Final Post

The key concepts from the semester that stick out to me are all of the subcultures that revolve around gender discrimination and inequality. The hip hop culture, the skinhead culture, and punk all had some aspect of masculine dominance and mosogany. This was especially interesting to me and I believe that it would extremely beneficial and interesting to, in the future, spend a few class periods on simply that aspect of subcultures and maybe explore the reasons why it happens. Something that I learned that will stick with me is that, as clishe as it may sound, no person, situation, or subculture is ever simple. There are always so many aspects or characteristics that it is impossible to understand from the outside. So never judge, because your uneducated, illinformed opinion will only reflect poorly on you.

Final Post: Topics That Stuck With Me

I think the topic I enjoyed discussing the most was (not a surprise) race and gender in subcultures. I really enjoyed looking into why certain subcultures are dominant in certain demographics and what formed out of those circumstances. With that in mind my favorite subcultures were riot grrrl and hip hop because we saw how marginalized groups created movements of their own. 
Thanks for a fun semester of discussions.

Final Thoughts

If I am being honest, I came into this class without much excitement. Looking back from the end of the semester however, I am glad that I enrolled. It really helped to expand my views of the different cultures which, until I studied them, I saw solely through the lens of the mainstream media. I now know a lot more about what motivates people to follow certain lifestyles and I have taken a lot more interest in subcultures that I otherwise would have dismissed or even degraded.  The ideas of rebellion and finding oneself through others are two concepts that I will likely look for more often. I very much enjoyed the class discussions and found practically all the subject matter interesting at least. All in all I feel that this class has definitely changed the way I look at people for the better and I am very glad for that. I enjoyed working with all of you and I hope you enjoy your break.

Final Class Questions

Considering I was unable to attend our final class, I thought I would address these questions in the form of a blog post. 

Also, props to Kevin for nabbing the 200th post on this blog.


"Once when tens of millions of people listened to the same summer hits, watched the same sitcoms and cried together in movie houses, the mass media defined what mainstream meant--what ideals we valued, how much change we would tolerate. If it's harder and harder to define mainstream pop culture, is there a mainstream at all?"

I see two sides to this issue.  On the one hand, there was less media to consume back then.  But I feel that while there is much more media to consume today, there are increasingly few and larger companies controlling that media.  With this condition in mind, there is most definitely still a mainstream. A few big brains are determining from the top down what we consume on a massive scale.  We still see the same watered down plots, the same generic humor and the same distilled, mindless entertainment being pumped out year after year.  This is the present.  The question is, what is the future?

The internet has somehow managed to exist as the bane of mass media for almost 20 years now. Only in the last 5 or so has it really taken off in terms of independent, thought based entertainment.  When I was a kid, AOL ruled my internet life.  Nowadays, I choose which blogs to follow, which articles to read, which music to listen to and movies to watch.  The internet has in many ways democratized consumption of media.  Will I buy this video game? Only if people I trust have reviewed it favorably.  Will I read that book?  Did a blogger I trust talk about it and how it can help me?  Then yes maybe I will.  In this arena, individuals carry huge voices and even if they don't, their voices carry to the exact right people.

While many people will mindlessly consume whatever comes their way, a few of us, and an increasing number of us, are finding autonomy in consumption beyond what was possible even 5-10 years ago.  This is a definitely a revolutionary age. 

"We are less influenced by books, movies, CDs and plays--who has the time?--than by what we hear about them through the media." Is all of our culture second-hand?

Second hand maybe but by whose hand?  Like I mentioned before, we are way more capable of skirting the big brain companies who distill us down to the least common denominator. So hearing about a new book might now come from the author him/her self or from a small niche website we subscribe to.  Then with the digital age we can be savvy consumers before we decide to invest our time into a form of media.  In this respect, second hand is a powerfully informed hand.  The key is to know who to trust.  Seek authenticity and transparency over "brandability" and facade.

"In American culture, as in American politics, it's possible to assemble a case for two entirely different visions of the  mainstream: one libertine, irreverent and p.c., the other traditional, devout and PG." Which is it?

I think from an outsider's perspective, the first scenario is likely the truth. Our mainstream television and cinema is probably what most of the world sees and associates with the US.  This week I filmed a movie scene where a successful investment firm throws an office party with a half naked marching band, booze, gymnasts and strippers (more than half naked).  While this is above average for a typical American movie, those sort of themes run rampant in our big name media.

Internally, I think it depends entirely on who you ask and is what makes this question so tricky.  I'd be a fool if I believed avoiding mainstream media was entirely possible.  Then again, being foolish can sometimes be a useful trait.

"The pop culture mainstream is a family that used to get together for dinner once a week but now does so only at weddings (or dating-who finales anyway)--and funerals." If there is no mainstream left, what is alternative?


I'm not sure if this question is dealing with the family unit alone or using the family unit as a metaphor for the country as a whole.  Sadly, family units do seem to be less important than ever these days.  Young adults move around the country seeking independence and people do not seem to stay as close even when they do live together.  Nobody talks to their neighbors (myself included).  Is this a product of the digital age?  Perhaps.  I would need to do about 3 years of research to even come close to half an answer.  


