Man, gonorrhea can be a bummer

Earlier today the Center for Disease Control held a press briefing to announce that the United States could soon face a gonorrhea epidemic.  The STI, which can cause damage to reproductive systems in both women and men and lead to infertility, has long been overshadowed by more difficult to treat sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS and herpes.  Every year, 64 million people contract gonorrhea, 700,000 of those in the United States.  However, over the past few decades, the bacteria causing gonorrhea have become more drug resistant, and now there is only a single antibiotic that effectively treats the disease.  Problematically, this antibiotic (ceftriaxone) is only effective when injected, meaning those infected must go to a doctor and get a shot rather than the easier oral treatments.

The CDC announced today it is only "a matter of time" before the disease becomes resistant to ceftriaxone as well.  And when gonorrhea remains untreated and enters the bloodstream, it becomes deadly.

It is difficult to say what impact this seriously concerning announcement will have on sexual attitudes in America.  The AIDS epidemic and ignorance about how HIV spread caused a moral panic in the 1980s that in some ways still persists today. (For example, sexually active gay men are still turned away from blood donations—even if they do not have HIV/AIDS.)  Though HPV is so common that half the sexually active population in America will contract a strain of it at least once in their lives, people still have qualms about the cancer-preventing vaccines.  Last year, Sen. Michele Bachmann baselessly made the claim that these vaccines cause mental retardation.  Clearly, sexually transmitted diseases present a unique public health dilemma because privacy and morality issues come into play.  Even if doctors could cure every disease, a large number of of sexually transmitted diseases would likely still go untreated because of ignorance or shame.

As essentially every study we've read this semester shows, the media does have a profound effect on a variety of sexual attitudes.  As Pinkleton et al. (2012) point out, the media can be an important and helpful educator on sexual health and can influence adolescents to make responsible sexual decisions.  Delgado and Austin (2007) found that sexual health messages were effective in a variety of mediums.  However, Hust, Brown, and L'Engle (2008) showed that so far, the media isn't doing as effective of a job as it could in this realms, choosing to mostly ignore sexual health messages despite the impact they could have.  There is no reasonable or ethical way to stop people from having sex, and there will always be people engaging in risky sexual behaviors that will cause these diseases to persist.  Healthy, educated attitudes about sex are more important than any vaccine when it comes to protecting sexual health.  In the coming years, the media should prioritize and normalize sexual health messages so that we don't have to worry about gonorrhea epidemics and other horrors.

Olympic objectification

Numerous articles over the past week has commented not only on the skimpiness of beach volleyball bikini bottoms (which, as we discussed today, are the opposite of new, yet remain fascinating to the public for obvious reasons).  My favorite is this article, which pokes fun at stock photographers' tendencies to take tons of gratuitous butt shots of female volleyball players by showing other awkward pictures of isolated body parts.

It's not particularly surprising that female Olympians would find themselves sexualized and objectified, because they are taking part in a television spectacle.  Other problematic gender portrayals commonly found in the media persist in Olympic coverage as well.  This analysis of the 2008 Beijing Olympics reached unsurprising conclusions about the differences in the ways male and female Olympians and commentators were shown on TV.  Women won 48% of medals at the Olympics, but received 46.3% of the television coverage, even though the women in diving, beach volleyball, and gymnastics (considered "socially acceptable" for women to play) all received significantly more coverage than their male counterparts.  Seventy-five percent of women's coverage was devoted to socially acceptable sports.  The study notes that these sports all involve skimpy clothing and no hard contact between players.  The study also found that male commentators received significantly more air time than female commentators.

These findings are unsurprising for anyone who knows that numerous television content analyses have found women to be underrepresented, and when they are shown, are depicted to be younger and more sexualized than the men they share the screen with.  One could also argue that "non-socially acceptable" sports like fencing and rowing are longer events that are less interesting to watch, and are ignored for the sake of time.

The rapist's side of the story

The social news website Reddit has long been considered male-centric, with some statistics saying the site’s users are 66 percent male.  Reddit’s pervasive undercurrent of sexism has long been discussed as an accepted fact, with almost any thread mentioning sexism being immediately downvoted.  For this reason, it's surprising that Reddit became host to a controversial thread asking men who had raped women to explain their reasons for doing so:

Reddit's had a few threads about sexual assault victims, but are there any redditors from the other side of the story? What were your motivations? Do you regret it?

