly will be ashamed of it, and uses violence as a way to make themselves feel like they have one up over others they feel threatened by, and often use the excuse that the reason behind their violent act is that they felt disrespected (Gilligan, par. 1). This makes a lot of sense to me, and if I were to research this topic, I think I would use a tactic similar to Gilligans; what better way to really see how the dominant male figure feels than to hear that persons’ point of view and compare it to other males who feel similar or the same way? I don’t think there is any other way to really understand the topic without hearing from one who has the firsthand life experience with something like this.
Works Cited
Fish, Stanley. “We’ve Seen This Movie Before.” NY Times (2010). http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/weve-seen-this-movie-before/
Gilligan, James. “Shame, Guilt and Violence.” Social Research: An International Quarterly of Social Sciences. (2003) http://internationalpsychoanalysis.net/wp- content/uploads/2009/02/shamegilligan.PDF.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Blog Post 3: Deviant Blogging And The Importance Of Language; Don't Be Such A BITCH!!!
Blog Post 3: Deviant Blogging And The Importance Of Language; Don’t Be Such A BITCH!
It is amazing to me how much can be assumed about a person by just referring to them with a single word. People will often judge you by appearance or a single encounter when they thrust you into the offensive word category. As a deviant person by societies’ standards, a word I have been called almost everyday for as long as I can remember, is ‘bitch’. More often than not, it is ‘f**king bitch’. Honestly, I have heard it so often that it really doesn’t bother me anymore. I have always figured that if that was the best people could come up with to insult me, then they had bigger problems to deal with anyway, such as lack of imagination and probably more insecurities than I could name. Why is the word ‘bitch’ considered so derogatory towards women? Where did it all start?
The word bitch means female dog (Dictionary.com). How did it become one of the most overrated and controversial words to ever rock our nation? Because it somehow became a slang word meaning “A) a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person, especially a woman. B) a lewd woman. C) Disparaging and Offensive . any woman” (Dictionary.com). How did the meaning become so completely changed around?
The history behind the word bitch is interesting. Depending on its’ use today, it can be a good or bad thing. The history of bitch is not so clear though, just as its not so clear as to why it went from meaning female dog to a horrible loose woman:
“The word "bitch" has had a colorful and busy past in the
English language. The main meaning of bitch is that of the
Female of the species, particularly dogs. I call this the
main meaning because it is the meaning which the word first
had in our language and the meaning from which metaphors
were made. The word's origin is not certain. Partridge thinks
That perhaps it is related to the Sanskrit word for genitals,
bhagas (1961). If we consider this origin for a moment, we
might come up with an association of some creature with exposed
genitals with those creatures we call beasts” (BITCH
AN EXAMPLE OF SEMANTIC DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE
Charles A. Collins, p 67.). So, to sum up, we really don’t have a very clear explanantion as to where the hell this word came from. We have an idea, but nothing concrete.
In society, this word is very, very offensive and so, so bad. Maybe that’s why I like the word so much. It is considered an insult, and definitely mild profanity. People will justify its’ use by downplaying the insult of it. It kind of falls along the lines of what is discussed in the article “You’re Not A Retard, You’re Just Wise”, by Steven J. Taylor. “You aren’t a bitch, you are just outspoken and mean.” That is usually what I hear when someone wants to call me a bitch but doesn’t necessarily want the confrontation that comes along with it. If someone can insult you, but make it sound like criticism instead then everyone is just happy all the way around without saying what they really meant.
I honestly don’t think the word is as bad as society has made it. I think it’s a word that some feminist woman decided to take offensively and cause a huge uproar about, personally. This is just my opinion of course, but I believe if the word bitch is the only thing a community has to ’bitch’ about, maybe you should get a life and look at the real problems in society.
As discussed in the blog post, “What Is Ableist Language And Why Should You Care”, I say what is the big deal? Why do people care so much about a word? Why does it matter so much to others what words are used in different communities? Do other communities really have the right to ask or demand that the word stopped being used? I know that musical artists in the rap genre had a huge backlash from angry bored housewives’ not liking women being referred to as bitches. The way I see it, if one of these rappers walks up and calls you a bitch, then, sure, be angry, demand that they not refer to you that way. If not, get over it and worry about things that really matter.
I wouldn’t say that the word bitch is alright to call someone, however, not saying that at all. I am considered a ‘bitch’ by society I suppose, but that doesn’t mean it makes it acceptable to call someone a bitch just because they pissed me off, and I am someone who often has trouble biting my tongue. In the article, “In Defense Of Fat”, I applauded the point behind it. If someone wants to eat crappy food, and their weight is out control, how is that the concern of anyone else? If someone wants to talk about bitches all day long, why does it matter as long as they aren’t specifically calling anyone else that or saying it’s ok to call someone else a bitch because they themselves or considered one? Maybe I haven’t explained this in a way that everyone can see eye to eye with, but like I said before, isn’t there enough to worry about in the world without caring if someone called me a bitch or not?
Works Cited
“Bitch.” Dictionary.com. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bitch
Collins, Charles A. “BITCH:AN EXAMPLE OF SEMANTIC DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE.”p.67.http://soar.wichita.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10057/1784/LAJ _16.1_p69-86..pdf?sequence=1
Fierce, Tasha. “In Defense Of Fat.” http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2011/09/in- defense-of-fat/
“What Is Ableist Language And Why Should You Care?” http://mymuffinroared.tumblr.com/post/3446600140/what-is-ableist-language- and-why-should-you-care
Taylor, Steven J. “You’re Not A Retard, You’re Just Wise”. p. 173.Readings in Deviant Behavior. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Word Count: 975
It is amazing to me how much can be assumed about a person by just referring to them with a single word. People will often judge you by appearance or a single encounter when they thrust you into the offensive word category. As a deviant person by societies’ standards, a word I have been called almost everyday for as long as I can remember, is ‘bitch’. More often than not, it is ‘f**king bitch’. Honestly, I have heard it so often that it really doesn’t bother me anymore. I have always figured that if that was the best people could come up with to insult me, then they had bigger problems to deal with anyway, such as lack of imagination and probably more insecurities than I could name. Why is the word ‘bitch’ considered so derogatory towards women? Where did it all start?
The word bitch means female dog (Dictionary.com). How did it become one of the most overrated and controversial words to ever rock our nation? Because it somehow became a slang word meaning “A) a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person, especially a woman. B) a lewd woman. C) Disparaging and Offensive . any woman” (Dictionary.com). How did the meaning become so completely changed around?
