Because who is perfect?

'Disabled' Mannequins Remind Us That Beautiful Doesn't Mean 'Perfect' (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/03/disabled-mannequins-video_n_4379586.html

Pro Infirmis is an organization for disabled people. The video shows the whole process that a number of mannequins are created based on real people with disability. It is very inspiring. The video reminds me of the discussion we had during class about the disabled culture and how media representation shapes people's thinking towards disable people.

In China, the media representation about people with disability both physical and mental is very narrow-minded. It  always indicates that the disabled community is an inferior community to "normal" people. People with disability are describe as "imperfect"and "misfortune". However, seriously, who is perfect? What are the standards of "perfectness"?  Who gets the say to set those standards?

Constantly, Chinese media associates "disability" with "helpless" and never with "beauty". It never brings up the idea that beautiful does not require for perfectness and people with disability are as beautiful as or even more beautiful than people without disability. In the future, media should focused on promoting the  beauty and equality of people with disability. Let people embrace the idea that people with disability are not just about "misfortune" and "helpless".

At the end of the day, let people ask themselves: "who is perfect"?

Are we now embracing gay bashers?

                As none of you probably know, Isiah Washington, the actor, is set to guest star and return to Grey’s Anatomy in May of this year.  What is most interesting is that Isiah Washington was actually fired from Grey’s Anatomy seven years ago. Here is the story behind this.

                Grey’s Anatomy is a drama television show written and created by Shonda Rhimes. Ms. Rhimes has one of the most successful television shows on air at the present time, and has won numerous Emmy’s for the television show.  Additionally, she is praised for creating a show with extensive interracial dating, and highlighting minorities as lead characters.  Oh, and Ms. Rhimes is also African American. These factors have created an open space for tackling intercultural interaction upon the show.

                Back in 2009, Mr. Isiah Washington made an anti-gay remark on set referencing or offending T.R. Knight, another actor on the show who happens to be gay.  Isiah Washington apologized for the remark, and then proceeded to follow up that remark with another one at the Emmy’s that year.  Ms. Rhimes decided to let Mr. Washington go at the end of that season.

                It is no wonder that the media would be questioning why Ms. Rhimes has a sudden change of heart. Seven years after the incident, she has decided to bring Mr. Washington back to Grey’s Anatomy.  While those who follow the show will appreciate the appearance because it ties up Ms. Yang’s story line quite nicely due to her exit at the end of this season, it further asks why Ms. Rhimes is comfortable with having him back on the show, seven years later. 

                The show has a cultural overlap, as Halualani et al. explains in their article.  The cultural overlap would be one that the television show is representative of minority rights, including gay rights. However, it is also part of the American cultural narrative. These overlaps are problematic, as Ms. Rhimes needs to be able to represent these groups within the American (white dominant) narrative.

                Could it be that Ms. Rhimes doesn’t need to deal with the anti-gay remarks since there are no openly homosexual men on cast this season? Or perhaps because she wants to be able to please her audience? What about her loyalty to the LGBT and other minority communities? Does Ms. Rhimes have an obligation to them?

Source:    "Critical" junctures in intercultural communication studies by Halualani, Mendoza & Drzewiecka

Conflicts Among Cultural Minorities

Class discussion this past week on intercultural training, specifically the Intercultural Conflict from a Multilevel Perspective: Trends, Possibilities, and Future Directions by Oetzel, Dhar & Kirschbaum. In this work, the authors mention that the examination of how cultural values influences interpersonal conflict communication tends to focus on Hofstede's (2001) five dimensions of cultural variability: individualism/collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity/femininity, and short/long-term orientation (Oetzel et al, 2007). While the article provides a very skilled breakdown of these concepts within conflicts, my thoughts strayed somewhere else. What about intercultural conflict, conflict among 2 or more people from different cultures, who are both members of a different culturally dominant society?
As most of you are well aware, I worked on the Navajo Reservation over the summer leading a group of high school kids in a cultural exchange program. As a leader, it was a responsibility of mine to brief the kids on the normative "do's and dont's" of entering a different culture, especially as their guest. After our intergroup orientation on culture, the kids attended a separate orientation led by our on-site partners. These partners were a married couple, the man being white and from Florida, and the woman was native, Navajo and Apache. They too listed off points the students needed to be aware of, subjects they were encouraged to engage in, and a few topics that were inappropriate to bring up (but welcomed to talk about if their native hosts did so). WorldLearning, an old and respected organization, prides itself on the multicultural students it selects to represent their programs all around the world. As so, my group of kids represented several different ethnic, cultural, racial and regional members of this country. I was very proud of this. Proud to be with these kids and help them establish relationships with members of the Native community, and in doing so demonstrating that not all "Americans" are white.
In the middle of the orientation, Rob (lets just call him that), looks at the 2 or 3 African American members of the group and says "now don't be surprised that they wont like you. Their only experience with blacks was a long time ago, with the buffalo hunters." My kids looked at me in shock and disbelief. Afterwards, they asked to talk to me and admitted they didn't know how they felt about that. How could the native community not see that they weren't "those blacks?" How could they not see that "those blacks" were brought to this country against their will?
If I had the somewhat articulated knowledge that I do now, I probably could have explained it better to them. Actually, I would have sat them down and shown them the Color of Fear video (had I had access to technology...). But it was definitely an eye opening experience, seeing first hand intercultural conflict among two cultures that had been oppressed by, well, my culture.

Academia and Anger... What's my line?

Thus far in my academic career as a graduate student, several of the theories and concepts that I have learned about have remained just that, theories and concepts. It wasn’t until this weekend that one actually came to life right before my eyes. I found myself in a place I had never been before; justifying the very ideas that once upon a time had been so foreign to me.