Overall, I see many drastic changes to come for mainstream culture.  

More predictions to come.  

Key Concepts of Subcultures

I will probably post more once I think about this topic in more depth, but the following things have stood out for me throughout this year:

1. The youth subculture not only lets us examine the youth itself during a certain time period, but also of the dominant culture. This is to say that the subcultures and the dominant culture have a hand-to-hand relationship, despite their outer disdain (For most cases) towards each other.

2. The credibility of sources proved to be crucial in our understanding of the subcultures. If a scholar who was well educated in a 2nd-person manner (Rather than a personal experience) wrote a paper about a certain subculture, we as students of the class would be cautious to approach this paper with trust. Rather, we would label this as a view by the dominant culture.

3. With the introduction of the fast-paced technology that continues to grow and evolve every second, not only have new subcultures emerged (ex. Gaming subculture), but old subcultures themselves now have access to a cheap and fast form of communication, something that many have struggled years before.

4. As time passes by, subcultures seem to become a part of the dominant culture (ex. Hip-Hop), or vice versa (ex. Gaming). This, to me, tells me that the relationship between the dominant culture and subcultures is fluid; it will never stay constant, but change. We can then observe this change to observe the society itself of that time.

American Juggalos

I had never even heard of the term juggalo or Insane Clown Posse until Rob brought it up in class last week and subsequently did his presentation on it today. It seems like the strangest subculture to me because I have no knowledge base whatsoever for the subculture. I don't know why they do what they do and I don't understand what motivates them to spray cheap soda all over each other. I plan on watching some of the infomercials that Larkin and Rob were talking about in order to learn more about the Insane Clown Posse. I really don't understand why they paint their faces either. Is there some rule that says you must look as scary as possible to join this subculture? Are there any motivating factors to join or is it just that you want to join the subculture. I would love to know how people get into the juggalo culture too. Like who wakes up one day and is like "I want to spray fago everywhere today while listening to scary music!"

Different Meaning of "Mainstream" Hip-Hop to Black and White People?

I found this video very interesting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62WTAzM3TZQ&feature=g-high-rec), where it essentially says that the target audience for white rappers are college kids, while those of black rappers are anyone but college kids. What do you guys think?

Resistance in Music

I attended a concert the other night which I really enjoyed from one of my favorite artists: Death Grips. They are an indie Hip Hop/electronic group with a lot of punk and violent overtones.  What's interesting about the group is their tendency to resist the mainstream.

As an example, they are signed to epic records, a well known record label, even though they are a more independent underground group, with most of their fanbase comprising of young people on the internet. However, they do not enjoy their contract with epic. Their third album release kept getting pushed back further and further even though the album was ready and as a result, released their third album, No Love Deep Web, for free as a digital download. Epic was not contacted about the leak. The album cover was a low res picture of an erect penis with the album title written on it.

The whole thing is interesting because it's easy to wonder what both sides were expecting. Why did Epic sign a group known for fighting the system and expect them to roll over when they wanted to delay their third album? Why did Death Grips sign with Epic only to renege on them in a very childish manner that would put them in costly litigation indefinitely?

At the concert though, it was very clear that Death Grips was not affected by releasing their album for free. They performed a good show and there was an excellent turn out. Death Grips is still touring around the world so clearly, as counterculture figures, they are doing something right. Going against Epic legitimized them in an underground subculture based on resistance.

2 Ties to Subculture

Hello everyone, I just wanted to mention two encounters with subculture I've had recently that might be worth looking up if you have some free time.
The first is a band that my friend referred to me called The Protomen. The Protomen are a strange blend of two subcultures: Metal and Gaming. They have two full albums that play as a "rock opera" loosely based on the Megaman video game franchise; the entire project could be considered an elaborate fanfic. Their musical style relates closely to metal (though perhaps a little on the "glam" side) and they are an interesting listen for fans of the video game, as it provides (fan-made) depth for otherwise shallow characters. All in all I found them highly enjoyable and would suggest them to anyone who is interested in either subculture (or rock operas I suppose).

The second came while I was reading a book called Heaven Is a Playground by Rick Telander. Heaven is a book about basketball in the inner city in the late 70's. I would recommend this book to anyone, even if they don't particularly like basketball (and especially if they do). A true story, there is a section in which the author goes on a late night graffiti raid. I consider Telander a very good writer and he provides a good account of the motivation behind graffiti as well as what it's participants hope to gain from it. He also provides a first hand account of an actual raid, exhibiting some of it's inherent dangers. The section is too long to quote here but is definitely worth checking out, it is found about two-thirds of the way through the novel.

Follow Up On Alt. Sports Discussion

I think we definitely had a spirited discussion in class today, but I know for me, it was hard to make ground on most topics because they are generally in the eye of the beholder. What makes one thing more creative or accessible to one person is a limitation to another. The topic that I think was the best to discuss was the role women play in sports. I think that it is incredibly difficult to discuss this because we have so many years of "this is a male sport, this is a female sport" shoved down our throat. I am guilty of this as well, but we tend to view things as a woman competing on or above a man's level. Even "She Rips..." used this thought process a little. One point that I saw was prevalent was the idea that women's sports or competitions are limiting gender wise. By specifying the gender of the competitors it only allows for someone to be good for a girl/boy. In order to not have this mindset, we would have to have sport with no gender regulation. Frankly I believe that at this point the only way that would happen is with the creation of a new sport.

