As I mentioned in the last class, since we are not meeting next Monday February 16th there is a little mini-assignment I'd like you all to do over the break:
Think of a cultural (or subcultural) example that was viewed (either now or in the past) as dangerous by official or mainstream culture. Some examples that we've already discussed include the graffiti art movement documented in Style Wars, rock music, and the internet. The example you choose should be as broad or as specific as you like, but please give a description of the example, why you think it was viewed as dangerous in mainstream culture, and if/how it was repressed (i.e. made illegal, censored, etc.).
Please write up your example as a comment to this post. If possible, include links on your example for further reading.
We will be discussing these examples in our next class on Monday February 23rd.
The Fall Semester...
16 years ago
Assignment: Think of a cultural (or subcultural) example that was viewed (either now or in the past) as dangerous by official or mainstream culture.
ReplyDeleteFlappers! In the 1920s after the devastating effects of a "war to end all wars" a new “breed” of young women sprung up. The Flapper Era grew out of a time of great uncertainty for the younger generation. Many felt disenchanted by the strict social norms which had shaped their early lives. They wore short skirts and bobbed their hair. The flappers were seen as brash for wearing excessive makeup, drinking, treating sex in a casual manner, smoking, driving automobiles. Because of their dislike for what was then considered acceptable behavior they rebelled. Decided to abandon the stifling moral codes of their predecessors and indulge in a far more self-absorbed, hedonistic way of life. Some actresses were also influences in the rise of such outrageous behavior; they glorified the life of a flapper which made it spread more. Because of the flappers there was a breakdown in the traditional values and more liberal views of the rights of women. But because the great depression this subculture of the younger generation didn’t last long.
The Gothic trend was very controversial when I was a teenager. Music was the ultimate influence on the attitude, the wallet chains, baggy black pants and shirts with dark quotations or symbols, and as we all know the trench coats.
ReplyDeleteBands like Marilyn Manson, Slipknot, and Disturbed promoted this lifestyle.
Marilyn Manson's music was attractive I can honestly say and the news media told the parents to know where there children will be on the night of the concert. I remember being at a High School Basketball game and the students were playing the song "Beautiful People" in between quarters and the faculty members demanded for it to be changed to something like Michael Jackson. In All Consuming Images, a girl speaks out and says she loved the attention that she got from the students at her school in Boston and it was easy to spot her friends with the same gothic/punk rock look. Perhaps her reasons to sport the look were not to destroy herself and the world around her; but just to have a change in oneself to feel appreciated. As they say bad company corrupts good character and I do not think ripping Bible's on stage and shutting off from society will do you any good for yourself.
The Gothic trend still continues today. Some say style it for the attention, others for the fashion statement, and the rest of the people live it up as a way of life.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe geek next to you is a serial killer. Oh, he is also a carjacker.
ReplyDeleteWhen the controversial game Grand Theft Auto three met the public, parents were shocked to learn that the game allows the player freedom to steal cars, take drugs and do mafia works. Very soon, the public concludes that all crimes children committed are somehow linked to the controversial game. Gaming, which had long been a geek’s hobby, is now considered controversial for the negative message it conveys and the violence it encourages. Game sellers, under pressure from the parents and lawyers, begin to take the mature rating on a video game seriously.
While I am not a fan of Grand Theft Auto, I do feel that a lot of the discredits direct toward the game developers are unjust. Sure the series are developed by the notorious game developer Rockstar, but don’t companies (not just game developers) develop what they felt the public want best? Is there anything wrong with creating a product that the public demands? If consumers are ready for violence, is there anything wrong with trying to satisfy their demand?
The Beat Generation, very prominent in America in the 1950’s, was a youth subculture that opposed the mainstream American values of the time. Many were writers like Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg who believed in spontaneity, non-conforming, and in self-expression. The Beat Generation was also involved in experimenting with drugs. The popular culture criticized them for not being intellectual enough. According to them, this young group of people was made up of “rebels without a cause.” The Beat Generation later on gave way to the hippies of the 1960’s and 70’s.