The history behind the word bitch is interesting. Depending on its’ use today, it can be a good or bad thing. The history of bitch is not so clear though, just as its not so clear as to why it went from meaning female dog to a horrible loose woman:
“The word "bitch" has had a colorful and busy past in the
English language. The main meaning of bitch is that of the
Female of the species, particularly dogs. I call this the
main meaning because it is the meaning which the word first
had in our language and the meaning from which metaphors
were made. The word's origin is not certain. Partridge thinks
That perhaps it is related to the Sanskrit word for genitals,
bhagas (1961). If we consider this origin for a moment, we
might come up with an association of some creature with exposed
genitals with those creatures we call beasts” (BITCH
AN EXAMPLE OF SEMANTIC DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE
Charles A. Collins, p 67.). So, to sum up, we really don’t have a very clear explanantion as to where the hell this word came from. We have an idea, but nothing concrete.
In society, this word is very, very offensive and so, so bad. Maybe that’s why I like the word so much. It is considered an insult, and definitely mild profanity. People will justify its’ use by downplaying the insult of it. It kind of falls along the lines of what is discussed in the article “You’re Not A Retard, You’re Just Wise”, by Steven J. Taylor. “You aren’t a bitch, you are just outspoken and mean.” That is usually what I hear when someone wants to call me a bitch but doesn’t necessarily want the confrontation that comes along with it. If someone can insult you, but make it sound like criticism instead then everyone is just happy all the way around without saying what they really meant.
I honestly don’t think the word is as bad as society has made it. I think it’s a word that some feminist woman decided to take offensively and cause a huge uproar about, personally. This is just my opinion of course, but I believe if the word bitch is the only thing a community has to ’bitch’ about, maybe you should get a life and look at the real problems in society.
As discussed in the blog post, “What Is Ableist Language And Why Should You Care”, I say what is the big deal? Why do people care so much about a word? Why does it matter so much to others what words are used in different communities? Do other communities really have the right to ask or demand that the word stopped being used? I know that musical artists in the rap genre had a huge backlash from angry bored housewives’ not liking women being referred to as bitches. The way I see it, if one of these rappers walks up and calls you a bitch, then, sure, be angry, demand that they not refer to you that way. If not, get over it and worry about things that really matter.
I wouldn’t say that the word bitch is alright to call someone, however, not saying that at all. I am considered a ‘bitch’ by society I suppose, but that doesn’t mean it makes it acceptable to call someone a bitch just because they pissed me off, and I am someone who often has trouble biting my tongue. In the article, “In Defense Of Fat”, I applauded the point behind it. If someone wants to eat crappy food, and their weight is out control, how is that the concern of anyone else? If someone wants to talk about bitches all day long, why does it matter as long as they aren’t specifically calling anyone else that or saying it’s ok to call someone else a bitch because they themselves or considered one? Maybe I haven’t explained this in a way that everyone can see eye to eye with, but like I said before, isn’t there enough to worry about in the world without caring if someone called me a bitch or not?
Works Cited
“Bitch.” Dictionary.com. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bitch
Collins, Charles A. “BITCH:AN EXAMPLE OF SEMANTIC DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE.”p.67.http://soar.wichita.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10057/1784/LAJ _16.1_p69-86..pdf?sequence=1
Fierce, Tasha. “In Defense Of Fat.” http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2011/09/in- defense-of-fat/
“What Is Ableist Language And Why Should You Care?” http://mymuffinroared.tumblr.com/post/3446600140/what-is-ableist-language- and-why-should-you-care
Taylor, Steven J. “You’re Not A Retard, You’re Just Wise”. p. 173.Readings in Deviant Behavior. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Word Count: 975
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Film Review 2: Murder Ball
Film Review 2: “Murder Ball” 14 Feb ‘12
In class on February 14 we watched the film “Murder Ball". It was a excellent film, and I would recommend it to anyone who can watch something with an open mind. The main thesis of the film is showing the viewer just how many preconceived notions that are out there about people in wheelchairs. Those of us who are not paraplegic or quadriplegic can’t even begin to imagine what it’s like to not have the luxury of our mobility. As a result, there are many assumptions out there that the men in the film who actually live that life do what they can to show us life from their point of view and to see how capable they are of living a happy and productive life, so no need to pity. They don’t like that shit.
The film was a documentary basically. The men interviewed were players on the USA Olympic Rugby Team. I never knew until I watched this film that there was an Olympic Team for people in wheelchairs; which shows a preconceived notion of mine. These men amazed me. They are all very accepting of the way thing are and are amazing at how much more capable and able bodied they are than those of us who do have the use of all of our limbs. I think that was one of the main things that supported the thesis was basically these men showing us their daily routines and how much they DON’T have to depend on other people as we all think; they have a daily routine and daily commute, they have families and are able to have sex as well. Most importantly, just because someone doesn’t have full control of their limbs does not mean it impairs their mind too, as some ignorant people apparently unbelievably think. Just as if you may have a slight mental disability in one area, you aren’t necessarily disabled mentally in every other way possible too. In the article, “You’re Not A Retard, You’re Just Wise”, the author uses various examples of disputing such a asinine assumption. Just because someone might have a mental problem, doesn’t mean they are “crazy”. They are most likely very strong in other areas (Taylor, p. 25, “Readings In Deviant Behavior.”).
The thesis of the film relates to the class, because the stigma of being deviant is very much implanted on those that are quadriplegic or are in wheelchairs for whatever reason. This deviant stigma is something that these people have no control over either, so it is very important that it is part of the course.
The points I found most convincing were the ones I could actually see. Watching a man in a wheelchair who also has no hands or forearms do everything a completely able bodied person can do with no trouble, from unlocking and opening his front door, to pouring juice into a glass from a pitcher that I would have spilled probably, to getting himself dressed, brushing his teeth, and driving to and from work, convinced me that there is absolutely no reason to think someone in a wheelchair needs to be pitied.
I did not see any part of the documentary that was unconvincing to me. I got a better understanding than I ever have of how unfair life can be, but no matter what shitty hand you get dealt, you can still be who and what you want to be, even when it looks like you can’t.
One of the points that stood out to me the most was when it was discussed that “a quadriplegics’ mind becomes a bigger disability than the physical stuff, every quadriplegic thinks they will walk again”. This intrigued me. Even though they know the odds of that happening are almost impossible, they still hold onto that hope. As discussed by Dr. Temple Gradin in “The World Needs All Kinds Of Minds”, she talks about learning from everyone, even the ones’ you think you can’t learn anything from, someone you never expected might have something going on in their mind that you never knew. I would like to see a psychological evaluation digging a little deeper in a quadriplegics’ mind that keeps them hoping they will walk again, even though they have had the reality check that it won’t happen.
