I'm a girl, so?

It all started when my boyfriend asked me one evening. "Dear, tell me why is it that when a guy sits down on the mrt and his girlfriend stands, everyone stared throwing him dirty looks?" It caught me somewhat unawares, well, he does ask me wierd questions every now and then but this, caught me by surprise. He never let me stand in front of him on the mrt even though he was more tired then me.

So I stuttered and started saying things like: "Well, you know guys are suppose to be the masculine and stronger party in a relationship. Hence, a guy sitting down while his girlfriend, whom everyone views as the weaker sex, is standing, portrays that this man is weak or un-gentleman to let his girlfriend stand."

"But he could be tired from a hard days work, or maybe he worked out in the gym and is really tired, or maybe he sprained his ankle, or is sick. Does that mean that he has to stand as well?" He replied.

"But he is still the man! So he is expected to stand by everyone around." I replied. Clearly irritated. And he pursued no more.

Clearly I am engaging in stereotypical ideologies and a somewhat feminist mindset. A stereotype of men is that they are masculine, tough and expected to protect the weaker sex, i.e. women. However, this stereotype irks me. I remember when my church organises sports events, I will be the first to sign up. Despite not knowing my own physical ability, I signed up for a vertical marathon once, with the mindset that what men can do, I can do it too. Yes, I am feminist. I want the world to know that women are not the weaker sex and that we should fight for our equal rights in this world.

The use of language plays such a huge role in our society as well, not just for the western part of the world. I dare say, I am not your typical stereotyped girl. I do not like buying cosmetics and putting make up. I love sports. I am loud if I want to. I jump around and go crazy if I want to. When I was seven, I started primary school education. Unlike other girls who band together and play hop-scotch or five stones, I was running around in the school play area with my guy friends playing catch or police and thief. I fell down once and my teacher was furious. She scolded me for playing with the boys as they are 'rough', not a trait that a little girl should have. I have been called hurtful names like 'tomboy' and 'boyish' by the girls and they,well, ostracised me. Because I was different.

I'm just wondering, why must we have stereotypes of the typical 'boy' or 'girl'? If a girl like me likes running around and tumbling around with the guys, is it that wrong? I remember digging out, not my mother's heels or clothes ( I do that once in a while), but my father's army baret and placing it on my head. Boy, was my mother angry. Little girls should not touch army stuff. I mean, what is so wrong with that?

Feminists can sometimes be extreme, but they do address issues that girls like me face. I am a girl, so judge me.

Moonwalker

"I just can't stop loving you.' He croons.

Yes, Micheal Jackson. The icon. The King of Pop. It has been months after his death and I am still reeling from the lost of such a great performer.

A little background on my admiration for this man. I grew up watching him moonwalk and executing his crotch-grabbing dance move and hearing his infamous 'Ow!'. In fact, my first impression of television was watching his MTV on the tube. I remember trying to dancing to Billy Jean and Beat it or crying when Thriller was on. I remember staring in awe as he did the moonwalk right in front of my eyes on the screen. (Yes, I moved to sit directly in front of the TV at as close a proximity as the pixels allow, guess that explains my glasses. ) No, I was not one of the thousands who sprained their ankles emulating his moves but I definitely was part of the millions who stare with open mouths and wondering if this man has bones on his ankles. Thus, with him practically being part of my childhood, I am saddened by his sudden passing and (excuse my exaggeration) I feel that part of my childhood died with him as well.

So, why in the world will I drag my childhood idol into my communications blog? Well, he is iconic and he has been the brunt of media scrutiny since his Jackson 5 days. Heck, even my grandma, who is Chinese speaking by the way, knows who he is! Every time he appears on television she will be there exclaiming in Chinese how great a dancer he is and that she loves watching him dance. This goes to show how the media has impacted his rise to fame and his subsequent fall from grace. Till his very end, he was under media scrutiny.

I guess this is a love-hate relationship. The media namely, television, radio, news prints and magazines play a big part in MJ's career. They brought him from a nothing, a little boy performing with his brothers, to a sensational hit. And yet, in recent years, it brought him down, covering his court cases and his file for bankruptcy. The very thing that made him who he is, tore him down.

Let me start off with the 'love' relationship. In his early days, the media covered Jackson 5 and followed him through to his solo career. It is through the television and radio that his songs were broadcast. People were exposed to his songs and this led to rise in album sales. Micheal Jackson was a hit. Sales sky-rocketed and many people gained. The music industry boomed with sales of his records and memorabilia. However, a side industry that tapped onto this boom was the fashion industry. MJ as we all know, pushes boundaries beyond anything possible. His quirky dress sense, think sequined pants or jackets, military-inspired outfits, skinny tight jeans, aviator shades and fedora hats, sent ripples through the fashion industry as people rush to buy clothes that are 'MJ-inspired'. Watching Mj dance in a military jacket on television definitely sent some youth crazy and he is willing to find every penny or dime just to afford a jacket that looks something like the one Mj wore on TV. So, I guess it's fair enough for me to say that the fashion industry has MJ and the media namely, the television, to thanks for it's booming business.