ReplyDelete< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_Generation>
Gangsta rap, a musical menace to society. It all started with "The Message" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny-zSZ62Ig4), and later became public enemy number one to the U.S government. In the early 1990's the likes of the Ice-T and N.W.A brought out a side of hip-hop no one was prepared for. Raw lyrics and blunt messages, the rise of Gangsta rap brought fear to the hearts of popular culture. Unprepared for the potency of these lyrics, the government sought out to censor anything and everything put out by these gangtsa rap groups. As its popularity grew, it seemed mainstream media blamed everything that was wrong with the youth on this sub-genre of hip-hop (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzeZhCt5PVA). A censorship war was set against this genre and continues today
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangsta_rap
Around 1867, a new invention was birthed...the motorcycle. At that time people could not have fathomed that the invention would spawn a subculture that lives on through today. After Marlon Brando's performance in the movie The Wild One, the bikers image was created and was no longer underground. Picturing a biker, one automatically thinks leather jacket, tattoos, burly men, and Harley-Davidson. Only when biker groups such as Hell's Angels started taking root, did problems with authority and mainstream begin to develop. They were involved with selling drugs, extortion, murder, vandalism, etc. The most notable event as to when the biker gang was notarized by the media was the Altamont Music Festival, in which Hell's Angels was hired as security for the concert. After things became super chaotic, four people ended up dead and caused a huge controversy. Because the murder of Meredith Hunter was caught on videotape, Hell's Angels has there since had not the best of reputations which transcends to most bikers. This group of bikers constantly have members arrested (even today) and have been exploited by the media as evil on wheels.
ReplyDeleteDespite the media's representation of bikers as a whole, there are good groups such as the Fire Riders, who do toy runs and cystic fibrosis runs, but unlike the Hell's Angels, they aren't reconized to the same extent.
Well, as I read other people's posts, i thought of the Sexual Revolution o the 60's and the Harlem Renissance. The Sexual Revolution was the time when women showed men they were equal to men and that they were capable of doing things men were capable of doing. The burning of bras and revolts were outcomes of what happened. The media interpreted women as wild as out of control, but they merely wanted to show men they were equal and were tired of being second best.
ReplyDeleteThe Harlem Renissance was the time when black American showed the white Americans there were creative people. Songs, poems, novels, paintings, ect. were produced in this era. I'm not sure how the media depicted these people, but all African Americas saw them as brave people or intellects.
In the 1950s, a new wave of anti-Communist paranoia swept over the US, resulting in the second Red Scare, also known as McCarthyism. During the 50s, the House of Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) along with Senator Joseph McCarthy accused several thousands of Americans of Communist behavior or sympathy to the Communist cause. These people were typically ordinary people, usually leftist in their thinking but mostly uninvolved with Communism in America.
ReplyDeleteThe result of these accusations involved destruction of career - particularly in the film and radio industry where even the hint (or a hint of a hint!) of Communist accusations resulted in a spot on the "Hollywood blacklist" - imprisonment, and inability to find employment anywhere in the accused field.
The group of youths in the 60s known as the hippies have contributed to several ideals we take for granted today. These include equality for women, exercising our right to protest, freedom of sexual expression, and pretty much any music you hear on the radio today. However, during the 60s this group was viewed as dangerous and subversive with their counter culture trends. They wore colorful clothing that strayed away from the traditional conservative clothing of the time. They also played music that was radically different from any previous form. Establishments ceased to allow men with long hair into their establishments, certain songs and albums were not allowed to be played in public, and heavy media of the coverage of anti-Vietnam War was reported in an unfavorable light.