Works Cited
Taylor, Steven J. “You’re Not A Retard, You’re just Wise.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p.173-81. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
“The World Needs All Kinds Of Minds.” Dr. Temple Grandin. http://youtube/fn_9f5x0f1Q
Word Count: 763
In class on February 14 we watched the film “Murder Ball". It was a excellent film, and I would recommend it to anyone who can watch something with an open mind. The main thesis of the film is showing the viewer just how many preconceived notions that are out there about people in wheelchairs. Those of us who are not paraplegic or quadriplegic can’t even begin to imagine what it’s like to not have the luxury of our mobility. As a result, there are many assumptions out there that the men in the film who actually live that life do what they can to show us life from their point of view and to see how capable they are of living a happy and productive life, so no need to pity. They don’t like that shit.
The film was a documentary basically. The men interviewed were players on the USA Olympic Rugby Team. I never knew until I watched this film that there was an Olympic Team for people in wheelchairs; which shows a preconceived notion of mine. These men amazed me. They are all very accepting of the way thing are and are amazing at how much more capable and able bodied they are than those of us who do have the use of all of our limbs. I think that was one of the main things that supported the thesis was basically these men showing us their daily routines and how much they DON’T have to depend on other people as we all think; they have a daily routine and daily commute, they have families and are able to have sex as well. Most importantly, just because someone doesn’t have full control of their limbs does not mean it impairs their mind too, as some ignorant people apparently unbelievably think. Just as if you may have a slight mental disability in one area, you aren’t necessarily disabled mentally in every other way possible too. In the article, “You’re Not A Retard, You’re Just Wise”, the author uses various examples of disputing such a asinine assumption. Just because someone might have a mental problem, doesn’t mean they are “crazy”. They are most likely very strong in other areas (Taylor, p. 25, “Readings In Deviant Behavior.”).
The thesis of the film relates to the class, because the stigma of being deviant is very much implanted on those that are quadriplegic or are in wheelchairs for whatever reason. This deviant stigma is something that these people have no control over either, so it is very important that it is part of the course.
The points I found most convincing were the ones I could actually see. Watching a man in a wheelchair who also has no hands or forearms do everything a completely able bodied person can do with no trouble, from unlocking and opening his front door, to pouring juice into a glass from a pitcher that I would have spilled probably, to getting himself dressed, brushing his teeth, and driving to and from work, convinced me that there is absolutely no reason to think someone in a wheelchair needs to be pitied.
I did not see any part of the documentary that was unconvincing to me. I got a better understanding than I ever have of how unfair life can be, but no matter what shitty hand you get dealt, you can still be who and what you want to be, even when it looks like you can’t.
One of the points that stood out to me the most was when it was discussed that “a quadriplegics’ mind becomes a bigger disability than the physical stuff, every quadriplegic thinks they will walk again”. This intrigued me. Even though they know the odds of that happening are almost impossible, they still hold onto that hope. As discussed by Dr. Temple Gradin in “The World Needs All Kinds Of Minds”, she talks about learning from everyone, even the ones’ you think you can’t learn anything from, someone you never expected might have something going on in their mind that you never knew. I would like to see a psychological evaluation digging a little deeper in a quadriplegics’ mind that keeps them hoping they will walk again, even though they have had the reality check that it won’t happen.
Works Cited
Taylor, Steven J. “You’re Not A Retard, You’re just Wise.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p.173-81. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
“The World Needs All Kinds Of Minds.” Dr. Temple Grandin. http://youtube/fn_9f5x0f1Q
Word Count: 763
Friday, February 10, 2012
Eminem being as deviant as can be ;)
"3 am" Eminem. From the album "Relapse" Shady/Aftermath 2009.
Just a video that brings out that dark, deviant side....and it is most likely offensive and appalling in every aspect to our society :D
"Beautiful" Eminem. From the album "Relapse" Shady/Aftermath 2009
This is one of my favorite songs; every word hits me hard because it's so relatable. Love Eminem or hate him; love rap music or damn the day it became a genre of music, there isn't a soul on this planet who can't relate to feeling like sometimes you just aren't good enough....just take a minute to listen to the words......
Film Review 1- Middle Sexes: Redefining He and She
Film Review 1: “Middle Sexes: Redefining He and She” 7 Feb 2012
In class on February 7, we watched the film “Middle Sexes: Redefining He and She”. This film is a real eye opener and interesting to watch to someone like me who doesn’t necessarily know more than the basic facts when it comes to being educated on transgender, transsexual, and what it is like living as someone who is gay, or someone who identifies with the opposite gender. There were parts that were difficult to watch; and at times I wanted to look away from what I was seeing. But it was almost like morbid curiosity; I couldn’t tear my eyes away. What is it about films like these that can grab a person in such a way that keeps them watching even when they want to look away?
From what I took from it, the main thesis of the film was basically different stories told from the people who have a lifestyle that is often discriminated against, judged, and in “normal” standards for society is considered morally wrong, disgraceful, and even disgusting to some. In some extreme cases, people have even been tortured to death for being transgender, just for being who they are. The film made the viewer see how many preconceived notions people have about being transgender, gay, hermaphrodite ect. From an outsiders’ point of view, we have no idea what its like to be hated for having a lifestyle of something that is beyond your control. As they said in the film, people don’t choose to identify with the opposite sex; it’s just the way things are.
The main arguments that support the thesis of the film forces society to question certain things about themselves which invokes a fear and a certain amount of anger for being forced to take off the rosy colored glasses and look at a lifestyle that causes us to in a way partake in this “deviant” lifestyle and abandon norms of society and feel what its like to be considered deviant for just being different in a way that is considered unnatural. One point that is made is that not only is someone who is transgender discriminated against, any person that is close to them or may have any significant part in their upbringing, especially their parents and family, get discriminated against as well because of preconceived notions that are completely asinine that say the way someone is raised will decide or contribute to a persons “choice” to being transgender or not. Because of this, people that are different are afraid of a society that says this lifestyle is not normal.
The most significant argument that supported the thesis was expressing very strongly how important to know what the actual meaning of sexual orientation means. It’s about what sexual preference you have, whether it’s the same sex as you or the opposite sex. It’s not a choice, despite what many close minded people think. Just like gender isn’t a choice, and gender can’t just be classified as male and female anymore. According to the article “The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Aren’t Enough”, if you group everyone into those two categories, you aren’t taking into consideration how often biological differences occur during a persons development which can create oddities which results in confirming male and female can’t be the only two sexes, and even the five sexes discussed in the article could still be underestimating how many gender possibilities could result (Fausto-Sterling, par. 5).
