Motherhood in terrorism

It's mothers day tomorrow. Ugh. Not to get all emo in my last blog, but my mom died when I was a kid and my grandmother adopted me, so this whole motherhood phenomena is pretty foreign to me. I actually think this is why I've been so attracted to looking at motherhood in national identity. Oh dear lord- someone call Oprah and Dr. Phil.

So when I was going through some research I checked out an article called Daughtering in War by Irene Matthews, which had an interesting subsection on Motherhood and torture in Guatemala. We've talked a lot about active torture- hurting or affecting someone for a gain- but what about the possibility of being by-proxy tortured. I see this happening in two different ways. First, the active creation of what we've talking about in theory with nationalism- the attack on someone's mother. Ok, it may sound silly, but does anything piss you off more than a yo-mama joke?! Is there anything that is seen as a higher act of disrespect? For some reason one scene from Cold Mountain pops into my head (if you haven't seen it, don't. Nicole Kidman and Renee Zelwigger- who I normally like- are as obnoxious as humanly possible). A rogue band of civil war-rejects parade around town attempting to find men who went AWOL. They assume that two men are hiding in a barn, so they torture the men's mothers (is that proper grammer?) so that her screams are what bring them out- to promptly be shot. In effect, it's not the torturer's fault they gave up the desired information- it's the mother's and her screams (which she translates as her inability to protect her sons). I don't mean to sound completely revolting, but is our mother-bond that deep? Why is this not the same as our bond with our fathers? Is it only the son's who react so deeply to the torture of their mothers?

The second type of by-proxy torture, which Matthews talks about in her essay, excludes the desired male entirely. The mother is tortured as a type of penance for doing exactly what nationalism tells her to do; birth soldiers. When the male military or political (etc.) actor is absent, his mother is put in his place- as if the two were united and her pain could be felt through him. There is also a sort of assumption, which we can see all the time in movies etc, that the mother somehow always knows her sons whereabouts through some weird-cosmic connection. Her attack is also supposed to reverberate throughout the family and community systems as being the most horrific possible. Why?? Why is this pedestle created in such a way that all that comes from it is abuse? Actually, now that I say that I realize that this is a different culture than our own. Perhaps in these cultures the mother is valued and idealized more than she is in American culture, so her attack has greater weight- so do Americans have the same experience as rural Guatemalans with this? Is the proverbial yo-mama something which affects us all in exactly the same way???

Ok, that's it for my rantings. Over and Out.

Gender in Terrorism

O.K. So this is my last blog and I have two things that I have been thinking about regarding terrorism and gender. I know I'm supposed to put up things based on news and current events- but its finals and I live under a rock.

In another class that I'm taking we were talking a lot about the usage of sex and sexuality in torture. In places like Guantanamo soldiers make prisoners strip naked and sexually humiliate themselves. Especially in cultures where homosexuality or overt sexuality of any sort is shunned, soldiers use these exact tactics to affect the tortured. The intent with a lot of torture, as we've seen, is to destroy one's sense of self so that they do not hold back, they have nothing to loose as they are completely destroyed and left with nothing. This reveals a blatant hierarchy in our value of humans. In doing this, the soldiers make these men their sexual submissives, their 'bitches'- in effect they make them into 'their women,'. Following this logic the worst things you could be according to the alpha male military authority are: anti-American, then an Arab, then finally a woman. Patriotism and cultural identity are the first things to be attacked, but when you really want to get someone where it hurts- call them a woman. Is this a reflection on all society, the two main societies involved- or is there another group here- independant of the others. Is there an entire other sphere of citizenship, where the laws are rewritten and the reprocussion of every action holds greater weight than we can ever understand? Do these participants have different rights, roles and responsibilities which define them as citizens? Are there citizens of war- is there a social sphere of war?