Because we had a focus on skateboarding, I thought that this series of videos was worth posting. In "She Rips," Elissa Steamer's role as a female skater was gone through in some detail. She had the first female video part and was the first female pro. She was in Tony Hawk video games and was an X-Games gold medalist. In 2011, she quit her sponsor, Zero, and as the "godmother" of skateboarding was unable to get a sponsor. This series of 4 videos (about 40 minutes) goes through her entire career and really picks apart what it is like to be the only female in the boys club that is skateboarding.

http://www.vice.com/epicly-later-d/elissa-steamer-part-1

The Failings of Technology?

I recently saw this article and found it so intriguing that what we thought would exponentially help the candidates (Social media through Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc.) would backfire on Romney in such a tight race: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/10/mitt-romney-project-orca-broken-app-cost-thousands-votes_n_2109986.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003.

There were also videos of voters choosing one candidate and the machine would pick another candidate. What do you guys think of technology? Do you think its benefits outweigh its cons? Also note that despite the small cons, they played a HUGE role in this election in the very last moment.

Subcultures Becoming a Part of Dominant Culture?

Hey everyone, so I've noticed that throughout our discussions of dominant culture and subculture, we have never really talked about subcultures completely becoming a part of the dominant culture. An example I would give is hip-hop: Despite the countless numbers of examples for hip-hop showing the dominant cultures' characteristics (Having a majority audience of white teenagers, something that's been accepted by even the President of the United States [ Seen when President Obama allowed Jay-Z to introduce him ], etc.), we've always said that hip-hop is a subculture. But as the definitions of dominant cultures and subcultures inevitably change in several years (Whether that be two, a decade, or even 100 years), will we still call hip-hop a subculture? And more importantly, can a subculture ever truly transform into something that is a part of the dominant culture?

(Late) follow up on 11/6 discussion

     This should have been posted Tuesday night, sorry for the delay. This is blog will come in two parts: the discussion and my personal opinion on some topics.
     On Tuesday we discussed consumerism and subcultures, does it really affect the youths and are big companies really the bad guys. Are they really "exploiting" subcultures? My group did plan to divide the class and make you guys debate on whether consumerism was bad or good for society but we ran out of time. If you guys want to answers the remaining questions we didn't get to, please feel free to. I, however, want to bring up the interesting topic we touched on in class involving Common, Eazy-E, and race relations in commercials.
     So I have a theory of why there was more controversy over Common being invited to the White House than Eazy-E. Maybe it's because Eazy-E is an image of what white people see black people as. Maybe he reaffirmed white people's perspective of black people (as "thugs"). Maybe Common was a threat to white people's perspective of black people because he is a conscious rapper and he didn't fit their subconscious views of a black person. Maybe this is also an explanation of why white people bastardized hip-hop's original ideals; because if a marginalized group starts threatening the social hierarchy, their message and ideals are manipulated to portray something the dominate culture would like to see (a reason why white people dominate the hip hop industry). When I asked "Why did hip hop become the initial vessel for cool?" An answer I got was because hip hop already praised consumerism (I am paraphrasing). That is valid of course, but now I think part of it is because black culture in general is already being manipulated in media. Stemming from that idea, let's talk about that Common Gap video and the statement that "Common isn't black" so therefore his representation in the advertisement doesn't really mean anything. I don't want to refute the point that Gap used a light skinned black person because it would be received better by the audience, that's probably a reason Common was used, I want to talk about the problem of saying that light skinned black people aren't black. This raises the question of what you think "black" is. Are you less "black" if you have a lighter skin? Obviously light skinned black people are often more accepted than dark skinned black people, but that doesn't make them any less black and saying that it does is honestly a bit offensive. To summarize, what I'm trying to say is: Dominant culture frames the media they view to fit their ideals and reaffirm pre-existing perceptions; light skinned black people are often more accepted than dark skinned black people and therefore used in commercials but it's a problem to claim that light skinned black people are less "black". In fact, here's a video that says it better than I can:

Hurricane Sandy and Social Media

Hey everyone, I hope you guys are safe and well. It wasn't bad at all in Cherry Hill, NJ, but I know Manhattan especially was hit hard. Anyway, one thing that really stuck out to me was the impact of social media, especially FaceBook and Twitter. During yesterday's storm, Mayor Bloomberg was alerting everyone and even suggesting that they use the city's facebook group for specific information. I know that Twitter was especially big with people retweeting important information, such as specific buses or trains closing down or opening, and the specific times of when bridges would open.

This post isn't really a "Let's argue and debate about something," but it's more or less about examining how social media has really binded us together.