The thesis of this film relates to the course in a pretty obvious way, in my opinion. The class is all about Social Deviance. We all know what deviance means by now. Behaviors or oddities that go against societies norms. What is more deviant to society and in the opinion of many people than being transgender or gay or possibly having sexual parts that aren’t considered just male or female?
The points I found most convincing was the detailed explanations and examples that didn’t just tell you, but showed the discriminations, hostility and hardships that result in being different than what you are supposed to be according to society. Hearing these things from the people who experience in their everyday lives always does more to convince you and causes you to feel how real it is.
I wouldn’t say there were any points that made the topic less convincing to me; however, not having firsthand experience with this lifestyle makes it difficult to put yourself in those shoes. I can empathize, but I have no idea what it must be like to have to deal with some of the difficulties that occur and the feelings one must have when just being who you are can shun you in society.
The point that stood out the most for me in the film when it was simply stated that variation is the norm, biology loves it and society hates it. Honestly, probably most of our ‘society’ probably doesn’t even know why they hate it; just because they are “supposed” to hate variation of the norm. I would study this point by doing something similar as discussed in the article “Transgender Warriors”, interviewing someone with firsthand experience, and also looking at how close minded these views have been over a timeline, and compare them to views of today and try to come to a conclusion about why after even all these years and how much the world can change society still holds on to these same over thought and uninformed ideas that being transgender or the like is so damn deviant and lets waste our time hating that especially when its not going to change the fact that some people are different (Transgender Warriors, Feinberg). You don’t have to agree with it or even understand it, just accept it. Accept it and move on.
Works Cited
Feinberg, Leslie. “Transgender Warriors.” Beacon Press, 1996.
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. “The Five Sexes: Why Male And Female Aren’t Enough.” The Sciences, April, 1993.
In class on February 7, we watched the film “Middle Sexes: Redefining He and She”. This film is a real eye opener and interesting to watch to someone like me who doesn’t necessarily know more than the basic facts when it comes to being educated on transgender, transsexual, and what it is like living as someone who is gay, or someone who identifies with the opposite gender. There were parts that were difficult to watch; and at times I wanted to look away from what I was seeing. But it was almost like morbid curiosity; I couldn’t tear my eyes away. What is it about films like these that can grab a person in such a way that keeps them watching even when they want to look away?
From what I took from it, the main thesis of the film was basically different stories told from the people who have a lifestyle that is often discriminated against, judged, and in “normal” standards for society is considered morally wrong, disgraceful, and even disgusting to some. In some extreme cases, people have even been tortured to death for being transgender, just for being who they are. The film made the viewer see how many preconceived notions people have about being transgender, gay, hermaphrodite ect. From an outsiders’ point of view, we have no idea what its like to be hated for having a lifestyle of something that is beyond your control. As they said in the film, people don’t choose to identify with the opposite sex; it’s just the way things are.
The main arguments that support the thesis of the film forces society to question certain things about themselves which invokes a fear and a certain amount of anger for being forced to take off the rosy colored glasses and look at a lifestyle that causes us to in a way partake in this “deviant” lifestyle and abandon norms of society and feel what its like to be considered deviant for just being different in a way that is considered unnatural. One point that is made is that not only is someone who is transgender discriminated against, any person that is close to them or may have any significant part in their upbringing, especially their parents and family, get discriminated against as well because of preconceived notions that are completely asinine that say the way someone is raised will decide or contribute to a persons “choice” to being transgender or not. Because of this, people that are different are afraid of a society that says this lifestyle is not normal.
The most significant argument that supported the thesis was expressing very strongly how important to know what the actual meaning of sexual orientation means. It’s about what sexual preference you have, whether it’s the same sex as you or the opposite sex. It’s not a choice, despite what many close minded people think. Just like gender isn’t a choice, and gender can’t just be classified as male and female anymore. According to the article “The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Aren’t Enough”, if you group everyone into those two categories, you aren’t taking into consideration how often biological differences occur during a persons development which can create oddities which results in confirming male and female can’t be the only two sexes, and even the five sexes discussed in the article could still be underestimating how many gender possibilities could result (Fausto-Sterling, par. 5).
The thesis of this film relates to the course in a pretty obvious way, in my opinion. The class is all about Social Deviance. We all know what deviance means by now. Behaviors or oddities that go against societies norms. What is more deviant to society and in the opinion of many people than being transgender or gay or possibly having sexual parts that aren’t considered just male or female?
The points I found most convincing was the detailed explanations and examples that didn’t just tell you, but showed the discriminations, hostility and hardships that result in being different than what you are supposed to be according to society. Hearing these things from the people who experience in their everyday lives always does more to convince you and causes you to feel how real it is.
I wouldn’t say there were any points that made the topic less convincing to me; however, not having firsthand experience with this lifestyle makes it difficult to put yourself in those shoes. I can empathize, but I have no idea what it must be like to have to deal with some of the difficulties that occur and the feelings one must have when just being who you are can shun you in society.
The point that stood out the most for me in the film when it was simply stated that variation is the norm, biology loves it and society hates it. Honestly, probably most of our ‘society’ probably doesn’t even know why they hate it; just because they are “supposed” to hate variation of the norm. I would study this point by doing something similar as discussed in the article “Transgender Warriors”, interviewing someone with firsthand experience, and also looking at how close minded these views have been over a timeline, and compare them to views of today and try to come to a conclusion about why after even all these years and how much the world can change society still holds on to these same over thought and uninformed ideas that being transgender or the like is so damn deviant and lets waste our time hating that especially when its not going to change the fact that some people are different (Transgender Warriors, Feinberg). You don’t have to agree with it or even understand it, just accept it. Accept it and move on.
Works Cited
Feinberg, Leslie. “Transgender Warriors.” Beacon Press, 1996.
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. “The Five Sexes: Why Male And Female Aren’t Enough.” The Sciences, April, 1993.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Blog Post 2: Why I Am So Very Deviant
One could definitely say that I am deviant in my ways; as in how I carry myself, how I speak, my reactions to things, the fact that I am considered a “potty-mouth” by societies’ standards and the fact that I am a minority. But out of all those key factors, the thing that most assuredly tucks me snugly into the deviant category is my big mouth. I am the first one to admit that I don’t know when to shut my mouth. When I was younger, not only did my mouth get me into trouble, but I also got myself involved in a considerable amount of physical fights as well; which is oh-so-deviant to our society due to the fact that (gasp!) putting your hands on someone in a way that causes them bodily harm is not only against the law, but it is considered “morally” wrong and it is something that is common knowledge to the average person; and if you know this and still partake in this immoral, illegal behavior, you couldn’t be any more deviant if you pranced around the street naked.