To go along with this, I was just discussing a very rarely addressed participant in sexualized torture: the female torturer. Apparently, (I had never heard of any of this- why??? hmm..) there is an entire body of female torturers who use their femininity as an added attack on their victims. The simple fact that they are women has an effect in itsself, in that it is seen as a destruction of masculinity that the male victim is prostrate to a woman. Also, these torturers use their sexuality as a deeper method of humiliation. Thier ability to give a man an erection earns them credit, while debasing the man to the extreme (though I wonder which is worse, being sexually assaulted by a collective group of male soldiers, or by one trained female torturer? As a woman, is she not allowed into that society of war, and her attack seen as more vicious than the man-to-man combatants, kind of like the individual who rapes a woman versus the usage of mass rape in military conflict). Apparently, these women are given fake menstrual blood which they smear on thier victims- I would like to see the budget proposal for 'fake menstrual blood' show up on George Bush's desk.

So when I thought about this I was struck by a question that I've had a hard time articulating. I guess it's who wins and who loses in this situation?? I really want to talk to these women torturers because I could easily see thier justification being some perverse distortion of second wave feminism. We've discussed the role of male torturers in war as just being cogs in the wheel- but the active use of women's sexuality seperates her from this wheel, while also giving her added value. In my mind the manipulation of her sexuality is not a beacon to be held or a tribute to her patriotism and ESPECIALLY not to her feminism. I'm really curious to know how that can be justified. I'm trying to get the articles etc that related to this- I'll post em if I do.

OK- I'm going to keep my blogs seperate but I do have another topic to address, (I'm obnoxious, but this is the only thing I'm allowing myself to do other than work on my other paper now that I officially wasted 2 hours on facebook today..) To be continued.... over and out!

Media Coverage

With all my recent posts of media coverage, it makes me wonder if we should truly believe anything they say. They present stories in a way to get the readers/viewers attention, even if it is deceitful. They present contrasting narratives more often than not. So my question is if they are the source of our news around the world, how can we truly trust them? How do we know when they are telling the truth?

Media and Celebrities

I was just reading some of the other posts and got me thinking about the media and celebrities as well. Unfortunately today, when one becomes a celebrity, your job description also includes paparazzi snapping away pictures of you doing very normal things in life. This never used to be the case - yet now, it is expected. It's sad because everyone is literally watching their every step. If they do something embarassing or commit a crime, the way it is presented in the media is amplified tenfold. Then whoever picks up a magazine or newspaper, their face is plastered all over. It is as if they themselves are in jail being watched over!!

Legal Age

Becoming 18 for many is very bittersweet. When you are a minor, you can pretty much get away with so many things. Because we were young, we tended to rebel more and paid little attention to consequences - because our only real form of punishment came through our parents. Police didn't bother much with us because we were not adults yet. However, once you are 18 - there is that transition in which you have to be so careful with whatever you are doing because now you can really get in trouble by the authorities. I think it is just strange that you can get punished so much more readily at 18 - i feel like the age is so random, but there is definitely a shift.

My own person panopticon

I have a crappy living situation in my apartment at school. While I was lucky enough to get the huge single, the drawbacks of it include having another girl have to walk through my room to get to her room every day. Not only that but this girl happens to be the most annoying obnoxious person I've ever had the misfortune of knowing. I really can't stand this person. No one wanted this room. I didn't really have a choice. I thought, I'm pretty easy going, this won't be a huge issue. Well I was sooo wrong.

Thinking of the foucault, I feel like my room is the panopticon. Everything and anything I do in this room at any given time may or may not be on display for others to see. Usually just her, but our housemates feel some (unauthorized) freedom to come and go as they please to her room by walking through my room -- and in reverse, they of course would be completely put off and disheveled if I just burst into their room all the time but ehh. Anyhow, It's so frustrating. Not that I have anything to hide, but I don't like these people that I live with. They are extremely judgemental and not at all my friends. They are in fact people I see on busses and in class that I think oh man I can't stand those people. And woo hoo, I live in a house of them. So the fact that they are constantly moving in and out of my private space, at their will, puts me in an awkard place. When I hear the girl who lives above me, let's call her Janis (yes like from Friends, that level of annoyance), walking up thes tairs into the apartment or down the stairs about to enter my bedroom, I automatically shift whatever I am doing so that I am either pretending to be on the phone or listening to my ipod or i'll even go as far as to change whatever website I am on and pull up an old word document to make it look like i am busy writing a paper just to avoid her. She walks in the room and quietly observes everything. Even if Janice doesnt linger very long, she always glances at my computer screen or the mess on the floor in the corner. It makes me cringe and anxious.