Subculture that Interests Me

One subculture that we have not talked about at all, but is very prominent in contemporary culture today is the hipster culture. There are greatly talked about and recognized in today's society, although I know they rose up during the 1940's and 50's after WWII. To my understanding they are rather rebellious, anti-conformist young adults with a particular clothing style not alluding to mainstream fashion. I also conclude that they listen to jazz and more modern types of unique and mellow music, and seem in general to have a more laid-back and liberal attitude. I am not well-versed on the ins and outs of their full culture and style, but they interest me very much in that I would like to know more about how they started and what their more specific qualities are that make them esentially "hipster". They are especially interesting in that they are so popular today, especially in the college scene, so I can get a small taste of the hipster style just by first glance. They seem mysterious and I feel that there are many people who are posers of this subculture that try to dress and act in that way. However, I am curious as to what qualities one must have or behaviors you must follow that make you a true hipster.

Motivation (or lack thereof)

Hey guys, I just wanted to rephrase and clarify my comments at the end of class. It was a poor choice of words to say that it is hard for feminism (and similar movements) to gain ground because it is difficult to “fix something that is not broken”. Obviously there is not total gender equality in America and there are several significant issues facing today’s women.

What I was trying to say rather is that, in the modern fight for women’s rights, there is no clear, one-step, solution for the greater population to work towards, and because of this support for the movement is limited to those who care about it passionately. For example, say there was a law enacted that stated that a woman could legally only make 85% of what a man makes if they do the same job. This would provide the feminist movement (and hopefully society in general) a clear target to aim at, an obvious monster to slay. Legal action could be taken, and (depending on the extent of the law) a vote could be taken to get rid of it. If a voter is at the voting booth it is simple enough for them to press a button against it, this takes minimum effort and is in favor of a cause that most people, of both genders, would support. Approval is gained, the law is struck down, everybody is happy.

Where the problem arises is when the target is removed, when the pursuit of equality becomes individualistic, when a visit to the voting booth becomes a boycott of a “sexist” company or a march in a demonstration. Even the most forward-thinking male would pause when asked to sacrifice his time, effort, and money for something that (as a male) does not benefit him. As we discussed in class, he may even be unwilling to do so because he feels it will hurt the stature of males as a whole. When passion becomes a requirement for progress the vast majority of men (and likely a fair amount of women) do not care enough to act.

This, I feel, is at least part of the answer to the question of why girl-centric movements struggle with support. Unless it requires a minimum amount of effort from the individual or that individual feels very strongly about equality there simply isn't much incentive to get involved.

(These are obviously just my opinions based on my own experience, not fact. I would be curious to see any other views, with or against my own)

Riot Grrrls and Grunge

I thought it was really interesting that the article made no mention of the grunge movement at all. In the 90's, just a short trip from Olympia, Grunge was gaining traction in Seattle. as described, "the whole world was looking at the northwest." Kathleen Hanna of Bikini Kill dated Kurt Cobain of Nirvana and here use of Teen Spirit deodorant was the inspiration for the naming of the song "Smells Like Teen Spirit." An interesting note of how their influence was found is in how Cobain himself appeared on stage. Although a pretty far out there hedonist, Cobain clearly had an interest in blurring sexist lines, most likely sparked by Hanna.

Another interesting bit mentioned in the article was Courtney Love's opposition to the Riot Grrrl label often placed on her and criticism of the movement. I honestly have no idea how valid this is, but it is something to think about. Love married Cobain and is an exceptionally jealous person, so her opposition may stem from her distaste for Hanna and Hanna alone.

Cobain in a dress while performing. He often wore women's clothes while onstage

A Follow-Up Post on Gamers

So I was meaning to post this all on Sunday, but visiting parents over the weekend can really push everything back. anyway...

I really found it difficult arguing for or against gamers, despite my experience with playing video games in my earlier years. Of course I don't have as much time with college around, but I felt like I could have offered more during the discussion of gamers. However, I feel as if I could not because of the definition of subculture itself. So far, hip-hop, heavy metal, skinheads, etc. have all contributed in showing us a clear diversion from mainstream culture, whether it is economical, religious, or social reason that causes this diversion. On the contrary, gamers do not seem to isolate themselves from society. The only evidence of doing so is the physical action of isolation, which does not prove to be the same as the other subcultures'.  Furthermore, we see advertisements, celebrities, and corporations embracing the use of video games and such. Take a look at the NBA2K13 that is releasing: Not only are the basketball players themselves endorsing the product, but several celebrities, such as Meek Mill, are doing so as well. One might raise the argument that other subcultures too may have hints of mainstream culture, but they also have the evident origins of their subculture roots. I just don't really see that with gamers. If I'm missing anything, please let me know, because it's been bothering me since the discussion on Thursday.

Also, I found this article to be really intriguing: http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/10/skyrim-inspires-a-course-at-rice-university/. In sum, Rice University through this one-semester course hopes to aware its students of the powerful impact of gaming, and also why games, especially Skyrim, have chosen the specific components of the Scandanavian culture. This can also be seen with the University of Florida's class with Starcraft: http://www.uproxx.com/gammasquad/2010/08/university-of-florida-gives-up-gives-credit-for-playing-starcraft/.

Lastly, there's media attention given to Starcraft, and the players in South Korea are reveered as highly (If not higher than) as Korean pop stars (K-Pop). What do you guys think of this? I know there were some arguments raised that gaming serves no real purpose, but even colleges to an extent found some usefulness in gaming to the point of making classes about them.