ReplyDeleteMany people have already cited the 60s as a decade giving birth to many subcultures/trends/styles viewed as dangerous by mainstream culture. One example I would like to mention from the 60s is the birth of student protests. Students from coast to coast were growing increasingly aware of the social and political climate they were in. Most students who decided to strike against their schools did so to protest against the oppressive "system" and the institutionalized inequalities that it perpetuated. The students that participated in these radical statements of opposition and the causes that were involved varied tremendously. For example, SDS struck against the Vietnam War and what they saw as perverted capitalist agendas, the BSU struck against racial inequality, the TWLF fought for Ethnic Studies, etc. Moreover, strikes were happening in universities such as Columbia, Harvard, and San Francisco State (and even in places like Paris, Mexico, and Germany). In my opinion, what made the student strikes so dangerous to mainstream culture was the fact that it directly challenged it and was so popular among the youth of the country. Followers of mainstream culture were not ready to confront the political, social, and economic issues that were being pushed in front their faces, and especially not by angry teenagers. Two examples that come to mind of how the vehement repression of these strikes led to violence are the San Francisco State student strikes and the Columbia University protests, both of which occurred in 1968. Tensions between the strikers and the institutions escalated to the point where police, guns, blockades, occupations, and blood were all involved. Although still not accepted by mainstream culture today, I think it is safe to say that student strikes would not be met with the same brutality and fear they were met with nearly four decades ago.
ReplyDeleteThis is from Juliet Kumah:
ReplyDeletePant sagging is one of the trends that some people in society viewed as negative. This fashion statement's history began in the prisons. Where in-mates were given oversized uniforms with no belts to prevent suicide, homicide or their being used as weapons.
It began to be popularized in the early 1990's by hip pop artist, then became a mainstream fashion trend to young black males; mostly. Pant sagging has government officials and citizens divided as to this being a crime or just a style of dressing? Some people see this fashion trends as a crime that is punishable by law while others view this law as infringing on peoples right to freedom of expression.
Some states have gone as far as having in place laws that make pant sagging a crime. Few examples are Delcambre, La proposed an ordinance to punish offenders by giving them fines up to $500 or up to 6months sentence. In Mansfield, La offenders pay fines up to $150 plus court cost or jail time up to 15days for first time offenders.
To solve this pant sagging issues law-marker like Councilwoman Annette Lartigue drafted an ordinance to fine or enforce community service in response to what she sees as the problem of exposing private parts in public. Also Atlanta councilman Martin proposed an ordinance that outlaws "exposed boxer shorts, skivvies, thongs and bra straps"
On the other hand Debbies Seagraves executive director of the American civil liberties union of Georgia disagrees and states "This is racial profiling bill that promotes and establishes a framework for an additional type of racial profiling"
This pant sagging has been an issue from the 1990 till this day. It is not seen as negative fashion only by those in government but some people in the public too especially the youth.
When discussing factors that can be or have been considered a threat or dangerous in the public media, we can also look at the cultures of other countries. For this assignment I looked into how the mainstream culture of many Muslim countries view women in the media and more specifically women singing in the media such as on television. I found out that not only are women strongly discouraged from singing in public or on television but in certain Muslim countries such as Iran and Afghanistan they are banned and outlawed all together. This is because a woman’s voice is seen as something sexual and therefore the idea of a woman singing would be considered an inappropriate and provocative act. It is interesting to see how a form of media that is seen as art or entertainment in some countries can be an illegal act in other countries.
ReplyDeleterelated links: http://www.picturetank.com/___/series/1d373c5651648b7c77ac0cab5e5b0d50/Iran:_Tehran_Forbidden_Music_Scene.html
One class of people who were considered dangerous were the Japanese americans during WWII. After the Attack on Pearl Harbor, there was the fear that Japan might invade the west coast of the United States. The Japanese who were already living there were thought that they might help their original country in conquering US. As a result, Roosevelt signed Executive order 9066, which allowed officialities to place the japanese in the internment camps. The most striking issue is that a good majority of those placed in the camps were american citizens. This fact makes me think if our civil liberties should be violated during extreme situations such as awars.