Let's move on to the 'hate' relationship. The media, prior to his death labeled him as 'loony'. Covering extensively on his court cases and his bankruptcy. His downward spiral from fame was caused by media coverage on his life as a whole. How he treated his child by dangling him over the hotel window, or how he covered his kids' faces with towels and blankets to shield them from media scrutiny or even how he sleeps in an oxygen box. His private life is not private at all. Excuse me, but I see MJ as a performer and I don't care if he sleeps in an oxygen tank, so just leave the man alone! But no, his marketability was too high. People will want to know what Micheal Jackson is up to. People will watch the television just because it covers Micheal Jackson 'live' or read a magazine because it has an article on Micheal Jackson. The media dug into his life so much that it became and moulded him to who he was. Trying his very best to keep his children from the public eye, being 'loony' because I guess he's just sick of papparazzis following him around. Even to his very last breathe, there were cameras flashing and helicopters flying over his head. I find this sad. That the media did not give him peace. Never once, in his entire entertainment life.

Right now, This is It, is showing in cinemas all over the world. A painful reminder of his death, but once again, the effects of media is at play. How many people are scrambling to the stores to purchase his albums? I went shopping once and am horrified to see all the major boutiques I went into had at least one MJ-inspired jacket. Frankly, I am disgusted. Once again, the fashion industry is banking MJ, this time on his death. I wonder how will he react to this uproar of his death. This is the wonders and power of the media. How it can mould a person and bring him down all in the short span of his 50 years on earth.

Just so you know, I watched This is It twice. Not because I want to support the media industry banking on his death but because I miss him. Watching him dance one last time on the silver screen brought me back to my little girl days, staring wide-eye at the moonwalking sliding across the screen.Never will I see another performer like him for he has taught me to push the boundaries and break barriers just like how he did with the moonwalk.

P.S. Just so you know, Micheal Jackson's album was playing in the background as I was typing this. =)

Childhood.

A little reflection on my childhood. I often think different things to big things that I don't know about. Like for example, the satellite dish was associated to big mushrooms. I often tell my mum I want see the 'big mushrooms' whenever we drive on the highway. I don't know how I came to the notion that satellite dishes are big mushrooms, I guess it's because they look like gigantic mushrooms to me. This shows the wonders of symbol. The meaning I attached to the satellite dish stuck till I was about 11yrs old.


Looking back now, I realised that it the things that are huge and unknown to me that I tend to associate my own manings to it. Cement mixers are giant balloons, the moon's the sun at night and many more. Nobody taught me so i just inferred and associated these things with things that I know now. Childish toughts, I know. This shows how we humans associate things since young.


We naturally have this need to associate meaning to things. My parents did not tell me what it is, so I just inferred. As such, I have misunderstood these huge objects of my youth As such my intensional orientation was based on my own definitions. My parents were left wondering what was I refering to when I pointed to a cement mixer and said: 'Giant balloon!" Hence, they adopted more extensional orientations and pointed to that cement mixer and asked me if I meant that. They have to constantly check the meaning behind my words.

This did not improve till I was primary 6, the meanings behind my words are never what they actually meant. I guess I was a creative kid back then. I thought monopoly money was real money as well, and my parents did try to correct my mental definition of things but maybe I was too caught up in my own world that I refused to understand their teachings. Due to my inability to express as a kid, it is no surprise that misunderstanding occur every now and then.

Now, twenty one years later, after countless misunderstandings, I can't say I have mastered the art of expressing myself. Misunderstandings do still occur. However, i have learnt to minimise it, by asking the meaning behind certain words and listening out for tones and looking at the situation. The different people I hang out with communicate differently hence, I have learnt to be flexible and change my commincation styles accordingly.

As such, to my the meaning behind each word a person speaks is important to minimise misunderstanding. It can lead to painful scenrios when the misunderstanding blows out of propotion.

Inglourious Basterds.

I went to watch Inglourious Basterds yesterday. Save for the fact that it gave me nightmares last night, it was overall, a good movie. It got me thinking though. That we always view the victims as the victims because they are, well, victims. And so the Jews are prototypes of victims. Poor things that got locked up in burning buildings, getting the star of David carved on their foreheads and killed mercilessly like animals. So we pity them and view the oppressors in a bad light. But what if it were the victims doing the dirty work now?

How will we react if it were the Jews who sculpt the Germans and crave swastikas on their forheads? Will we view them the same ways we view the Germans? Or will we cork our eyebrows and say: 'Oh, they are protecting themselves and seeking revenge for the horrors the Germans did to them.' But here I ask, if someone slaps you, will you slap that person back? Will that help matters?

Yes, Ingluorious Basterds is a fictatious movie but what if it were true? That the victims are also issuing the same treatment their oppressors gave them. This, my friends, is the horrors of war. The burning, bombing, screaming, and gun shots are all part and parcel of war. Sickeningly though are the things that the different parties involve do to one another, killing each other in cold blood. So here comes the bottomline, why war? And can the world be at peace with one another?

People always go on and on about the horrors of war and blah blah blah but at the end of the day, both parties lose because both parties lost many of their countrymen. Will we humans ever stop hating one another? All it takes is one person to smile at the person who slapped him and walk away. Is it really that hard?

So in essence are there really prototypes of victims? Or are these people engaging in victimage? I am not saying that the horrors of war is not true, it is true and it happened and to purge guilt of starting the war, scapegoating was carried out. Hitler was the main guy who started the war, but Hitler alone could not have started the war, he needed a team of people and there you have it, World War 2. I wonder if Hitler ever felt guilty bout starting World War 2, the war that took so many lives. I wonder if he ever knew the full extent his actions has caused. Does guilt ever take a foothold on this man? I wonder, but I'll never know.