One of the most downvoted comments came from a user who did not think his story would garner much attention.  He described himself as "a post-colleged age male who raped several girls through use of coercion, alcohol, and other tactics over a course of 3 years."  He says he got tried of "sluts and sorority girls" who were easy to get in bed, so he started going after innocent-seeming introverted girls for the thrill of the chase. His full story is quite lengthy, but is available on the as the first comment in the forum I linked.  In quick summary, his tactic was usually to bring girls to his apartment to watch a movie, where there was no couch, only a bed.  He would slowly maneuver until he was on top of them pinning them to the bed, at which point many girls would squirm or be clearly uncomfortable, which he admitted to enjoying.  "Most girls don't say no either," he continued. "They think you're a good guy, and should pick up on the hints, they don't want to have to say "no" and admit to themselves what's happening."  He added, "Alcohol helped. Having a few drinks during the movie, or doing a few jello shots that were 'prepared for a party that weekend' would usually do the trick."

The man concluded with saying that he has never experienced any repercussions for his actions and feels guilty but could never apologize.  He referred to himself as a 'serial rapist.'  Though he seems to clearly the see the harm he has done now, his story does display how ambiguous circumstances allowed him to get away with rape.  He started out playing the dominant role, an aggressive male pursuing a submissive girl who was deemed worthy of his attention because of her perceived innocence (in contrast to 'slutty' girls).  The fact that she willingly came to his apartment in expectation of a regular date and consumed alcohol is the beginning of a normal social script leading to sex.  But things went wrong because he clearly knew they were unwilling and continued anyway, enjoying his exploitation of them.

Manic pixie dream girls

Since Garden State came out in 2004, the film trope of the "manic pixie dream girl" (MPDG) has been discussed over and over again.  The most widely used description of the MPDG is from film critic Nathan Rabin: "that bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures."  While the men in films featuring MPDGs are sensitive new age guys who show fragility and emotions, the sole purpose of MPDGs is to lift the male characters out of an existential void with their quirky effervescence.  You can see a montage of clips containing MPDGs here.

The new film Ruby Sparks seeks to subvert the MPDG stereotype.  Written and acted by Zoe Kazan, who projects the same wide-eyed saccharinity as perpetual MPDG Zooey Deschanel, the film portrays a depressed writer who creates his dream girl character, only to find her actualized in real life.  They commence on a dream relationship, which sours when the girl begins thinking independently, and acting contrarily to the way he desires.  The film frankly discusses the harm idealized notions about a person can bring to relationships, calling to mind numerous studies we’ve discussed over the term.

First, the manic pixie dream girl stereotype smacks of Galician’s 12 myths and stereotypes of sex, love, and romance found in the Bader (2007) article, most notably myths #7 and #10, which state that the love of a woman can change a man and that the right mate “completes you”, respectively.  The Segrin and Nabi (2002) article about unrealistic expectations about marriage also lends depth to understanding the problem with MPDGs.  Though I can’t think of an instance where the main guy actually marries his dream girl, they do generally commence on these dream relationships with the sense that this girl is “the one”, that their dream girl completely understands them, and their love lives together will be perfect.

Interestingly, the types of men in this type of film usually run against the norms of hegemonic masculinity and fall into the “sensitive new age guy” category. They frequently show fragility and emotion, and as their reliance on MPDGs for happiness would suggest, exhibit submissive traits.  Additionally, there are certainly extant media portrayals of what I would consider “manic pixie dream boys”, notably Jack Dawson in Titanic (1998).

Stereotype threat

I often think of myself in relation to my close friend Allie, who is the yang to my yin. We have contrastive world views and very different senses of humor. Just about the only thing we have in common is our taste in music, but we complement each other well as friends. Another way in which our paths diverge is that I have taken the relatively safe path (in terms of being gender-friendly) and studied communications and film in college. Allie, meanwhile, takes courses in physics, calculus, and chemistry, and is considering a minor in computer science. When I go to a comm class, there's a solid chance the students will be at least 80 percent female. Meanwhile, when Allie goes to class, she is a minority as a female, and she tells me she is constantly worried about making a mistake and looking like a "dumb girl."

That women are underrepresented in math and the sciences is no secret. There are fewer women than men on television, and they are typically younger and shown in more provocative clothing. While the diversity of women's careers has expanded on television in recent years, it still doesn't rival that of men's. What Allie suffers from is 'stereotype threat', which NPR describes thusly: "When there's a stereotype in the air and people are worried they might confirm the stereotype by performing poorly, their fears can inadvertently make the stereotype become self-fulfilling."