Over the weekend, I had a night out with friends. We had a few drinks, played some pool, threw some darts, and enjoyed each other’s company. It was only when the subject of history and politics come up did the night take a turn for the worse.

A good friend of mine, who I have several things in common with, approached the idea of Southern culture. He is from Texas, and I from Tennessee. And while there are facets about cultures of both states that are similar, overall, they are very different. We were discussing the idea that non-southerners hardly recognize this fact. That to some, we are all a bunch of teeth missing, redneck speaking, truck driving, undereducated, cousin marrying, racist individuals. And then, the conversation took a different turn.

This friend of mine, whom I respect and revere, was spouting such ill-informed, stereotypical, over-generalized, and downright racist things, I wasn’t sure how to react. The dialogue ranged from discussions about immigration, inequality, power structures, historical marginalization and narrative bias. But the tone (from him) was always the same. It was a tone of indifference. No matter what I said, what injustice I pointed out, what empirical data I referenced, what historical event I compared, his mind was not going to be changed. To him, the argument about the privilege of white males was so preposterous he laughed it off. Being from Texas, he had very opinionated views on immigration, and was convinced that the U.S. Government supports and defends the rights of illegal aliens. That they are provided and entitled to all the benefits U.S. American citizens are (access to welfare, health insurance (umm, what?)), education, and jobs he was convinced of. These are things I had definitely heard before, so it didn’t come at such a shock.

When I had had enough of the exchange, I simply pointed out that it wasn’t surprising to me he didn’t understand his position and privilege in life because it was all he had ever known, he became visibly angry."It is not uncommon for men to exhibit random tantrums when their...views are challenged" (Matias & Allen, 292) To him, my implication that he had ever led a privileged life was insulting. In the Loving Whiteness to Death article, this statement rang true, "These theories seek to reveal what many students' egos cannot tolerate knowing; hence, their egos react defensively."
 Thus far in my graduate career, discussions of difference in opinion have mainly taken place in the classroom, a controlled, safe environment. So being taken out of that context almost removed my confidence in a way. I was unable to piece the words together that I wanted because I knew they would be heard on deaf ears. I later went home, thought about it, slept on it, and came up with a marvelous idea. Someone should undertake the project of countering ignorant statements with simple, easily understood and communicated ideas for those of us who want to spread knowledge, but trip over our own feet when doing so. If this already exists, point me in the right direction. If not, any takers? You’ve got yourself a paying (ok downloading) customer.

Racism in Healthcare

Entitlements, as they are often referred to in rhetoric-based political circles, are often a foundational argument for the unfairness of social redistribution programs by the privileged against the non-privileged in our political domain.  This, some argue alternatively, is nothing more than racism and the undermining of minority health by the privileged.  So which is it?  The disadvantages of race in our society is identified in Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic’s book entitled Critical Race Theory, in their discussion on the subject of minority health.  They say, “People of color lead shorter lives, receive worse medical care…” and goes on to express the inherent racism in the capitalist system of privilege.

The Affordable Care Act is, in a sense, an entitlement program since lower income persons receive subsidies from the government to buy into the private insurance system.  However, if this were true, minorities would at least benefit equally, right?  According to the Atlantic magazine article entitled, “Rich, White, Healthy People Are Most Likely to Hate Obamacare”, that is further subtitled, “And people who benefit from the law are more likely to view it negatively than positively”, suggests in part that those who benefit most from the medical insurance bill are those who are the privileged in our society, and less so for those of minority status.

Reactions to Adoptees

Baden’s Reclaiming Culture: Reculturation of Transracial and International Adoptees does a phenomenal job of explaining some of the gray area and “dissonance” that transracial adoptees and transracial and international adoptees experience.  I recently found a site here with a series of photos of two adopted girls holding a dry erase board with words that have been said to them and their mother regarding the girls’ identities, the adoption process, as well as the validity of their mother’s love.  One could argue that these inappropriate comments are a major factor in the creation of dissonance in adoptees.  The personal and enacted identity gap communicates to the adoptee that their relationship with their parents is different from a relationship a child would have with their biological parents.  This is usually communicated via rude comments such as, “Do you have your own children?” or, “Where are your real parents?”  

What Facebook Knows About Our Relationships...

It isn’t a shock that Facebook knows a lot about our lives and our habits. Just take one gander at the targeted ads on the side of your Facebook page and you’ll see trends in your behavior. It is also no shock that Facebook has become a dominant social medium for sharing statuses, pictures, babies, wedding rings, and the like. It follows logic, then, that Facebook would not only know about our lives and behaviors, but also our relationship with others. We touched a bit on this in class, when discussing nonverbal communication. Of particular interest to me was the Le Pagne of the women of Cote d’Ivoire, specifically the fabrics used to nonverbally communicate information about their romantic relationships. And as it turns out, without saying a word, we similarly demonstrate certain behaviors on Facebook around our relationships. There is a very interesting Buzzfeed article about what Facebook knows about our love lives. A few of these include: (1) The first 12 months are crucial to determining whether a relationship will last; (2) People post more on Facebook in the months before a relationship, and then get quieter after they are in a relationship; (3) Once relationships start, people post more happy posts; and (4) Facebook users’ friends interact with them more following a break up. For specifics, please visit the article. 

This is quite a bit of information about our relations with others, all from how we socially interact through Facebook posts – a common way to project many aspects (or all for some) of our lives. In what sense is this similar nonverbal communication projected through the La Pagne in Cote d’Iviore, and in what ways is it different?