I guess one could correctly assume that my secret pleasure I get from shocking people definitely has always had something to do with just wanting to be that rebel, that hellcat that had to be just a little different from the crowd; whom to almost a ridiculous extent was extremely successful at pissing people off. Call it the foolishness of being an adolescent if you want. That is feasible. By displaying rebellious behavior to society in the ways I did, I unknowingly cast myself into a perfect example for the labeling theory. I was a product of my environment. I didn’t have much growing up, my family struggled financially and I never made it any secret that it made me angry. When you aren’t used to having much, you don’t expect much, so what difference did it make if I followed the rules or not? Being part of the lower class when it came to socio-economic status, the labeling theory fit me like a glove. Not the best upbringing and surely on the road towards breaking the law and offending society, labeling a kid who had my behavior as deviant was about as accurate as could possibly be (Labeling Theory, Becker). This deviant behavior was expected of a kid like me, so I gave society exactly what they wanted, and then some.
I also believe the conflict theory is relatable to my deviant adolescent behavior. That part of me that was so angry that I had so little and there were so many others my age that didn’t ever have to want for anything. I found myself always going toe-to-toe with the kids who were known as “wealthy”, and justified my behavior as being the spokesperson for others who were considered “poor kids” like I was against the “rich kids” that were always willing to step onto the battlefield to go to war against the kids who were just like me and that always caused conflict, even as kids who had no idea what social standing, conflict, and what the word deviant even meant. The conflict theory goes together with the labeling theory like peanut butter with jelly when it comes to showing an example of how we are products of our environment, and even as adolescents we know that we are expected to live up to the labels that are set for us, which in turn molds our thinking and behaviors for the rest of our lives (Conflict Theory, Quinney).
Things are different now that I am an adult. I don’t just go around punching people in their faces anymore. However, I will not hesitate to beat someone senseless with my words though, which is something I do often, as “deviant” as that may sound to some. When it comes to someone like me who has such an aggressive personality and admittedly some anger issues, having a temper and a tendency to fly off the handle with my big mouth, this is my way of having some control in society and still being able to express myself to where people get my point loud and clear. As bad as it sounds to some, this is my alternative to going up and just hitting someone in the face. Honestly, the only reason I don’t get into fights? The consequences, as in the law. Being arrested, jail time, parole, charges being pressed against me and knowing what disruption it would cause in my life is the only thing that stops me from letting someone feel the wrath of my right hook, and there are many times I have to remind myself of these consequences so I don’t just react with my fist connecting with the jaw of whoever happened to rub me the wrong way. This fits right into the social control theory; considering the fact that if the law wasn’t there to regulate me, I would probably not hesitate to revert back to that kid who expressed her anger with her fists (Control Theory, Hirschi).
Taking all of this into consideration, for my deviant behavior example, I went into a very high-end retail store and spent about an hour there basically offending people. I chose Macy’s at Westfield Vancouver Mall, for the simple fact that it is frequented a lot by people who are considered by most to have a certain amount of wealth, as Macy’s is rather expensive. I didn’t go too over the top, but I definitely got a lot of stares and fingers pointed at me, as I was making a point to use more profanity than I normally do, and talk about things that society would disapprove of being discussed in public, choosing to talk about sex and hooking up with different guys and making up a story about a bar fight. This sort of talk along with a lot of profanity offended a lot of people. Why is that? Because society says those aren’t the sort of things you are supposed to talk about in public, it is considered inappropriate and shows a lack of sophistication. Just using the word “f**k” is enough to make people gasp and shake their heads, because the word is just so offensive to the ears of the shoppers at Macy’s. Guess my deviance came in handy when it came to this experiment.
I don’t think there are many people who would disagree with me when I say I fall into the deviant category of society. Its just the way I am, and I honestly don’t care if people approve or disapprove. If there weren’t deviant people like me in society, who would the normal people have to gossip about and judge?
Works Cited
Quinney, Richard. “Conflict Theory.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 45. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Travis Hirschi. “Control Theory.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 30. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Becker, Howard S. “Labeling Theory.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 39. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Word Count 1190
I guess one could correctly assume that my secret pleasure I get from shocking people definitely has always had something to do with just wanting to be that rebel, that hellcat that had to be just a little different from the crowd; whom to almost a ridiculous extent was extremely successful at pissing people off. Call it the foolishness of being an adolescent if you want. That is feasible. By displaying rebellious behavior to society in the ways I did, I unknowingly cast myself into a perfect example for the labeling theory. I was a product of my environment. I didn’t have much growing up, my family struggled financially and I never made it any secret that it made me angry. When you aren’t used to having much, you don’t expect much, so what difference did it make if I followed the rules or not? Being part of the lower class when it came to socio-economic status, the labeling theory fit me like a glove. Not the best upbringing and surely on the road towards breaking the law and offending society, labeling a kid who had my behavior as deviant was about as accurate as could possibly be (Labeling Theory, Becker). This deviant behavior was expected of a kid like me, so I gave society exactly what they wanted, and then some.
I also believe the conflict theory is relatable to my deviant adolescent behavior. That part of me that was so angry that I had so little and there were so many others my age that didn’t ever have to want for anything. I found myself always going toe-to-toe with the kids who were known as “wealthy”, and justified my behavior as being the spokesperson for others who were considered “poor kids” like I was against the “rich kids” that were always willing to step onto the battlefield to go to war against the kids who were just like me and that always caused conflict, even as kids who had no idea what social standing, conflict, and what the word deviant even meant. The conflict theory goes together with the labeling theory like peanut butter with jelly when it comes to showing an example of how we are products of our environment, and even as adolescents we know that we are expected to live up to the labels that are set for us, which in turn molds our thinking and behaviors for the rest of our lives (Conflict Theory, Quinney).
Things are different now that I am an adult. I don’t just go around punching people in their faces anymore. However, I will not hesitate to beat someone senseless with my words though, which is something I do often, as “deviant” as that may sound to some. When it comes to someone like me who has such an aggressive personality and admittedly some anger issues, having a temper and a tendency to fly off the handle with my big mouth, this is my way of having some control in society and still being able to express myself to where people get my point loud and clear. As bad as it sounds to some, this is my alternative to going up and just hitting someone in the face. Honestly, the only reason I don’t get into fights? The consequences, as in the law. Being arrested, jail time, parole, charges being pressed against me and knowing what disruption it would cause in my life is the only thing that stops me from letting someone feel the wrath of my right hook, and there are many times I have to remind myself of these consequences so I don’t just react with my fist connecting with the jaw of whoever happened to rub me the wrong way. This fits right into the social control theory; considering the fact that if the law wasn’t there to regulate me, I would probably not hesitate to revert back to that kid who expressed her anger with her fists (Control Theory, Hirschi).