ReplyDeleteFrom Vanessa Razuri:
ReplyDeleteThe Harry Potter series were a really popular book series a few years ago and almost everyone read the story about the boy wizard's adventures in Hogwarts School of Wizardary. Aside from its huge popularity there were some people more specially strong believing Christians who are against the books mainly because of witchcraft. In other words, they call it "Wicca", a belief in the devil which grants you powers to do harm and spread evil. Christians believe that the books are evil so they started to burn the books and tried to get the government to ban them from the libraries and the schools but in the end it was just a waste of time since it in reality created a way for children to start reading again.
Along the same lines of graffiti which we spoke about in class, tatoos and piercings also came to mind when brainstorming for posed dangers in our society. Tatoos and piercings date back to many ages ago. It was a naturally occuring part of many cultures and even used for medical or spiritual healing processes. According to an article I read, it was only until the Spaniards saw the tatoos on the Mexicans, that this cultural practice was given it's negative outlooks and was deemed the "work of Satan." From then on although tatoos were originally cultural practices with meaning, it is now viewed negatively and not such a natural or cutural doing.
ReplyDeleteToday it becomes more difficult to find people who don't already have tatoos or intend to get one. In our current generation tatooing is either a form of expression or rebellion. "Common reasons are for self expression, doing something different or out of the ourdinary, and being looked upon as dangerous or a rebel." This quote shows that our society finds this body art to be dangerous and thus not approved of as a whole. This can be supported by the fact that visible or inappropriate tatoos affect one's job opportunities. One's first impression is very important. Tatoo's known as dangerous by our mainstream culture would thus contribute negatively to one's appearance and lessen there chances of obtaining a job.
Body piercings on the same note have the same effect. Too many or piercings in unusual spots are not largely accepted and are frowned upon. Similarly with tatooing it was once a cultural practice until it was deemed associated with the devil. Now it seems to put forth a sense of rebellion or danger.
Today, "if you choose to get a tatoo or piercing, you may very easily become stereotyped or judged." But as time goes on with the changing generations, who knows what could happen and how things could change.
Subcultural and countercultural movements will always shock the mainstream culture and put it at unease to some extent. When asked to come up with some example of this phenomena, I, perhaps for personal reasons, immediately thought of the practice and culture surrounding body modification. The history of this practice goes back very far and is very involved and most of all, differs around the world. In western cultures, the trend of body piercing and tattooing being a subculture anymore at all, I think, is arguable. Nonetheless, it is still an image that seems to come off as “dangerous”. At least, dangerous in the sense that when entering the job market, it is understood that ‘Corporate America’ will ask you to compromise that image. The colorful history of tattooing and piercing doesn’t seem to be relevant in this situation; when confronted with this subcultural image, the “mainstream culture” backs away for reasons of purely superficial value. The image that seems to project itself along with certain kinds of piercing and tattooing is negative and usually has nothing to do with the individuals themselves. Popular culture and popular media plays up the stereotype of this image belonging to some sort of rebellious underclass and makes it acceptable. The (sub)culture of this practice is incredibly varied and isn’t localized to a certain group of people and yet, popular culture interprets this image very specifically and usually in a negative, potentially ‘dangerous’ way. It would seem to most people that having a piercing somewhere other than your ear or a type of tattoo in a visible place shouldn’t put you at a disadvantage when functioning in society, but it does and will continue to do so until the “mainstream culture” reconsiders its interpretation of this culturally invested image.
ReplyDeleteI just read that my example was already brought up! Sorry, Shaina! I don't mean to rain on your parade!
ReplyDeleteGay culture definitely began as a threatening subculture to the mainstream, and still struggles for acceptance today. Countries around the world had at one point or another laws banning sexual acts between people of the same sex, indicating the extent to which homosexuality was considered a danger. These days homosexuality is not the taboo it used to be, although it still has the potential to cause controversy.
ReplyDeleteThe Gay rights movement began in the late 1960s and gathered momentum in the 1970s. More recently the fight is for the right to marry. Conservatives still view homosexuality as a "sin", and oppose gay marriage on the basis that it disrupts the institution of marriage entirely. As unreasonable as these claims sound, the groups against gay marriage hold significant political clout, and have managed to counter the gay rights movement on many occasions.