I really don't give a damn what she thinks but it's so hard to not be self-conscious when the one place you are supposed to be out of the public eye, your own private bedroom, is a place where you are under the most scrutiny. I can always be called out on something, I can never say that I am too busy with school work to do something bc she can see if I am watching TV or napping. I can't go out for a night and not come home without inquisitive gazes making judgements or knowing everything i do. Whereas they all live in their own private spaces, and they can do the exact same things I do, and no one will ever know.

I truly feel like a prisoner in my own house. It actually has had physical effects on me to the point where I became ill enough to be medicated and had to start seeing a pyschiatrist to treat my anxiety. I can totally understand the effectiveness of the panopticon having experienced my own version first hand.

discipline from HS to College

When thinking about the shift in torture that Foucault discusses. I tried to imagine a similar shift in my own experience. In high school we would get detention for being late to class or just misbehaving. We had people watching over us all the time: teachers, security guards, or other students who would tell on us. In college it has shifted to a more individual atmosphere in which you truly become responsible for everything you do. Should you get caught doing something in the dorms that you were supposed to, there are RA's who would write you up. These were different from detentions. Instead of sitting in a room for 30 minutes after school, in college we had to meet with the resident director and discuss why we did whatever it was we were doing wrong and perhaps had to create a bulletin board discussing the issue for the residence hall.

Shoplifters

I once knew this girl who was a serious klepto - she would steal thousands of dollars of clothes from high end department stores like Bloomingdale's. Well she recently got caught, although she had been doing this for several years now it was her first time. The way she got caught was when an undercover had noticed her behavior behind the dressing room. I was always suspicious of the fact that no cameras have ever caught her before. This is somewhat like the Panoptic observation in Foucault. My friend knew there were cameras, and knew that she could have been watched but took that chance to steal anyway. But one thing she never watched out for were other customers in the store. At least now she has learned her lesson.

Work Under Way on ‘Virtual Fence’

An organization called the Secure Border Initiative has begun construction on what is being called a "virtual border" between the United States and Mexico. This border, which will cost billions of dollars to construct, will be made up of various electronic equipment that will allow border patrols to monitor the border "virtually." The purpose of the border is to stop illegal immigration and smuggling. The construction of this "virtual border" seems to fit into United States citizens' paranoia about foreign infiltration, culturally, and now through disease. In a world that is affected by globalization and the compression of time and space, calling this fence a "virtual border" seems to be an attempt to restrict foreign bodies as well as foreign ideas. In reality, there is no financially efficient way of restricting illegal immigration, and the the construction of this "virtual border"will operate as a physical manifestation of our culture's mental guarding against the threat of foreign infiltration. The fact that enough support was raised to begin construction of the border reflects many people's need for a sense of security in a globalized world.

Swine Flu

This is just what I have been thinking about the swine flu...when the press discusses the swine flu, they state these facts about deaths and prevention in a panicked manner and thus making the audience scared as well. One of my teachers in high school strongly believed that the media was teamed up with George Bush in a conspiracy theory. He said that the whole SARS, bird flu, and other things like Y2K were used to scare the public to sway their thoughts from other things that were happening. While I don't necessarily believe the same is true for the swine flu, I do feel that the media is trying to scare us. Perhaps it is just another one of their tactics in order to get us to stop thinking about other things that are going on in the world because lately all I've been hearing about is the swine flu and nothing else.

Branching off of Why TMZ Why?