Taking all of this into consideration, for my deviant behavior example, I went into a very high-end retail store and spent about an hour there basically offending people. I chose Macy’s at Westfield Vancouver Mall, for the simple fact that it is frequented a lot by people who are considered by most to have a certain amount of wealth, as Macy’s is rather expensive. I didn’t go too over the top, but I definitely got a lot of stares and fingers pointed at me, as I was making a point to use more profanity than I normally do, and talk about things that society would disapprove of being discussed in public, choosing to talk about sex and hooking up with different guys and making up a story about a bar fight. This sort of talk along with a lot of profanity offended a lot of people. Why is that? Because society says those aren’t the sort of things you are supposed to talk about in public, it is considered inappropriate and shows a lack of sophistication. Just using the word “f**k” is enough to make people gasp and shake their heads, because the word is just so offensive to the ears of the shoppers at Macy’s. Guess my deviance came in handy when it came to this experiment.
I don’t think there are many people who would disagree with me when I say I fall into the deviant category of society. Its just the way I am, and I honestly don’t care if people approve or disapprove. If there weren’t deviant people like me in society, who would the normal people have to gossip about and judge?
Works Cited
Quinney, Richard. “Conflict Theory.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 45. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Travis Hirschi. “Control Theory.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 30. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Becker, Howard S. “Labeling Theory.” Readings In Deviant Behavior. p. 39. Alex Thio, Thomas C. Calhoun, Addrain Conyers.
Word Count 1190
Sunday, January 22, 2012
What makes you so normal? And if you aren't one of the normal people; what makes you so deviant???
Deviance:
Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.n. One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards (The Free Dictionary, by Farlex).
As a person who has always seemed to shift away from what is considered normal by most “socially accepted” people and their standards, I guess I can say that I tend to take a deviant standpoint on a lot of things; at times I even do it just to get a reaction, just to see if I can offend someone, as rude and socially incorrect as that may sound. How do people like me manage to accomplish that? By understanding deviance and knowing that when you are considered deviant you are also considered an outsider. According to Howard S. Becker, in his most well known book “Outsiders (1963)”, culture is defined as “the shared understandings that people use to coordinate their activities”. He viewed deviance as “the cultural product of interactions between people whose occupations involved either committing crimes or catching criminals”. (Encyclopedia Brittanica). Does that seem fair to categorize those of us who defy the norm of society into those two groups?
It kind of all boils down to what is considered an appropriate reaction and opinion on things considered deviant in society, especially in this beautiful country of ours, where how you appear to others is of utmost importance, and especially what you say. You had better watch what you say…because one of the lovely, but at the same time, disgusting “normal” but not talked about behaviors in our society is to delightfully twist ones’ words around if what they are hearing is any way considered ethically or morally offensive or vulgar. For example, one genre of music that the majority of people love to hate, which happens to be one of my favorite genres; rap music.
Any possible negative comment that can be made about a genre of music is rap music. You can’t understand a word that’s being said, all they do is talk about bitches and money and use profanity because they aren’t intelligent enough to have a decent vocabulary; and so on and so on until I get so annoyed that I often will play a especially vulgar and degrading song just to get under that persons skin…..isn’t my behavior considered deviant right there? What makes certain rappers especially deviant to the world, that little thing about them that just gets under everyone’s skin and just pisses them off; but even people that hate it and find it offensive will sure as hell still listen to it and spend plenty of time talking about it, certainly giving that rapper a whole lot of attention, which is exactly what that certain rap artist wants and makes it known he was sent here to piss the world off? Who does that better than Eminem aka Slim Shady?
Eminem right from the start of his career pushed the envelope and the limits as far as he possibly could, with an amazing lyrical and vocal skill that even the toughest credit couldn’t deny, but with song that had lyrics that caused peoples’ mouth to drop open in shock, disgust, and horror at the audacity of this word vomit that was spewing out of this blonde haired, blue eyed, white boy rapper produced by rap legend Dr. Dre, causing everything from lawsuits to picket rallies and protests. When his second album “The Marshall Mathers LP” dropped in spring of 2000, I clearly remember watching the media attention and waves of shock and fury that was the backlash from it. I believe it had been called one of the most disgusting degrading albums to ever come out, a disgrace and an insult to music, as the album was nominated for several Grammy Awards that year. The most extreme furious reaction mostly centered around where Eminems’ most controversial album to date picked as the main topic, the gay community. This is where the protest rallies came in.
I am the first one to admit, “The Marshall Mathers LP” has extremely offensive, vulgar, and disgusting lyrics directed towards the gay community, I can understand their anger. For example, the last track on the album is a song called “Criminal” which is so derogatory to the gay community that anyone who listens to it can’t even fathom that someone could put out a song that is so very much a no-no to societies standards to talk about these things in such a way. The following is the intro and first verse to the song; and from the first line you see right away what you are about to get yourself into.
"Criminal"
[Eminem]
A lot of people ask me.. stupid f**king questions.
A lot of people think that.. what I say on records,
Or what I talk about on a record, that I actually do in real life…
Or that I believe in it.
Or if I say that, I wanna kill somebody, that…..
I'm actually gonna do it….
Or that I believe in it….
Well, s**t…if you believe that…
Then I'll kill you.
You know why?
Cause I'm a
CRIMINAL
CRIMINAL
You goddamn right
I'm a CRIMINAL
Yeah, I'm a CRIMINAL
[Eminem]
My words are like a dagger with a jagged edge
That'll stab you in the head
Whether you're a fag or lez
Or the homosex, hermaph or a trans-a-vest;
Pants or dress; hate fags? The answer's "yes"
Homophobic? Nah, you're just heterophobic
Staring at my jeans, watching my genitals bulging (Ooh!)
That's my motherf**king balls, you'd better let go of ‘em
They belong in my scrotum, you'll never get hold of ‘em
Hey, it's me, Versace!
Whoops, somebody shot me!
And I was just checking the mail;
Get it? Checking the 'male'?
How many records you expecting to sell after your second LP
Sends you directly to jail?
C'mon!-- Relax guy, I like gay men;
Right, Ken? Give me an amen (AAA-men!)
Please Lord, this boy needs Jesus
Heal this child, help us destroy these demons
Oh, and please send me a brand new car
And a prostitute while my wife's sick in the hospital
Preacher preacher, fifth grade teacher
You can't reach me, my mom can't neither
You can't teach me a goddamn thing cause
I watch TV, and Comcast cable
And you ain't able to stop these thoughts
You can't stop me from topping these charts
And you can't stop me from dropping each March
With a brand new CD for these f**king retards
Duhhh, and to think, it's just little ol' me
Mr. "Don't Give A F**k," still won't leave….
