For this reading I decided to do a Connections and Extended Comments blog and try (I feel like this article had a lot of great points and I don't want to miss any) to make connections with Thomas Hine's Rise and Fall of the American Teenager and Linda Christensen's Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us as well. I felt like this article could relate to past articles but a lot of you brought up really good points that I wanted to work with as well.
As Linette pointed out in her blog which Julie extended on, socialization plays more of a role than biology does in the construction of masculinity. I agree that it is much more than your biological make-up that makes you an aggressive person--I believe your home life, the environment you are brought up in, your care givers etc all have an affect on how you turn out--boys and girls.
For example, Jess wrote in her blog about how Kimmel used the example of violent video games, music, television etc. Teens see the violence in these games and on television and get this idea in their heads that it is suddenly okay for them to go to school and do this.
This reminded me of Christensen's article. On the first page of her article she writes "Our society's culture industry colonizes their minds and teaches them how to act, live and dreams. This indoctrination hits young children especially hard." (126) This is Christensen's secret education. Teens are picking up on this secret education in these games and television shows and music videos and wanted to go out and recreate what they are being taught. They're not grasping that those depictions are not real life (as Jess explains in her blog). However, violence in video games, on television etc is not always the reason...as Kimmel writes there is no real significant solid proof.
Hine's main argument is that teens do not "fit in" in society or in social classes, they do not fit in the work force etc. This results in them constantly and continuously looking for a place to fit in. Because of the constant search society is losing them to whatever group is willing to accept them first (Hine sees this as a problem-in-the-making") When teens feel unaccepted then have a tendency to lash out for attention.
For example, Jess wrote in her blog about the boys who committed the shootings were "victims of endless bullying and 'gay-baiting'." All of these boys were tortured by their peers and classmates and like Jess says---the classmates show no remorse for how they treated these boys. Jess points out that we are only human and we can only take so much before we break and as I said above, lash out. I agree--a person can only take so much verbal, physical, mental, social...abuse of any kind before enough is enough. Not that by any means that is justification for a school shooting.
For Class:
I'm interested to see where others stand on whether socialization plays more of a role than biology does. Also, I didn't write about it in my blog simply because it just wasn't a point I chose to touch on but boys & their emotions. I'm curious to see where everyone stands on that & the issue Jess and Daury raised about mental illness
Hi Celine! Love your post! I really like the way you merged the two types of blog posts: connections and extended comments. Very well done. I think Hine and Christensen work really well here. As you know (having mentioned my blog post), I feel that socialization plays a more prominent role in the idea of "masculinity" (and the social construction of "gender") than biology. Similarly, I think that mental illnesses play a role, but not in all instances; I think other factors are more important in many instances. Wonderful job on your post! :)
ReplyDelete