Of course, positive strides have been made in the gay rights movement over the years, most notably with the Stonewall Riots in NYC (1969) and the legalization of gay marriage in various countries and American states. As the decades have passed, an entire gay culture has sprung. Television networks, magazines, musicians, actors, and a general presence in the media have made homosexuality less of a "threat" than it was once considered. Although it may not yet be quite "mainstream", it certainly seems to be headed in that direction.
-Jessica A.
Originally I had planned to mention gay culture but Jessica has already discussed it in full. It is interesting however, that taboos surrounding relationship did not only concern relationships between same sex couples or otherwise, but also man - woman interactions. During the 20th century (the rise of the movie industry and the motion picture) various censorship boards and councils were formed to curtail the subject matter within the movies. A huge portion of the censors were aimed at the depiction of men loving women, or vice versa. A movie could not show a man and woman sharing a bed under any circumstance (even if they were only sleeping on opposite sides avoiding physical interaction), kissing (in any form or style), or any other public displays of affection.
ReplyDeleteAs the years went by many movie producers and directors broke those rules for a "shock factor" in their movies. The first short motion picture to display a woman and man embracing each other and kissing was considered extremely raunchy and explicit and caused many authoritative figures to be appalled, and yet, the scene thrilled audiences. Ironically, the kiss could be considered the sex scene of today.
The reason the movies in particular were of great concern was because so many millions of people saw them each year. Many upper class and influential individuals thought the movies would corrupt the minds of the viewers and, most importantly, the new immigrant population.
Outside of the movies no one spoke of their interactions with their wives or girlfriends as the act was considered vulgar and wrong.
Obviously, today that's not the case, as anyone can go out to see a movie and witness a full-blown sexual encounter and hardly be phased by it.
-Teo G.
Rock and roll is of course not the first musical idiom that was derided for being detrimental to society. Jazz swing was the 'rock' of its day, causing the youth to lose their inhibitions and the parents to run for the church. Lyrically however swing was, for the most part, safe. As rock music morphed into a mostly self-composed art form, the addition of lyrics added a new target for the zealots of censorship. The version of "Louie, Louie", by The Kingmen was the first rock song to be banned, mainly because of what they thought the band "might be" saying.
ReplyDeleteRock censorship continued throughout the 60's and 70's with this comment by rock musician turned pastor Bob Larson summing up the fears of many: "Rock and roll is a part of this plan (Satan's) to achieve a world-wide moral decay".
Although rock censorship has certainly become less severe with time, it is an issue that still comes up. Pope Benedict was quoted in 2005 as saying this about rock music:
"Rock"... is the expression of the elemental passions, and at rock festivals it assumes a sometimes cultic character, a form of worship, in fact, in opposition to Christian worship."
Aaron K.E.: One example of this phenomenon is the subculture of latter-day pseudo-Libertarian revelers classified under Anton LaVey's 'Satanic Bible' banner.
ReplyDeleteSaid people, in reality, are little more dangerous than philosophy majors, and their 'Satanism' amounts to sitting around drinking wine in crystal goblets while thinking about how superior they are to everyone else. There are also magic rituals and other such things they do, but none of them are particularly dangerous or involve the sacrifice of goats or what-have-you.
A lot of the hatred for them not only comes from Anton LaVey's ridiculous attention-grabbing stunts, but also the Satanic Ritual Abuse craze in the 80's and early 90's, in which many girls and boys were coerced by their psychiatrists into admitting bogus memories of horrific abuse by 'Satanists.' At the height of the panic there were numerous book-burnings and protests in the streets nearby Churches of Satan, and Anton LaVey of course received multiple death threats daily.
It continues to this day in some form, but most people have realized how harmless members of the Church of Satan are.
As I read through everyone's great posts, it really made it hard for me to come up with a threat to society, but after thinking about it for a while I realized that people talked about Rock & Roll, but what about punk rock, and the "Punks"? The punk scene was a very big attraction here in NYC. People would go to the village to see the freak show they considered the Punks.