Subculture that interests me

I would like to research the subculture surrounding graffiti.  I find this to be an interesting topic due, in large part, to the diversity of both the writers and the styles.  Graffiti is pervasive in virtually every corner of every part of the world, from scratched off paint in toilet stalls to 20-foot high letters on warehouse roofs.  It can consist of anything from a name to a political slogan to a novel, and with my research, I hope to answer the question of why people begin write graffiti and what effects, social or otherwise, it has on them.

Gamers

Since I was absent Thursday, I wanted to post my thoughts on gamers here. I didn't know much about gaming culture. I mainly saw it as a bunch of people that enjoyed pretending to be someone else in a virtual world. The documentary showed me how influential gaming is on a person's life. The Philly guy's story brought up a problem that I was not really aware of. I mean I knew gaming had it's problems but the documentary made it more real for me. Seeing how gaming affected people with disabilities also was enlightening. Gaming is usually seen as a pass time with no benefits but it can really change a life in a positive way.
What I want to mainly discuss is society's reaction to the gaming roommates. Why do we see being a middle aged, single, and anti-social as a bad thing? It's because dominant culture and society expects us and emphasizes that we should have a family and a respectable career when we are "middle aged". These are "traditional" values and we have mostly moved on from this cookie cutter ideal and grew tolerant of non-traditional ways of living, but deep in our subconscious we still have a tendency to judge. I am not saying that this is everyone, but you get my point (hopefully). I think an important part of that documentary was to not chastise the gamers but to show the world another way of life.

Guns and Video Games

I think that our last two “heated” class discussions are very closely linked in many cases, though we have yet to really touch on it. Many games where players customize their own avatar and play with them as though they are actually in the game are centered on violence. Some examples of this are Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto or Gears of War. These games allow the player to essentially travel into a new body and become a killer, and in the case of GTA, a car thief. These games certainly offer a catharsis for the player, and are a very useful tool for certain people to vent anger and frustration in a manner that causes no real destruction. What concerns me is when this game stops becoming a game. When do you play so much Call of Duty that you actually begin to lose sight of reality?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147722,00.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-678261.html

These articles talk about a boy of 18 who purchased and played versions of Grand Theft Auto all day every day for around four months. He played so much that he actually believed he was in the game. He shot “two police officers and a dispatcher to death in 2003, mirroring violent acts depicted in the popular game.” That’s right. He actually killed three people because he believed his life was Grand Theft Auto. “After his capture, Moore is reported to have told police, "Life is like a video game. Everybody's got to die sometime."

There really is no way to address this. A huge lawsuit was filed and a lot of money changed hands, but that does not even come close to handling the issue. Three people died because someone played an overly violent game to a point where his version of reality was completely blurred. The kid had no criminal record at all, and was so good that he killed two police officers and a dispatcher and stole a police cruiser in under a minute. We can’t take away games, we can’t censor them or how much people play them. I really cannot even come close to a solution. I just know that this makes almost no sense to me, is a problem, and was worth bringing forward. 

Alright, I would love to respond to all of your posts, but frankly I feel it more necessary to acknowledge the discussion we had yesterday in class. I apologize, and will try and respond to future posts where I think my input might be interesting.

That being said, lets talk about Gamers. I can say quite honestly that I was unprepared to watch the documentary "Second Skin". I am not a gamer, and despite having gone through adolescence with a y chromosome, I cannot say I ever really engaged with video games outside of "Grand Theft Auto" and a little "Gears of War". But I'm not sure that even matters. When you get down to it, the people we observe in "Second Skin" are an entirely different beast than the acne scarred introvert that commits themselves to a virtual reality. Adolescence, when it seems many kids are first allowed to indulge a video game obsession, is about having certain qualities of an adult, such as an understanding of strategy, while lacking other qualities, such as an ability to communicate effectively with the opposite sex. This makes a virtual reality all the more attractive, especially one that indulges the most animalistic urges of violence, competition, and in some games even, sex. So it's hardly a shock that herds of young men create an avatar in which they lack the awkwardness of pubescent ascent.
In this way, video games on the very outset become escapist. Much the way that children have imaginary friends, build forts and play with water guns, video games allow players greater control over themselves than they have in reality. Your ability to affect every physical attribute of your character, combined with a lack of hunger, exhaustion and most importantly, death, gives players a sense of control that is understandably appealing and can often become addictive. While I am not shocked, nor even really worried about the young players, I find it deeply troubling, even upsetting to consider how small a portion of the gamer population this is. In fact, the average age of of male players in 26 and the average age of female players is 31. Most startling is the fact that I imagine many of these players seek the same escape as the younger generation. This mentality demonstrates a fundamental dysfunction that as observed in the documentary leads to social inability and more importantly obesity. The critical step of adolescence in leaving the stability of childhood for the tumultuous reality of adulthood has either been entirely skipped, or even more interesting been recessed, in gaming communities. This peculiar behavior might seem like a social echolalia in terms of other social media, but the difference lies in the onticological presence of such devices as messengers not passengers. The passenger quality of the MMORPG takes it from being the instigation to the instigator, and in turn allows people to construct social realities that have no physical presence. I would like the case that this is dangerously unhealthy, and deserves the kind of attention given to alcohol, cigarrettes, gambling and more recently junk food. As a society we should recognize the addictive and destructive qualities these games possess. Ofcourse there is a healthy way to play video games, the same way there is a healthy way to drink, but at some point these games go beyond a brief escape to an entirely virtual existence and at that point they should be considered dangerous.