I agree with you that the media is awful and seductive at the same time. I admit to browsing perezhilton.com from time to time. Also, since the Great Vodka Spill of '08 occurred on top of my TV, I only get a few channels such as Bravo and MTV.. So when I want to tune out my loud roommates, it is often to the same ridiculous "reality" shows about skinny beautiful rich people. I honestly do NOT CARE about these people. They really piss me off more than anything. I could go on for a day about how warped these people's priorities are (or to be fair, how warped the editors of these shows portray them). But I'll spare you all and I won't even go on that rant. What really does bother me, however, is the media shoving this in our faces. As strong of a person as I like to believe myself to be, I can't help but sometimes feel like my priorities and values are uprooted by being a consumer of this media. Particularly about my body. I like to tell myself that I am who I am and I'm pretty damn proud of it. I go around thinking, Ok, So I am not 110 lbs with clear skin and designer clothes. So What?? If my appearance or level of chic is a concern of my friends then they are not people i want to be friends with in the first place. I walk around confident and glad to be who I am.


Then i turn on the TV.



...And not on just one channel, or one show-- but every channel, every show, there are these flawless beauties parading around crying about not being beautiful enough, having judges and panels tell them what they need to work on to be more beautiful because they aren't cutting it, etc etc. And if you see enough of it, repeatedly, it starts to get to you.

There is a mirror near my TV. I was watching this show and they told the girl she wasn't skinny enough. She probably is about 6 inches taller and 20 lbs lighter than me. I glanced in the mirror as they were criticizing her and instead of my reflection all I could see was fat and cellulite and clogged pores. i instinctively sucked my stomach in and fixed my hair to cover a blemish on my forehead.

This is how invasive the media is. It disgusts me! It is enough to penetrate my confidence and make me think I am not good enough by throwing these unrealistic standards at me constantly. I know that a lot of women feel this way. Especially young girls (that's where it all starts to be honest). And I am sure plenty guys do too. It's so frustrating that my perception of my own body is vulnerable to this shallow generation of media influence. I don't think that turning on the TV should be a blow to my confidence. But I feel like that's what is has come to.

When the Patient Gets Lost in Translation

Elaine Scarry discusses the problems that arise when one is attempting to describe his or her pain to another. She claims that language lacks the proper vocabulary to adequately express pain and describe its nuances and various manifestations. This fact becomes even more complicated when we introduce the issue of language barriers. This article describes the experience of Pauline W. Chen, an English-speaking doctor who treated a Spanish-speaking patient, Armando. After performing a liver transplant on Armando, Chen describes her difficulty in interpreting Armando's descriptions of pain, and she explains how she knew the physical Armando better than the "mental" Armando. If Scarry is correct, Dr. Chen has a hard enough time treating the pain of English-speaking patients, so treating Armando's pain is next to impossible. Surprisingly, however, Dr. Chen, along with many other doctors, fail to retrieve an interpretor for their consultations, deciding that consideration for the patient is outweighed by time constraints. Additionally, interpretor services are not always available, due to limited staff and budget constraints. The article describes a patient's basic need to communicate with his or her doctor, as well as the doctor's duty to consider patient input in his or her treatment plan. The situation described in this article represents the Western ideology behind professional medical care; that is, the body can be treated without any consideration for the "mind."

Value of the Body

My two childhood best friends joined the marines after high school. When we were growing up they would always play their war video games and toy soldiers and intense versions of capture flag and all those typical boy things. I remember also that as we got older, while they did understand that the war going on, and war in general, was more serious than just "blowing up some terrorists" and "shooting up those terrorists mother f*ers", i can tell that they still thought that war was going to be like their video games and our hardcore water gun fights in the woods. Even though these two guys are very smart and kind people, they still would refer to the killing of the "bad guys"-- whoever that may be-- as something fun and that they would do with joy. It's been a few years now and they have been overseas. They have seen war and they have seen death. And although they've never told me explicitly, I have pretty strong reason to believe that they were responsible for death as well.