[Chorus: Eminem (repeat 2X)]
I'm a CRIMINAL
Cause every time I write a rhyme, these people think it's a crime
To tell ‘em what's on my mind; I guess I'm a CRIMINAL
But I don't gotta say a word, I just flip ‘em the bird and keep going;
I don't take s**t from no one, I’m a CRIMINAL!
(http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/eminem/criminal.html)
Now, who wouldn’t be offended by those lyrics? I totally understand why people are. But people are so blinded by the controversy and the profanity that often what Eminem is telling you in his own way is that when it all comes down to it, its just music. It’s entertainment. There are always going to be things you don’t like or agree with. That’s life though, so maybe it’s something you better get used to. Maybe one should think about choosing their battles too? Again, its just music. There are a lot more serious issues going on in the world other than song lyrics that might have offended someone or hurt their sensitive little feelings and made them cry. But Eminem is often misunderstood; so because of that he is deviant in the eyes of society. But that’s really what you should expect when you make the choice to sit down and listen to that rap song.
On the other hand,if you want to find a rap song that isn’t offensive to your precious ears, and still be considered part of the rap genre, listen to Will Smith’s pop/rap style; for his songs have no profanity and all his songs are mostly about love and family, or the main theme song for the soundtrack of the movie he is starring in, not to mention all of his movies are generally rated PG-13 or lower, mind you. Which means the whole family can sit down and listen to Will Smith together, as he is age appropriate for everyone. His music is the rap that is the normal, and accepted to society. He doesn’t offend anyone, it’s positive feel good music and he keeps it safe and plays by the rules. His song “Just The Two Of Us” is a heartwarming song that is written about his oldest son that almost puts a tear in your eye, as it is considered what’s normal to society and doesn’t threaten to corrupt the delicate ears of impressionable young children.
Just The Two Of Us :
Verse 1: Will Smith
(Now dad this is a very sensitive subject)
From the first time the doctor placed you in my arms
I knew I’d meet death before I’d let you meet harm
Although questions arose in my mind, would I be man enough?
Against wrong, choose right and be standing up
From the hospital that first night
Took a hour just to get the carseat in right
People driving all fast, got me kinda upset
Got you home safe, placed you in your bassinet
That night I don't think one wink I slept
As I slipped out my bed to your crib I crept
Touched your head gently, felt my heart melt
Cause I know I loved you more than life itself
Then to my knees, and I begged the Lord please
Let me be a good daddy, all he needs
Love, knowledge, discipline too
I pledge my life to you
Chorus:
Just the two of us, we can make it if we try
Just the two of us, (Just the two of us)
Just the two of us, building castles in the sky
Just the two of us, you and I……
(http://www.lyricsmania.com/just_the_two_of_us_lyrics_will_smith.html)
He plays it very safe, yeah? Perfectly obeyed all of societies rules. But as once said by one of my favorite women in the world, Miss Marilyn Monroe, “ If I’d observed all the rules, I would never have gotten anywhere“ (www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/62998). Rules are definitely made to be broken. The 2 videos that I have selected to drive my point home about what’s deviant and what’s normal could not be more blatantly obvious if it reached out and slapped you across the face. While using profanity of course! I personally don’t like playing by the rules if I can avoid it. I’d rather be deviant and break a few rules. I’d rather just be me instead of “normal” any day. You only live once, right? Better spend the time you have being you and not trying to mold yourself into everyone around you.
Works Cited
Becker, Howard S. “Deviance Definition”. Encyclopedia Brittanica Online. http://www.brittanica.com.
Becker, Howard S. “Outsiders.” Pearson, 1963.
“Deviance.“ The Free Dictionary, by Farlex. Online. www.thefreedictionary.com/deviance.
Eminem. “Criminal.” The Marshall Mathers LP. Shady/Aftermath, 2000.
Monroe, Marilyn. “Rules.” Good Reads.com, Online. (www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/62998)
Smith, Will. “Just The Two Of Us.” Big Willie Style. Columbia, 1997.
Word Count: 1892
Deviant?
Normal?
Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.n. One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards (The Free Dictionary, by Farlex).
As a person who has always seemed to shift away from what is considered normal by most “socially accepted” people and their standards, I guess I can say that I tend to take a deviant standpoint on a lot of things; at times I even do it just to get a reaction, just to see if I can offend someone, as rude and socially incorrect as that may sound. How do people like me manage to accomplish that? By understanding deviance and knowing that when you are considered deviant you are also considered an outsider. According to Howard S. Becker, in his most well known book “Outsiders (1963)”, culture is defined as “the shared understandings that people use to coordinate their activities”. He viewed deviance as “the cultural product of interactions between people whose occupations involved either committing crimes or catching criminals”. (Encyclopedia Brittanica). Does that seem fair to categorize those of us who defy the norm of society into those two groups?
It kind of all boils down to what is considered an appropriate reaction and opinion on things considered deviant in society, especially in this beautiful country of ours, where how you appear to others is of utmost importance, and especially what you say. You had better watch what you say…because one of the lovely, but at the same time, disgusting “normal” but not talked about behaviors in our society is to delightfully twist ones’ words around if what they are hearing is any way considered ethically or morally offensive or vulgar. For example, one genre of music that the majority of people love to hate, which happens to be one of my favorite genres; rap music.
Any possible negative comment that can be made about a genre of music is rap music. You can’t understand a word that’s being said, all they do is talk about bitches and money and use profanity because they aren’t intelligent enough to have a decent vocabulary; and so on and so on until I get so annoyed that I often will play a especially vulgar and degrading song just to get under that persons skin…..isn’t my behavior considered deviant right there? What makes certain rappers especially deviant to the world, that little thing about them that just gets under everyone’s skin and just pisses them off; but even people that hate it and find it offensive will sure as hell still listen to it and spend plenty of time talking about it, certainly giving that rapper a whole lot of attention, which is exactly what that certain rap artist wants and makes it known he was sent here to piss the world off? Who does that better than Eminem aka Slim Shady?
Eminem right from the start of his career pushed the envelope and the limits as far as he possibly could, with an amazing lyrical and vocal skill that even the toughest credit couldn’t deny, but with song that had lyrics that caused peoples’ mouth to drop open in shock, disgust, and horror at the audacity of this word vomit that was spewing out of this blonde haired, blue eyed, white boy rapper produced by rap legend Dr. Dre, causing everything from lawsuits to picket rallies and protests. When his second album “The Marshall Mathers LP” dropped in spring of 2000, I clearly remember watching the media attention and waves of shock and fury that was the backlash from it. I believe it had been called one of the most disgusting degrading albums to ever come out, a disgrace and an insult to music, as the album was nominated for several Grammy Awards that year. The most extreme furious reaction mostly centered around where Eminems’ most controversial album to date picked as the main topic, the gay community. This is where the protest rallies came in.