ReplyDeleteThe punk movement was underground,and I would say the next big movement after the hippies.Punk was started in England with bands like the sex pistols,generation x, then in the U.S with the Ramones.The media pretty much skipped a great portion of this movement. Later on, once punk was ruined by posers, the media jumped on the bandwagon.
Believe it or not,when punk started, you couldn't get a pair of Dr.Martens here in the states. The only way to get your hands on them was to have someone from England ship them or friends traveling to England bring some back.Places like "Hot Topic" didn't exist. The Clothes that punks wore, were hand made. England had Punk stores, but here in the U.S, there were none until a lot later on during the punk scene.
Squatters were the ones that took the most harassment from the police. They were groups of kids that lived and occupied empty buildings in the lower east side. They were different than homeless people, because they had political views and believed in community.
At the same time that punk was emerging, Hip Hop was also coming out. Hip Hop was more main stream than Punk. Hip Hop stations were accessible, and hip hop records by Run DMC and LL Cool J could be purchased at any Sam Goody, but punk rock only had one underground station here in NYC: the only station was NYU's "Hell Hole". To purchase punk albums, you had to go to bleeker st.
The media only jumped on punk stories when controversy hit, for example :In England, a punk store was selling fake severed fingers, and this caused such a commotion, that the cops went in, and confiscated them.
Punk Rock advocated anti-capitalism. They believed that the government only protected the rich and the poor could just rot. Punk pulled for anti-status.
The death of the Punk scene came when "posers" came into the underground scene.Kids with bad attitudes, that didn't share the same "communal" views as punks. Ex: Punks shows were underground and only cost $5-$10 per show. People would mosh and if someone fell they would hold crowds back to help the person. After a while, posers went to the shows starting fights with people bumping into them. They brought knives with them. Soon enough, underground punk clubs couldn't afford the insurance because of these kids, so the clubs closed and the scene became even more underground.
Thrash Metal during the late 70's and throughout the 80's spawned popular bands such as Anthrax, Slayer, and Metallica. These bands were pioneers in the metal genre. The music was generally fast and loud with aggressive lyrics. Thrash music quickly became popular among teenagers. It was something new and different and went against the norm. Outside views of Thrash depicted the music as violent and not suitable for kids and young adults. They believed the music would destroy the minds of the youth. Slayer, for instance, was and still is a controversial band. They have been called satanists and Nazi sympathizers. These perceptions have been constantly put down by the band themselves. It is something that comes with the music. I recommended watching, Get Thrashed and Metal: A Headbangers Journey. These documentaries portray the true essence of the culture and how it has been seen in both negative and positive light.
ReplyDeleteLambada, a.k.a. "the forbidden dance."
ReplyDeleteAlthough this dance was never outlawed or made illegal, it was quite controversial in the 1980's.
Dirty dancing swept the nation and America still being a largely protestant, puritannical nation, found this dance dangerous due to its closeness and passionate and sultry moves. Moreso than the dance itself, the sexual expression and freedom was considered a threat to society.
This also reminds me of the movie "Footloose" and is another one of those things, like rock and roll, or gansta rap that the mainstream tends to find threatening to the social fabric, yet in turn serves only to enrich it.
I actually found a link about a principal in Ohio who wants to ban dirty dancing:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,496864,00.html
In the past around the 1500s everyone use to follow whatever the church said and goes by what they lay out. The thought of challenging the church was an outrageous thing to do and was not tolerated. An example would be Galileo proposing Copernicus's heliocentric theory where everything revolves around the sun. That resulted in him become under house arrest till the day he died.