Clearly, stereotypes have existed long before the media, but these stereotypes make it into the media and are reinforced in a vicious cycle.

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/12/156664337/stereotype-threat-why-women-quit-science-jobs

Movie Analysis: "Wild at Heart"

          Wild at Heart (1990) is the love story of Sailor (Nicolas Cage) and Lula (Laura Dern), a young couple from the fringes of society who will stop at nothing to be together.  Lula’s mother does not approve of their relationship and uses her mob connections to try to kill Sailor.  When he kills the hit man in self-defense, he is sent to prison.  Upon his release, he and Lula set out on a cross-country road trip to stay together and escape Lula’s mother and her hired hit men.  Sailor and Lula are young, beautiful, and extremely in love.  Lula is girlish, excitable, and completely devoted to Sailor, while Sailor is a bad boy who truly loves her, though he rarely makes a display of his feelings.

            In the scene where Sailor is released from prison, Lula picks him up in her convertible, bringing him his favorite snakeskin jacket and telling him her plans to take him to a motel and a concert.  At the motel, they have sex, after which she cooingly tells him “Geeze Louise, Sailor, baby, you are the best.”  Afterward, Lula dresses and reminisces about her mother trying to give her a talk about sex at the age of 15.  As Sailor lounges in bed handling business matters on the phone, he rather insensitively remarks the he thought her father’s business partner had raped her at age 13, after which the film describes the traumatic event through flashback.

This scene introduces key aspects of Lula’s character, most importantly the incredibly spontaneous sexuality she embodies.  Lula is completely comfortable with herself, putting on a low-cut, tight, short black dress to pick up her boyfriend from prison. After their reunion sex, she affirms Sailor’s masculinity by telling him he is “the best” in bed.  More broadly, this suggests women should dress well for their partner and avow his sexuality/masculinity through comments on his sexual prowess.  This type of behavior is an example of the Feminine Courting Strategies found in Kim’s (2007) article, stating that women willingly objectify themselves to attract men and stroke men’s egos as well.  Though Sailor is likely having sex for the first time in years, he remains cool and emotionally detached, handling business concerns instead of basking in the post-coital glow.  Sailor’s behavior is encompassed in the male courting strategies, which says men are the protectors and providers of women (Kim 2007).  Additionally, by introducing Lula’s explosive sexuality and immediately following it with discussion of her rape, the film links these concepts, perhaps judgmentally implying that her extreme sexuality may be the result of sexual abuse at a young age.  This is part of Kim’s (2007) Good Girls code, which includes notions of a woman’s value being linked to her sexual history.

             In the next scene, Sailor and Lula go dancing at a punk show.  They mostly dance together, but then another man grabs Lula when she gets lost in a crush of people.  She looks scared and uncomfortable as she looks to Sailor for help.  Sailor cuts off the band and coolly approaches the offender, saying, “Are you gonna provide me with an opportunity to prove my love for my girl, or are you gonna save yourself some trouble?  Step up like a gentleman and apologize to her.”  The other man is defiant and insulting, so Sailor beats him up until the man apologizes to Lula, after which she laughs off the event and continues to be her carefree self. 

This scene introduces others aspect of Lula’s character, especially her helplessness and reliance on Sailor.  While she could have told the man she was not interested or walked away, she does neither, suggesting it is the duty of a man in a relationship to protect his woman from other men.  This is another example of Kim’s (2007) Feminine Courting Strategies, which states that women look helpless in order to gain the attention of a man.  Sailor’s behavior in this scene reinforces this, as he asserts his dominance through physical violence.  Lula acts submissive, according to Holz Ivory’s coding scheme for submission (2009), which includes behaviors such as acting indecisive and showing fear.  Sailor fits into the dominant coding scheme in the study, using physical violence to assert himself.  His chivalry allows Lula to persist in her carefree sexuality, of which he is the protector.  Lula, in turn, reinforces this behavior by fawning over Sailor and demanding he take her home for sex, both of which are Kim’s (2007) Masculine and Feminine Courting strategies, respectively.

''

            In another scene, Sailor leaves Lula at home while he’s working.  Feeling ill, she lounges around the house.  At one point, an acquaintance named Bobby Peru stops into the house and asks to use the bathroom.  Lula uncomfortably shields her body (as she is wearing a lacy negligee) as the man comments on her breasts and becomes increasingly threatening.  He reaches out to touch her, and when she backs away, he accuses her of not jumping back fast enough, which he takes as evidence that she is interested in a sexual encounter.  "It means you want Bobby Peru," he says.  When she shoves him away, he grabs her and shakes her violently, threatening to tear her heart out if she doesn't ask him to have sex with her.  Meanwhile, he begins to molest her—to which she responds sexually—and finally whispers in a helpless, unconscious way for him to have sex with her.  He then abruptly leaves, jeeringly laughing at her and leaving her to break down in tears of shame, calling out for Sailor.