I am the first one to admit, “The Marshall Mathers LP” has extremely offensive, vulgar, and disgusting lyrics directed towards the gay community, I can understand their anger. For example, the last track on the album is a song called “Criminal” which is so derogatory to the gay community that anyone who listens to it can’t even fathom that someone could put out a song that is so very much a no-no to societies standards to talk about these things in such a way. The following is the intro and first verse to the song; and from the first line you see right away what you are about to get yourself into.
"Criminal"
[Eminem]
A lot of people ask me.. stupid f**king questions.
A lot of people think that.. what I say on records,
Or what I talk about on a record, that I actually do in real life…
Or that I believe in it.
Or if I say that, I wanna kill somebody, that…..
I'm actually gonna do it….
Or that I believe in it….
Well, s**t…if you believe that…
Then I'll kill you.
You know why?
Cause I'm a
CRIMINAL
CRIMINAL
You goddamn right
I'm a CRIMINAL
Yeah, I'm a CRIMINAL
[Eminem]
My words are like a dagger with a jagged edge
That'll stab you in the head
Whether you're a fag or lez
Or the homosex, hermaph or a trans-a-vest;
Pants or dress; hate fags? The answer's "yes"
Homophobic? Nah, you're just heterophobic
Staring at my jeans, watching my genitals bulging (Ooh!)
That's my motherf**king balls, you'd better let go of ‘em
They belong in my scrotum, you'll never get hold of ‘em
Hey, it's me, Versace!
Whoops, somebody shot me!
And I was just checking the mail;
Get it? Checking the 'male'?
How many records you expecting to sell after your second LP
Sends you directly to jail?
C'mon!-- Relax guy, I like gay men;
Right, Ken? Give me an amen (AAA-men!)
Please Lord, this boy needs Jesus
Heal this child, help us destroy these demons
Oh, and please send me a brand new car
And a prostitute while my wife's sick in the hospital
Preacher preacher, fifth grade teacher
You can't reach me, my mom can't neither
You can't teach me a goddamn thing cause
I watch TV, and Comcast cable
And you ain't able to stop these thoughts
You can't stop me from topping these charts
And you can't stop me from dropping each March
With a brand new CD for these f**king retards
Duhhh, and to think, it's just little ol' me
Mr. "Don't Give A F**k," still won't leave….
[Chorus: Eminem (repeat 2X)]
I'm a CRIMINAL
Cause every time I write a rhyme, these people think it's a crime
To tell ‘em what's on my mind; I guess I'm a CRIMINAL
But I don't gotta say a word, I just flip ‘em the bird and keep going;
I don't take s**t from no one, I’m a CRIMINAL!
(http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/eminem/criminal.html)
Now, who wouldn’t be offended by those lyrics? I totally understand why people are. But people are so blinded by the controversy and the profanity that often what Eminem is telling you in his own way is that when it all comes down to it, its just music. It’s entertainment. There are always going to be things you don’t like or agree with. That’s life though, so maybe it’s something you better get used to. Maybe one should think about choosing their battles too? Again, its just music. There are a lot more serious issues going on in the world other than song lyrics that might have offended someone or hurt their sensitive little feelings and made them cry. But Eminem is often misunderstood; so because of that he is deviant in the eyes of society. But that’s really what you should expect when you make the choice to sit down and listen to that rap song.
On the other hand,if you want to find a rap song that isn’t offensive to your precious ears, and still be considered part of the rap genre, listen to Will Smith’s pop/rap style; for his songs have no profanity and all his songs are mostly about love and family, or the main theme song for the soundtrack of the movie he is starring in, not to mention all of his movies are generally rated PG-13 or lower, mind you. Which means the whole family can sit down and listen to Will Smith together, as he is age appropriate for everyone. His music is the rap that is the normal, and accepted to society. He doesn’t offend anyone, it’s positive feel good music and he keeps it safe and plays by the rules. His song “Just The Two Of Us” is a heartwarming song that is written about his oldest son that almost puts a tear in your eye, as it is considered what’s normal to society and doesn’t threaten to corrupt the delicate ears of impressionable young children.
Just The Two Of Us :
Verse 1: Will Smith
(Now dad this is a very sensitive subject)
From the first time the doctor placed you in my arms
I knew I’d meet death before I’d let you meet harm
Although questions arose in my mind, would I be man enough?
Against wrong, choose right and be standing up
From the hospital that first night
Took a hour just to get the carseat in right
People driving all fast, got me kinda upset
Got you home safe, placed you in your bassinet
That night I don't think one wink I slept
As I slipped out my bed to your crib I crept
Touched your head gently, felt my heart melt
Cause I know I loved you more than life itself
Then to my knees, and I begged the Lord please
Let me be a good daddy, all he needs
Love, knowledge, discipline too
I pledge my life to you
Chorus:
Just the two of us, we can make it if we try
Just the two of us, (Just the two of us)
Just the two of us, building castles in the sky
Just the two of us, you and I……
(http://www.lyricsmania.com/just_the_two_of_us_lyrics_will_smith.html)
He plays it very safe, yeah? Perfectly obeyed all of societies rules. But as once said by one of my favorite women in the world, Miss Marilyn Monroe, “ If I’d observed all the rules, I would never have gotten anywhere“ (www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/62998). Rules are definitely made to be broken. The 2 videos that I have selected to drive my point home about what’s deviant and what’s normal could not be more blatantly obvious if it reached out and slapped you across the face. While using profanity of course! I personally don’t like playing by the rules if I can avoid it. I’d rather be deviant and break a few rules. I’d rather just be me instead of “normal” any day. You only live once, right? Better spend the time you have being you and not trying to mold yourself into everyone around you.
Works Cited
Becker, Howard S. “Deviance Definition”. Encyclopedia Brittanica Online. http://www.brittanica.com.
Becker, Howard S. “Outsiders.” Pearson, 1963.
“Deviance.“ The Free Dictionary, by Farlex. Online. www.thefreedictionary.com/deviance.
Eminem. “Criminal.” The Marshall Mathers LP. Shady/Aftermath, 2000.
Monroe, Marilyn. “Rules.” Good Reads.com, Online. (www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/62998)
Smith, Will. “Just The Two Of Us.” Big Willie Style. Columbia, 1997.
Word Count: 1892
Deviant?
Normal?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)