The Daily Show Critiques Coverage of Planned Parenthood Shootings

When I saw this clip, I thought it was genius. Of course, most content produced by The Daily Show is. 

In this clip, Trevor Noah explains how the coverage of the shooting at the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood was flawed. The shooting left three people dead, including a police officer. 

I would like to start by saying that this is not a pro-life or pro choice discussion. I am choosing to do this topic because Planned Parenthood provides important services to women, and the way the shooting was covered was simply interesting to me. 

To put this incident into context, this incident happened during a time when politicians have been spewing hate rhetoric after videos were released of Planned Parenthood selling fetus tissue. Those videos were soon found to be fake. The debate to de-fund Planned Parenthood is still ongoing. 

However, that is a different conversation. I appreciate this clip because it discusses the exact same thing I was thinking: why was the media scared to call this shooting domestic terrorism? This was an attack with ideological violence behind it. He even said during the attack "no more baby parts", a reference of the fake videos I mentioned earlier. 

The answer is simple: because he was white. Priming is a powerful tool in journalism. Priming is the fact that the media sets the stage on an issue, and how the audience understand said issue. 

According to a study done by Franklin D. Gilliam, Jr. and Shanto Iyengar, the media often resorts to race when reporting on crime, and this has a large impact on the way a crime is viewed. 

In this clip, Trevor Noah shows many clips of various media outlets debating if this was terrorism. One of the clips makes the point that if the shooter was Arab, journalists would report it as terrorism, and this is true. If the shooter had been a minority, this crime would have been reported on way differently. Let's just admit it. 

I agree with what Trevor Noah says in this clip. If we have to ask to call an attack terrorism, how about we just call it terrorism. 

That's So Raven educates about Privilege

When I was a kid, I loved the show That's So Raven. The show about a teenage psychic girl and her friends. For those that are around my age now, so early twenties, you remember this show as well.

Recently, this episode came to my mind. I remember this episode well. It is one of the many episodes that attempted to teach young people about various social problems. In this clip that I found from the episode, Raven has a psychic vision that she did not get a job because the manger does not hire black people. She spends the beginning talking to with her friends about racism. She sends her friend Chelsea, who happens to be white, to apply and she get the job. Chelsea, who is white, gets the job and wears a hat with a hidden camera. Raven then dresses as an older man shopping in the store, and the manger tells Chelsea to follow her around while she shops. Towards the end, she tells Chelsea that she does not hire black people, and Raven and her friends end up exposing the discrimination in the store.

To view the clip click here.

This clip came to my mind because recently I have become familiar with the term privilege. The term privilege in this sense is a special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste. Those that are privileged are often unaware.

This system acts as a detriment to non-dominant groups that have not historically or traditionally had access to the dominant culture's institutions. Privilege can come in many forms, including white, male, and able-bodied privilege. For this post, I am focusing on white privilege.

I also want to make it clear that this does not mean white people do not experience troubles in life. This term means that systematically and socially white people experience privileges that minorities do not.

In the reading White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack by Peggy McIntosh, she lists numerous aspects of privilege that whites carry around with them and use in everyday life, but are often unaware of these tools. One of these tools she "unpacks" is the fact that she, as a white female, can often go shopping alone without being followed or harassed while in a store.

Upon blatant acts of discrimination and racism, this episode of That's So Raven obviously displays this when the manager asks Chelsea to follow Raven around the store while she is shopping. I have also witnessed this many times in my life. I remember my Latina friend feeling very uncomfortable once when we were shopping because an employee decided to follow her.

I, as a white girl, have never had this happen to me. This in itself is a privilege that I was never aware of until I became educated on this concept.

However, I realize now that this one episode of one of my favorite childhood shows attempted to educate me on this fact of life way before higher education did. I appreciate the fact that I grew up on shows that called out the problems with society, instead of trying to cover them. I think more shows should aim for this as well.

As white people, Peggy McIntosh calls that we must understand our privilege instead of denying it, and use it to change the way the system operates. I think my generation has hope in doing this, because we are realizing and becoming educated at a rate faster than any generation before us.

So the next time someone asks you to "check your privilege", don't become defensive. Instead start a conversation. Try to understand. Understanding and education is the key to change,

I realize this post is not as much about gender, but it is about show that, as a young girl, I really admired. Raven is a character that often stoodd up for what she believes in. In one episode, she also stands up to body shaming. She is as character that I was happy to grow up with.

Stereotypes and Prejudice of the Gay Male as Seen in Braveheart

The other night I was bored. There was nothing on T.V, so my roommate and I decided to watch some show about celebrity scandals. We watched episodes about Robert Downey Jr. and Sean Penn. Riveting stuff, really. Naturally, one episode came on about Mel Gibson. For most of us that can remember his fall from fame, we know how controversial he became. He has been accused of being anti-Semitic and sexist. Homophobic also has been added to his character traits.

This news isn't new, of course. No one could escape his scandals as they were happening. Watching the show describe the controversy around Passion of the Christ was no news to me. I remember that well.

The one thing that I learned from this show was something I already knew. What I mean is the controversy surrounding one of Mel Gibson's most successful films: Braveheart, I have seen this movie multiple times. It's violent but riveting. One thing this bad celebrity show revealed to me was that Braveheart was also homophobic. This was a fact that I had seen, but never even noticed.

The show talked about how GLAAD, one of the most prominent gay rights groups, took large issue at the depiction of Prince Edward the II, and the scene where his lover is thrown out the window by his father. Suddenly, it clicked in my head.

First, lets start with how Mel Gibson, the director of the movie, decided to depict Edward II. Edward, who may have actually been a bisexual according to historians, is depicted as weak, effeminate, and cowardly in this movie. He is shown as being a bad leader, and in stark contrast to his father who is cruel and shown to be a good leader.

Sadly, this is how gay males have been depicted in movies and other forms of media for years, leading to people to construct stereotypes around gay males that we use to understand that group of people.

According to Richard Dyer, a professor in the department of Films Studies at King's College in London, stereotypes that are placed on gay people are widely believed to be correct. This is damaging because it leads said group to believe stereotypes about themselves.

To stereotype gay males, movies often use one form of stereotyping called Iconography, according to Dyer. This a way to show a character's gayness by bestowing certain qualities on them, and a way to explain that charterer's actions later. In this movie, merely depicting Edward II as physically small makes him look weaker than his fellow male characters.

This leads us to controlled prejudice. This is the final and last stage of acting out prejudice. It is intentional and accepts these stereotypes as valid. We accept gay males depicted this way, and accept it as mostly true. Mel Gibson, being the director, chose to depict this character in this particular way.

The most disturbing thing that I realized was the shear coldness of the window scene. As I mentioned before, I have seen this movie multiple times, but I always found this scene among others to be particular disturbing. Now I understand why. This scene is meant to be a funny one against the backdrop of a very intense story, and this is problematic.

 This is a scene that starts out as an argument, and ends in an abrupt death of Edward II's lover by being thrown out a window. It sounds sad, cruel even, but he way it was shot made it look almost comical. Now I understand why GLAAD took issue with this scene, and this movie. This scene made it seem like it was totally okay that a man was thrown out a window with the most cruel intentions. The sheer nonchalant nature of the murder is also upsetting.

Mel Gibson, know for his racism and prejudice, decided to shoot this scene to be comical. To me, and others, it is just disturbing.