ReplyDeleteIn America people who have tattoos have a hard time to find employment. Although to them it is a way of expressing themselves the mainstream society views it differently. Usually they look at people with tattoos as delinquents. This comes from the stereotype of ex/convicts, gangs using tattoos to indicate facts about their criminal behavior. [ex. A tear tattoo can be a symbol for murder but it can also mean that you lost a loved one]. The US military also use tattoo to indicate military units, battles, kills etc. Women who also have tattoos are looked at differently especially when they are in the tattoo industry and some are in more risk of isolation. There are negative associations with tattoos not only in America but also in Japan. In certain public Japanese places they would ban people bearing large tattoos. Even though the use of tattoos predates the widespread popularity, tattoos are still associated with criminality.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if this was mentioned already in the previous replies but I think burlesque dancing is another example of something that was considered 'dangerous'. Burlesque is an art act of humorous entertainment which placed women and their sexuality at center stage. It first started out in the 1840's till 1937- when Mayor LaGuardia of New York had it banned. Women would walk on stage with little (and provacative) pieces of clothing and showed off their bodies with confidence (demanding attention).
ReplyDeleteBut recently burlesque has been coming back and becoming more 'mainstream'. There are clubs all over New York, as well as burlesque dancing classes, and there are even male performers now. To begin with, I guess this was seen as somewhat of a threat becuase of the conservative and traditional thoughts of some people and how women were suppose to act. Though there have been campaigns against this art form since the 1870's, nowadays burlesque dancing is increasing in popularity.
http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_177/bigteasesburlesqueis.html
http://sissybutchbrothers.com/film.html
One small subgroup that many considered dangerous is the MOVE political group that was founded in 1972 by John Africa (nee Vincent Leaphart). John Africa urged his followers to adopt a lifestyle that rejected most modern trappings including cooked food, all commercial hygiene products, the use of cars and nearly all electronics and anything that felt would contribute to the pollution of the planet. Everyone that was a part of the MOVE movement adopted the last name Africa as a tribute to the idea that all life originated from the continent. They believed that man-made laws were flawed in their need to be amended and explained by lawyers and enforced by a legal system. They believed natural laws were best and in removing the idea of certain people being seen as superior to others natural law would be more appropriate for human nature.
ReplyDeleteWhile MOVE’s website and literature seems to share similar principles with the hippie movement like their practice of eating more natural foods and their rejection of the idea of individual property and capitalistic motivations they found enemies in their many of their practices. Some of which were denying their children medicine and clothing believing that they were keeping them closer to nature. Purportedly their practice of eating natural foods included raw meat, and how in their refusal to use a lot of modern technologies resulted in their property being heavily littered with trash and human waste.
The most well-known MOVE headquarters was in southwest Philadelphia at 6221 Osage Avenue where members lived and raised their families in communal house where they altered the outside appearance with rooftop “bunkers” and gardens. Often their neighbors would complain because they would speak into bullhorns and profess their beliefs for the community to hear at all hours of the day and night. In addition to this their appearance was often seen as offensive since they didn’t believe in combing or cutting their hair preferred to leave it in its “natural state” and didn’t believe in the use of manufactured body products like deodorant or bar soap. They also seemed to boast the defense of their ideals with heavy firepower.
The MOVE movement gained national attention when after two police standoffs in eight years (in 1978 and 1985) their location at 6221 Osage Avenue was bombed following a day-long back-and-forth shootout with police. This resulted in eleven MOVE members dying including four children. In addition to this not only was the MOVE house destroyed but almost the entire block went up in flames resulting in the complete obliteration of 53 homes and eight destroyed homes and left almost 250 people homeless. Before this final fatal standoff with police MOVE had gained a lot of negative press by being involved with the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. Abu-Jamal was a member of the MOVE party who was convicted in 1982 of killing Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner and was sentenced to death but appealed his case and since then has written books about the police and legal system.