Interesting Subcultures

As a fan of music stylized as or influenced by punk/emo/hardcore, the subculture that interests me the most would probably be punk, mainly because I participate in this generation’s version of it to an extent. I am able to witness a lot of how people participate and receive the messages of the culture, but I am always interested in seeing how people on the outside view and define things that are almost second nature to me. As far as a subculture that has always intrigued me, the first thing that comes to mind would be Juggalos. Juggalos are fans of the rap duo Insane Clown Posse who basically make their over-exuberant love of the music a lifestyle. They paint their faces like clowns, drink Faygo and listen to ICP and other horrorcore acts that stylize themselves after ICP’s example. For one thing, I never quite understood the musical aspect of the culture, so to see people so avidly following them, almost like they were the Grateful Dead confused me. Juggalos have been the target of jokes on shows as small as Workaholics to as big as Saturday Night Live. Documentaries have been made about their actions at the now yearly Calling of the Juggalos, which I must admit had a stronger entertainment lineup than both Coachella and Bonnaroo. Now that Juggalos are labeled as a gang, ICP are suing the FBI (yes, the Federal Bureau of Investigation) to retract the label because of how detrimental gang involvement could be in the lives of Juggalos. Quite honestly, I am just very interested in the culture because it is the only one I have ever heard of that is based off of one musical act and really has no defining characteristic other than a love of ICP. Also, the outlandish acts by the performers and fans always grab my attention.  

Interesting Subcultures

While browsing the list of subcultures on wikipedia there was one in particular that caught my eye called the Pokemon subculture. Unlike other subcultures, I have never heard anything about this one nor did I ever imagine it could be a real thing. At first it was hard to take it seriously but upon further research I found out that members of this subculture basically took ideas from the Punk and Emo subcultures but incorporated it into the well known Pokemon franchise through clothing and hairstyles. All things considered its still hard to take it seriously simply due to the absurdity of it. However, subcultures are defined by their uniqueness and unpopularity and it seems to me this is at least the most unusual one. Perhaps it was too unusual even in terms of a subculture because according to wikipedia the movement died down within a few years of its development, which occurred sometime around 2000. The reason I found it interesting was that to me it symbolized the creativity groups of people can have when it comes to finding something to believe in. Obviously there are many more well-known and successful subcultures out there but the fact that this one was able to exist for any period of time at all proves how creative people can be when they want to express their beliefs.

Interesting Subculture

I think an interesting subculture that we have not talked about is the rave subculture.  I think this would be interesting because I think it has become more relevant in modern times due to the rise in popularity of techno music.  The music and drug use is pretty much the only thing about the rave subculture that I know about and I was just wondering if there was more to it than that.  Are there specific ideas and ideologies of the rave culture? I think it would be informative to look into because of it becoming more mainstream.

Subcultures that Interest Me

The one subculture that I saw that probably interested me the most was grunge.  A lot of the music I listen to can probably be classified as such, but I do not really know much about the subculture beyond the music.  Some others that stuck out to me were the hippie subculture, not so much because I wanted to learn about it, but because it seems like such an important and influential subculture that we did not spend time talking about in class.  The others that fascinated me were the ones like steam punk that just seemed so unusual that made me wonder what makes people want to commit to those subcultures.

Subcultures that interest me

The fandom subculture is interesting to me mostly because I am a part of it. Though I participate in many fandoms, I don't really concern myself with why it exists or what its rules are and its origins. To me it just exists and it's a fun place to be. However, it would be interesting to answer these questions and to get into the trends and inner-workings of fandom culture. This goes back to one of our first classes together where we discussed how interaction with media changed over the years and how we're not just consuming it anymore; we are building on it and creating something new out of it. That's the core of fandom, I believe, connecting with television and movies on another level and making something bigger from it. Studying this subculture would help me understand this concept a little more.

Another subculture that seems interesting is steampunk. I've heard of it and seen things from it but I never really gave it a second glance. It just seems so aesthetically cool, but I want to learn more about other ways people participate in this subculture beyond the looks.

EDIT: So since we can't research subcultures we are a part of, I've changed my topic to the culture surrounding body art (tattooing).