            This scene is another example of Lula’s helplessness without Sailor.  The depiction is somewhat problematic because it suggests Lula is unable to control her sexuality and falls prey to any man who can exploit it.  Sailor is the protector of her, as a woman and as a sexual being.  Lula occasionally does assert herself and try to say no, but she ultimately follows orders, shows fear, and cries according to Holz Ivory’s submission coding scheme (2009).

            Wild at Heart is a complicated film to analyze because it is a carefully considered art film presented as trashy romance.  Director David Lynch is extremely well regarded in the film community, and he would be unlikely to uphold the female and male roles the film displays on a surface level when asked.  In many ways, Wild at Heart is a pulp fiction Romeo & Juliet, with some regarding it as a devastating romance and others seeing it as a satire of young love.  The cartoonish characterizations and overwrought plot lines are constantly drawing the viewer out of the story world, making it apparent that the whole film is ridiculous.  The viewer is not immediately certain what to take at face value.  Lynch is certainly aware that these roles and stereotypes do exist for men and women in our culture, and he draws attention to the inherent ridiculousness of them, but doesn’t go as far to subvert ideas of female objectification and male dominance.

Golin, S., Montgomery, M., Sighvatsson, S. (Producers) & Lynch, D. (Director). (1990). Wild at Heart [Motion picture]. United States: The Samuel Goldwyn Company.

Holz Ivory, A., Gibson, R., & Ivory, J. D. (2009). Gendered relationships on television: 

Portrayals of same-sex and heterosexual couples. Mass Communication & Society, 12 (2).

Kim, J. L., C. L., Collins., Zybergold, B. A., Schooler, D., & Tolman, D. L. (2007). From sex to sexuality: Exposing the heterosexual scripts on primetime network televition. Journal of Sex Research, 44 (2).

Coming out in the hip hop world

In the past week, Frank Ocean debuted a critically acclaimed hip hop album titled "Channel Orange" that is expected to sell over 100,000 copies.  However, this achievement has largely been overshadowed by his announcement days earlier that he is gay in a lengthy love letter to the man who helped him come to this realization a few summers ago.  He said that sharing his sexuality with the world would clear the way for him to enjoy the success of his album and show the world he is proud of himself.  The announcement was essentially unprecedented in that it made him the first famous gay male hip hop artist.

As a hip hop artist, Ocean is clearly aware of the stereotypes that exist about the community.  Hip hop music is stereotypically depicted as being awash in explicit sexuality and showy displays of masculinity.  As a member of the hip hop collective Odd Future, Ocean and his contemporaries are keenly aware of this reputation.  Odd Future drew criticism for over-the-top lyrics that were often violent, sexist, or—ironically—homophobic.  Odd Future member Tyler the Creator has repeatedly stated that in spite of his propensity to use the term "faggot" in his lyrics, he is not homophobic at all.  It would seem that Frank Ocean takes Tyler the Creator's answer for face value, as does the group's producer Syd Da Kyd, who has been openly lesbian for some time.  Such an answer suggests that Tyler the Creator has crafted a transgressive approach to lyricism, flagrantly displaying some of the uglier sides of rap music.  Clearly, hip hop culture is in transition period.  At the same time, the past year has seen a debate over whether the black community holds disproportionately strong homophobic undercurrent, a controversy which led the NAACP to officially endorse marriage equality this May.

Because of the precedence of Frank Ocean's announcement, he will likely serve as the gay role model in hip hop/rap for some time to come, a role that does not come without considerable pressure due to the culture into which this announcement was made.  The article "Gendered Relationships on Television: Portrayals of Same-Sex and Heterosexual Couples" by Holz Ivory et al discusses the underrepresentation of LGBTQ individuals in the media, and that when such portrayals are present, they are highly stereotyped.  Ocean's announcement has clearly subverted stereotypes about rappers being heterosexual, but clearly homosexuals are still underrepresented in rap music (because most articles on Frank Ocean refer to him as being the 'first famous gay rapper') and in essentially every other form of media.  Still, Ocean has taken the first (and perhaps most difficult step) in the direction toward sexual diversity and equality.