The reason I am even thinking about this is because I have been responding in other blogs about how people value the body in different contexts. I find it interesting to compare the attitudes that my boys have towards death from their pre-marine life to their post-war life. Before they were so amped to kill those bad guys. Now, they never talk about it. They get snippy with me if I make jokes like about hurting myself or wanting to kill someone. They say things like, "don't ever say that Reg" whereas maybe 5 years ago they'd say something like "i'll go get my bebe gun". (Joking of course but still). It is interesting to see how they value the body differently after witnessing and participating in violence. I am not saying that they are totally changed, of course if they get drunk and have a night out with the guys they will joke around about violent stuff that boys do. But since I know these people on a very personal level, and they let that male bravado down with me and aren't really worried about being somber or vulnerable. It's evident to me that their values have changed. I see that, to them, the body, one that is threatening or benign, is no longer just some thing that can be mutilated and destroyed nonchalantly.

Recession Anxiety Seeps Into Everyday Lives

This article discusses people who have an increase in panic attacks due to anxiety about the recession. Some people who are not actually having any financial troubles become debilitatingly anxious if they think too much about the economic situation. The media's focus on economic issues has led to many people feeling anxious about things to which they would normally not pay any attention. The media using scary phrases like "economic crisis" leads to a general public feeling of fear. In our class discussions of the media, we talked about the ways in which journalists are responsible for creating realities. Today's media has created a reality of economic uncertainty of which we are all a part. This reality is causing people to become anxious and panic despite the fact that their own economic situations are stable. In the case of the people quoted in this article, the reality presented by the media has overwhelmed and obscured these individual's personal realities.

Joy and Anticipation for Soldiers’ Return

This article tells the story of thousands of people who are waiting for their family members in the New Jersey National Guard to return home after serving overseas. An armory in Teaneck, NJ, prepares families for soldiers' returns by making them wear helmets for an extended period of time. The discomfort experienced during this minor ordeal is supposed to be representative of the pain and discomfort a soldier experiences while abroad. Exercises like these are meant to forge a link between the reuniting family members, and it serves as an exercise in understanding another's physical pain. The article also talks about being mentally prepared for a soldier's return, acknowledging the fact that the soldiers' personalities are somehow changed during their service. This reminded me of Foucault's idea that soldiers can be made, and it is neccesary that they are made and changed in order to deal with the trials of combat. This articles reflects the belief that soldiers can also be unmade. Many mothers and wives of solders are quoted as expressing a desire for a return to normalcy, that the lives they lived before their sons and husbands were sent abroad could somehow be restored with the rehabilitation of the returning soldiers.

Swine Flu in Mexico

In our discussion last week of the media coverage of the swine flu outbreak , someone mentioned the detrimental effect that this coverage may have on our relations with Mexico. This article talks about how Mexico is planning to recover from the bad press and economic decline resulting from the media coverage. The Mexican government plans to spend billions of dollars advertising their tourist attractions, lowered hotel rates, and travel package deals. Despite the World Health Organization's pandemic warning, a travel agent says that many people are encouraging travel to Mexico after learning the "real facts about the H1N1 virus."
It would seem that the Mexican tourist industry is trying to end the hysteria surrounding news coverage of the swine flu outbreak. By ignoring the recommendations of the World Health Organization, they are denying foreign control over their own body politic. They attempt to present a realistic and comparative view of the situation, rather than assigning arbitrary pandemic levels and definitions. However, whether or not the tourism industry is pushing this view for the sake of neutral media coverage or for financial gain remains to be seen.

James Bond Style Anti-Terrorism

A James Bond marathon has been playing on TV recently and I thought that it would be a good topic for a blog. The James Bond series has been one of the most successful British movie franchises to date, with world-wide acclaim. The character Bond, James Bond, is a suave renegade spy who does what he needs to do to catch the bad guys, while always having time to pick up a few gorgeous women along the way. While not as brutal as a Jack Bauer like character, he still is able to avoid international laws without much consequence and in the end still gets praised for it. Even though Bond isn't a real man, the popularity that the series has seen over the past few decades is a testament to how many people truly admire the character and his antics. All of this makes me wonder, would a real-life version of a Bond-like spy, who goes after terrorists without adhering to the law receive the same kind of praise from the general public, or is it just his sex appeal and skills with a gun, that make him so intriguing? Thoughts?

Why TMZ, why?