Follow-up on Thursday's Discussion

Our discussion last Thursday on virginity pledgers hit on a number of controversial topics, namely the affects of Reality TV as well as Disney Channel pop stars on the public and, particularly, young teenagers. One of the first points brought up was that virginity pledging itself, though a well-known concept, is not heavily advertised to all audiences. This became evident when a portion of our class was not aware of many of the disney channel stars that made virginity pledges because they were simply not  part of that audience. Another debate we had was whether these celebrities were making these pledges simply for money or for personal religious purposes and the class seemed to agree that most of these stars probably did believe in the pledges, however Disney probably caught on to how much revenue could be generated from this soon after. The class also had some disagreement regarding the affects of Reality shows in general on the public and quite a few good questions were raised. A few good questions were what type of demographic watches these shows and why do they watch them in the first place? Though the class had difficulty finding concrete answers for any of these questions, it was agreed upon that unlike disney channel, reality tv show had a very wide audience, but at the same time a very wide influence on that audience. Tying it back to virginity pledgers, part of our discussion addressed how young teenagers perceive reality shows and tv in general and how this affects their perspective on sex or abstinence. In relation to this, Haenfler mentioned a few statistics in the chapter that seemed to indicate that overall virginity pledges were ineffective, which begs the question why did those people make the pledge in the first place? In an effort to answer this question we discussed the impact of parents or religious figures on teenage perspective on sex versus the influence they deem from the media.
Though the class remained on topic during the whole discussion, there were a few topics that we ran out of time to talk about or barely touched on. The main issue we failed to discuss was the relationship between the LGBT community and virginity pledgers in general. The question that we were supposed to discuss was about the treatment of LGBT individuals by virginity pledgers or religious groups in general and how the relationship has evolved between these two groups in the past as well as how it may change in the future. I'm sure everyone has been exposed to these issues at some point or another during their lifetime. If there was something any of you wished to say in class related to this question or any of the others that we discussed, feel free to post about it on the blog.

interesting subcultures

I couldnt really think of any subcultures in particular that really interest me but one thing that I wanted to learn more about was women in subcultures. Not as much the role of women in male dominated subcultures, but those subcultures that are predominantly female. I know that we are going to start talking about goths and riot grrrls in class soon but I am really interested in learning about other largely female and more specifically feminist subcultures. One that really interested me was wicca. We read a chapter on wicca but I didnt really find it that informative. I thought it was actually poorly written and fairly vague. It only skimmed the surface of a subculture that I believe is very complex and intriguing. I would like to learn more about wicca and its following. I would be interested in analyzing the similarities and differences between male and female dominated subcultures and the impact they have on society.

My Favorite Subculture

In my opinion, the most interesting subculture would have to be the hip-hop subculture. Not only is its beginnings in the South Bronx the clear definition of a subculture (That is, arising from a group whose believes are different than the mainstream culture's), but its evolution into what it is today is phenomenal. Today you have artists like Nicki Minaj, 2Chainz, Lil Wayne, etc. who are considered both hip-hop artists and "mainstream" ones. Rappers have not only a strong music presene, but political and business as well (Seen through Puff Daddy's "Vote or Die" campaign and Jay Z's ownership of the NBA's Brooklyn Nets). Furthermore, though it began in the early 1900's in the United States, hip-hop is still as strong as it is, if not stronger; on top of that, evolving from a subculture that was initiated by African Americans and Hispanics, not only has the audience broadened to white people, but Asians as well. In other words, it is (As of now) an ever-evolving subculture. In addition, despite its mainstream evolution, hip-hop still maintains its roots with artists like Nas, Dead Prez, etc. It is quite rare for a subculture that has evolved into something mainstream to still have its original roots.

Parents' Effect on Music Popularity

     At the end of the discussion on Tuesday, we briefly brought up how they did not know whether or not record sales increased in metal with the parental advisory sticker in place and I wanted to shed some light on the idea of the role of authority figures trying to stop youth listening to a certain type of music.
     Off the top of my head, I can think of two examples of parents and authority figures actually stimulating the popularity of music by trying to protest it.  The first being Elvis in the mid to late 1950's.  Rock and Roll as a whole was pretty new and parents felt pretty threatened by it.  Among all of these ,new rock and rolls acts perhaps no one made parents feel as threatened (with the exception of Jerry Lee Lewis, who's actions were extremely inappropriate and ruined his career) as Elvis and hip swiveling dance moves during his performances that parents thought was very suggestive and not appropriate for their children to see.  No matter what the parent did to try and stop him from catching on with their children (this includes Elvis' first performance on the Ed Sullivan show, where he is famously shot from only the waist up so his dancing is not seen on television) Elvis just kept getting more and more famous.
   The second thing I can think of is when Billy Joel released "Only the Good Die Young."  This song talked about the Catholic church, and not in the way the church likes being talked about.  Because of this, the church banned the music.  This only caused Joel's record sales to dramatically increase until he had one of the biggest albums/ singles in the country because every kid had to hear what the Catholic church was so angry about.  No matter what the music, I think that parents trying to stop their kids from listening to a certain kind of music will only make them want to pursue that music more.  Parents can also lead to making music more popular than it previously was by drawing attention to it.  Then the idea of "any publicity is good publicity" starts coming into play, and in some ways, having parents dislike music only makes kids want it more.  If the parental advisory stickers had no effect on album sales, Dee Snyder testifying in front of congress on television almost certainly did.