Cited references:
http://www.onamove.com
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,956982-2,00.html
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1330
"Fear lasts longer than love" - A Bronx Tale
ReplyDeleteMobsters, Wiseguys, Gangsters, any term you pick, its almost innate that people get a sense of fear at the thought of encountering someone belonging to the Mafia. The American Mafia which is also known as American Costa Nostra came about in the late 19th century in the United States. This was due to the large mass of Sicilian and Southern Italians immigrants migrating to America. It was documented in 1986 that the Italian-American Mafia was one of the largest organized crime groups. Most groups occupied metropolitan areas such as New York, Philadelphia and Chicago. Although the acts committed by gang member are illegal, the media seems to praise them for their tough exterior and ability to manipulate people with their weapons and amount of friends to support them. Take for example the classic movies such as "The Godfather," "Goodfellas," "A Bronx Tale," and the very popular HBO show "The Sopranos." These characters are brought to the screen and we as viewers are able to connect with their humanness, and how everyday they are, especially if you are a New Yorker. We laugh at their potrayals and their stereotypes. They strike fear in their victims and assume respect from everyone who looks their way. Because their appearance in movies isn't always as humorous as reality the FBI stepped in to crack down especially in 1970 when the RICO Act was passed and made it illegal to be part of an organization that committed crimes. Through this Act the witness protection program was created to enable the safety of victims who were threatened by the Mafia.
In America, dieting is one of the major focus in today's society. People are more influenced to lose weight then to stay healthy. This idea of losing weight is to gain what many say "the perfect body." Though people are not made to be the same they are influenced to be. One of the main style of dieting that is still being argued today is counting calories. Many people argue that counting calories can help maintain healthy eating but do not see that it's a sign of Anorexia. This way of dieting help people actually starve the body. This causes many to lose body mass.
ReplyDeleteThe Gothic Subculture has taken hits by the news media through tragic stories such as school shootings and the murder of Pamela Vitale. The Gothic Subculture, often identified through dark clothing or any sort of unique fashion, have been perceived as something dangerous in the media. When the tragedy of Columbine occurred, in the aftermath, it was told that Dylan Klebold and Dylan Harris, the murderers, were wearing long black trench coats and were associated with a group called The Trench Coat Mafia. This lead to the assumption that the Trench Coat Mafia, or trench coats for that matter, is exclusively involved with gothic fashion. Marilyn Manson [band], misconstrued to play gothic genre music, were viewed as a driving force to drive these two students to go insane, although it was later exposed that medication had more to do with the problem such as antidepressants and other various pills. The school shooter Jeff Weise was also indirectly labeled a goth since apparantly articles stressed more about him wearing trench coats and listening to heavy metal music then to explain the motive behind his attacks. Of course, heavy metal music is also not associated to the genre of gothic music nor is it a direct blend to the culture. Scott Dyleski, also 'misconstrued goth,' was portrayed through Fox News as rather more bias than explaining the motive or cause, which is why the title on that segment was titled, "Goth Murder Madness" with the video directly on this link...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5psCjK6tzQ
I think the micheal jordan era was a dangerous time. i am talking about his sneakers back in the 80's and 90's.people were getting killed or robbed just to get a pair of jordans. still to this day people wait hours in line to get a pair.
ReplyDeleteI don't know whether my topic is a good example of something cultural or subcultural.I remember when I was little that I use to love watching cartoons like Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry. But now you really don't see cartoons like that on TV. Now you see cartoons with "violence" in only cable channels or late at night. I think is due to censorship. Now a days everything seems to be censored whether it's a good thing or a bad thing that's left to people's opinions. I frankly think that it really doesn't depend on what shows TV. Even cartoons that had "violence" in previous sessions before are altered.
ReplyDeleteThere are many debates on this subject and concerns that TV violence contributes to child violence. I'm not saying that I disagree I just think that other factors probably apply. And I don't think that we should fear the media and its content.
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/violence/violence_debates.cfm
During the 18th century in England, women's clothing drastically changed. Middle class women wore comfortable loose dresses instead of the confining corsets of the aristocracy. This shift was controversial because people believed it gave women too much freedom and represented bad morals. Ironically this occurred at the same time as the popularization of the novel, which was also quite controversial and for essentially the same reasons.
ReplyDeleteoh, by the way, tinmanrising is Ching Y.
ReplyDelete