The "Fe"Male Body

Option 2

Rohlinger, Deana A. Eroticizing Men: Cultural Influences on Advertising and Male Objectification. 2002.                  Print.

Deana Rohlinger’s book “Eroticizing Men”, adds to Bordo’s concept of the emerging theme of male objectification evident in advertising. She argues how in today’s society, “women’s bodies, and men’s bodies too these days, are dismembered, packaged, and used to sell everything from chain saws to chewing gum” (Kilbourne, 1999, pp. 26–27). Throughout the century, cosmetic industries have targeted women as its main consumer. However, in the last few decades men have yielded to “getting manicures and facials, dyeing their hair, concealing blemishes, and spending millions on plastic surgery” (Rohlinger 70). Men attempt to mimic the “perfect bodies” that are found in mainstream media. Men have been forced, by society, to appear more masculine. Even homosexuals are targets of this phenomenon. Homosexuals find it necessary to appear masculine in order to fit in to society’s culture. Society has instilled into men the concept of being manly. If masculinity lacks in a man, then there sexual identity is in jeopardy and is questionable. And just like women are into their looks, men are into their masculinity.  Rohnlinger addresses the obsession that men have with achieving these “perfect bodies” that are evident in male advertisements. Objectification of the male body is achieved through the male body and its related parts (Rohnlinger 70). According to Rohnlinger, bodies in advertisements come to represent an ideal that individuals seek to achieve, and hence provide the foundation for a masochistic or punitive relationship with one’s own body (Rohnlinger 70). In doing so, men are now conscious of their physical attractiveness because of exploitation of these advertisements- a point that Bordo uses to frame her argument about male objectivity.

Wallace Delivers the speech "right in front of him"

David Wallace’s commencement speech ties in much with Rodriguez’s essay The Banking of Education.  While Rodriguez argues that education has now succumb to the thought of memorization rather than the ability to think for oneself, Wallace takes it one step further and  argues that it is not about thinking, it’s about choosing what principles to think of and which ones to disregard. Wallace uses common cliché “"the mind being an excellent servant but a terrible master".  This, to me, is an excellent claim for his argument. Many times people find themselves thinking about their environment, creating conscious entities inside their heads, not intentionally, but as of a habit. The world around us influences every decision we make greatly. All the seamless bullshit that is part of our everyday lives that we tend to contemplate is what Wallace believes to be nonsense.

People have the innate idea that they are the centre of the world, or at least the centre of their life. We don’t think about it because as a society, we deemed it to be repulsive, to be a self-centered egotistic bastard. However, not a day goes by that I look at the world out of my eyes. My influenced perspectives and believes, whom play a common role in every decision I make, position me at the pinnacle of the [my] world. These influences deviate my mind from what is going on right in front of me. People pay attention to everything else but what they are supposed to.

An exemplary example is how Wallace delivers his speech. His speech does not consist of any stories [although he uses one to criticize] that tend to evoke sympathy or sorrow into the class. Wallace comes out straight forward and presents the ideas that he believes are the important ones to think of.

We humans tend to be self-absorbed and neglect other people’s more tedious and frustrating lives. Mother Nature made created us this way; to care about oneself and neglect others. Why do you think companies advertise to donate a dollar a day to help a child in need? Because as self-centered as we are, we only see what is right in front of us. We don’t think about other people whom we are not familiar with. Not many people are willing to give money to others. Why? Well, plainly we just don’t care. We are too absorbed into our lives that we do not contemplate about things that do matter. Instead of helping a child in need, we buy a PS3 to keep us busy.

Maybe that’s why education sucks in this country? Our “American” minds don’t care.

Drones vs. Humans-> The Thinking Feud

The ability to critically think was one of Paulo Friere greatest thoughts about inquiry. The process of inquiry is what separates humans from other species. The desire for knowledge and innovation is what allowed mankind to make “one small step for man and one giant leap for mankind “during the first successful moon landing attempt; not just simply conventions and memorization.  In The Banking Concept of Education Friere criticizes the educational system today and discusses his thoughts on what the possession of “true” knowledge really means. Webster’s dictionary defines inquiry as- the seeking of information by questioning; to ask. However, today many students actually seek out information rather than reiterate it including me.

In a classroom setting students and teachers are structured, much like an algorithm, to receive and deposit information. Freire defines the pupils as being passive “receptacles” or “deposits” for meaningless information. You could think of it like a machine and an attendant. The attendant pushes the button and the machine does whatever the attendant was it to do. Like Friere said, when a student thinks of 4 times 4 they don’t systematically know what they are doing. On the contrary, it is the reiteration of knowledge that gets kids to oppress the traditional education system.

Simply put the education system today is much like a big dictionary. Reading, memorizing, and blurting out definitions of concepts are the basic tools. Where nine times out of ten, they are usually hibernating deep within our consciousness.

The teacher-student and student-teacher are another set of issues that Freire brings up in his essay. The teacher’s authority and the student’s complete ignorance of knowledge is what allow these deposits of information to be made in the first place. Students equate authority with knowledge. Meaning someone with power must be wise or intelligent. Even during out childhood years we thought our parents as geniuses. Why, because of the control that they have over our lives. And this control is what subordinates student’s to the teacher’s mercy. Teachers are the epistemological authority in this system; students' pre-existing knowledge is ignored, aside from what was expected to be 'deposited' into them earlier. Freire phrases them as “adaptable manageable” human beings.

The ability to think is what separates the drones from the humans. Remember that!