Metal on the "Outside"

I thought it was interesting when Rob Zombie said that metal was for outsiders and marginally unpopular. They made a point of saying it did not do well in the mainstream and was not supported by mainstream culture. This movie was released in 2005 and out of the top 100 albums released in 2005, 7 of them were released by metal bands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_in_music#Billboard_Top_200_number-one_albums

Syllables

Hey, before we get too far away from hip-hop I thought I'd show you guys this song, I thought the lyrics were interesting because they shed some light on how rappers that were present in different eras view the music of today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-EvG-rF8w8

Don't Ignore the Context

I do believe that we, as a nation, have progressed socially. However we are still living in a world where everything is still unjustly skewed especially in the context of hip hop culture. One can say that more women are in positions of power and they get generally more respect in different mediums, but one cannot ignore the fact that all of this improvement mainly applies to white women. Women of color have a harder time getting jobs and when we do get jobs we get paid less than white women. "According to Census data, for each dollar a male earns, a female receives only 77 cents. The wage gap is even wider for women of color, with Black and Hispanic women receiving 61 cents and 52 cents, respectively, for every dollar
paid to a white male." (http://wagner.nyu.edu/wocpn/publications/files/Pay_Equity_Policy_Brief.pdf) Our race creates one more barrier that white women do not have to go through. The same thing applies to LGBTQ people of color. We may see more representation in media of LGBTQ people, but again most of that are white people. I bet you can name more publicly gay white people than you can name publicly gay people of color. LGBTQ people of color undergo more discrimination than their white counterparts "The report documents 27 anti-LGBT murders in 2010, which is the second highest annual total recorded since 1996. A whopping 70 percent of these 27 victims were people of color; 44 percent of them were transgender women. The study also found that transgender people and people of color are each twice as likely to experience violence or discrimination as non-transgender white people. Transgender people of color are also almost 2.5 times as likely to experience discrimination as their white peers." (http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/07/70_percent_of_anti-lgbt_murder_victims_are_people_of_color.html) So before you praise how far we've gotten as a nation, think about it on a broader scale and how hard it is and why it's still so hard for people of color to live in this society.

This brings me to my next point relating to my discussion board post about dominant culture. To me, dominant culture equals straight white males. Producers will play to this dominant culture when they make music so they can make more money. We can acknowledge that the misogynistic homophobic music that hip hop became has been detrimental to hip hop culture, minorities and their thinking and the thinking of those around them, but we can’t ignore the reason hip hop evolved to this. We must also acknowledge that dominant culture is a main culprit to the faults in hip hop.

Here are some more texts I am basing my post on: http://www.temple.edu/tempress/chapters/657_ch1.pdf

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/general/news/2012/04/16/11376/idea-of-the-day-gay-and-transgender-people-of-color-face-a-greater-struggle/

(I have two blog posts because the first one was a request from Dr. Kuriloff. We were discussing dominant culture and I sourced an article and she wanted me to share it on the blog so I did)

Statistics

I came across this interesting article during my research for my discussion board. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111521814339424546,00.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

It questions the statistic "70% of rap listeners are white suburban kids" and it traces that statistic to its sources. Statistics about race can be a tricky thing to measure so it was insightful to see how this specific statistic came about. This plays into one of our discussion points about the credibility of sources in social science. It's hard for us to observe human behaviors when as humans we are more complex and statistics simplifies our behaviors. 

Youtube, and the World of "Vlogging"

I've followed a couple who call themselves "CTFxC" for over two years. The concept of vlogging, though known before the emergence of YouTube, was not really as large as it is today. Channels (Specific sites within YouTube by people) that are popular for vlogging are as follows:

- http://www.youtube.com/bfvsgf
- http://www.youtube.com/ctfxc
- http://www.youtube.com/user/shaycarl

As you can see, the first two have around 500,000 subscribers, whereas the latter has nearly 1,000,000 subscribers, so obviously they have a large impact on today's social media networking today. With the feature of the "demographics" of YouTube, where it gives you the statistics of each video, it's really interesting to see which type of people watch these videos. I randomly searched a vlog video from the ctfxc channel and got these following statistics:

Top demographics

Female, 13-17 years

Female, 18-24 years

Male, 13-17 years

Top locations

United States

Canada

United Kingdom

It's really interesting to see this since our focus is on the youth subcultures, which is generally encompassed around the age from 12-18. If you guys have the time, I would recommend checking out this interview of the "ctfxc" : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDcfZiUhDA4 (Note: There are other videos of other vloggers that I have not covered, such as mysterguitarman). Also note that these channels have people from totally different backgrounds: Charles from CTFxC is a part of a rock band, as his father was, the family from ShayCarls is that of a Mormon family, and the couple in the bfvsgf are your typical New Jersey people. With all these different subcultures presented, I think one of the main reasons why people are drawn into these videos is to look at different people's lives, and subsequently different subcultures. I personally know that I won't be travelling around Europe or across the country every day, as does Charles does, so having that "middleman" which is the vlog provides me that sort of entertainment. I know this is similar to the idea that was brought up in the hip-hop discussion: Because the majority of rap listeners are white suburban kids, one of the reasons they listen to this, we hypothesized, was to take a glance at the life of the "ghettos." And because these videos are roughly 10 minutes each, it doesn't consume all of my time (However, each of these channels have roughly 800-1000 daily vlogs, so catching up might take awhile).

What do you guys think of this concept of vlogging? Does it bring together people from different backgrounds, and even subcultures?