Every time I go online my browser opens up to aol.com and i always peruse the top news stories that they feel are the highlights of the moment. It normally consists of a serious news story, some house hold fixer upper, something about dating,  a fallen child star and where they are today, and the remainder is about stars that are popular today.

Today the main stories are about Jen and Brad getting back together (NOOOO!!!!!???) and about the Jon & Kate Plus 8 cheating scandal. Why do we care so much? Are our lives not exciting enough? or is it just the media dishing this garbage to us that makes us believe that we care? Most likely the latter. 

Mass media is such a mystery. It shoves pictures of "reality" into our lives and keeps us from being content with what we do have. We're not rich enough, skinny enough, don't have enough friends, don't have enough kids. blah blah blah. Although I can't stand sites such as TMZ and those awful reality shows like "The hills" and 'The real housewives of every rich, posh, upper-class neighborhood" I can't help but be drawn to it as it's constantly in my face.  

It's even worse when mass media assists in spreading a wide spread panic such as what is occurring today with the Swine Flu. It's awful and unstoppable!

Are you listening?

  Although I honestly could not handle much of the Scarry reading, her point on pain as the unmaking of language absolutely had an effect on me. More and more I'm trying to find other things which cannot actually be spoken and expressed independently. Conversely I've also been thinking about my own communication of pain.  I never realized how much we need to communicate our most minute experiences at all times. It seems as if as a culture we only feel our feelings and actions are validated if they are somehow observed and judged- why update your facebook status if not to have someone click the 'I like' button. Our most personal moments, worst break ups, most awful hangovers and lowest failing grades are the first things we publish publicly. Is that a release of our pain- if Scarry is looking for a recreation of language, I propose that things like twitter are a new language medium. People seem to be afraid to take their pain and suffer in silence- something which can actually be really valuable because its an important time for introspection, (is that a word? Did I just make that up??). Scarry speaks about our inability to explain pain to others, but I feel like it is more important to our society to simply have others recognize the fact that we are in pain- do we look for empathy or sympathy? Do we want pity or to know we are not alone- that we are in fact not unique, though we attempt to stand out with clever status updates and deep quotes. Are our feelings only real if someone else realizes them? 

    Obviously communication is important, but more and more it seems like it consumes us. Everything we do is about communicating a message to others- what we wear, what we say, where we go etc. We define ourselves through other people's experiences of us. What about how we feel? I am so consumed by the meaning of all that I say and do- that I have no idea what it means to me- or even what it means to be me! Why do I need others to listen to who I am- isn't this the central idea behind a 'blog' in the first place? The journals we lock and keep away from nosy siblings are no longer enough- our privacy isn't what we value it's our publicity. When did the moment occur when we went from coveting the safe, private, me-centered space of a journal to using blogs as a way of prostrating our innermost feelings and thoughts so that our deepest selves can be reified by an 'i like' button or a 'comment'.  I'm bitter. 

They Just Wrote It... They Didn't Do It... So They're OK.

The Abu Ghraib prison scandal has brought up many controversial issues for our country lately: what is torture? do we need it? does it work? should we go public about it? Who is responsible? This last question, of responsibility and blame, is one that I am curious about. I watched a video on youtube which talks about the lawyers who wrote the memos authorizing the torture that occurred. There is a debate over these lawyers' role. Some believe that those who wrote these memos should be prosecuted where others don't feel they should be held accountable. These lawyers authorized memos that gave "legal cover" for torture techniques such as slamming heads against walls and water boarding. In my opinion, Hell yeah they should be held accountable for this! So what they didn't carry out the actual process of torturing these individuals --guilty or not -- they were fully aware of what they were authorizing. I think of this like a hitman. You hire a hitman, they off someone for you, but since you didnt commit the actual crime--just funded and organized it-- are you not to blame? Since you did not actually execute an act of violence upon another body are you not responsible? I don't believe that. There are different forms of power relationships acting on the body that exist in this example. There's the relationship between the body of the condemned and those who represent the regime/government and carry out the act. Then of course there is the actual political power that goes on between the body of the condemened and the regime/government itself. I believe that the authors of these memos ought to have the finger pointed at them just as much as the military officers who followed them.