Sociology Sundays: Marxism and Toy Story

Let it be known that I am a huge fan of Pixar, in fact, as I write this I am sitting in some Finding Nemo PJs and I have to say, the Toy Story trilogy is very much my favourite group of movies that exist, but there are some very interesting moments in it that I think Karl Marx might have a problem with. And being the loser that I am I will be combining two things I love, Marxism and Toy Story and telling you what Marx might say about this childhood classic.


The first thing we need to do is work out how the class system works within Andy's room. Whilst Andy and humans in general would be the obvious choice for ruling class it's also interesting to look at the dynamic between the toys so I will be splitting this into two sections. The Toys and The Humans.

THE TOYS

Firstly we should look at the main character, Woody, Woody is in a position of power, he runs Andy's room, and it all seems to be going well. From what we can tell, Woody runs the room because he is Andy's favourite. This is almost like the "god given right" Kings and Queens were bestowed in order to run a country. At first glance we would assume Marx would label this a bad thing, like he does with god given rights etc. however, I don't believe that it is as simple as that.

Whilst it is entirely possible to consider Woody a "Kingly" figure and Andy the "god-like" figure, the fact that it is okay for the rest of the toys, who all seem equal in their ranking after Woody, it could be looked at as a near-communist society with one person in power. This is, obviously, something Karl Marx would be close to liking.

If we also take into consideration that Buzz finds his way to the top very quickly and all the other toys migrate to like him we could argue that it is the choice of the "lower class" and, therefore, it is more of a chosen leader, rather than assigned. Woody is no more likely to be in charge than, say, Mr Potato Head, or Hamm, it is all to do with how the other toys perceive Woody.

Woody has also, it is assumed, been around longer than the other toys, which makes him more experienced, now whilst I am not 100% sure on Marx's opinion of electing the smartest person to lead a group, I know that Gramsci, is definitely all for "counter-hegemonic blocs" which means a group of in the know "working class" people using their smarts to overrule the oppressive 1%.

However, the only time where is it 100% clear who the oppressive toy is, is in the third movie with Lotso. He is a dictator with a group that do all the work for him in oppressing all the toys who step out of line, using devices such as CCTV, Prison and even torture (the sandbox). This is, personally, one of the best aspects of Toy Story 3 and, of course we get the brilliant line from "Marxist Barbie"...

THE HUMANS

As I mentioned before, within Andy's Room the Toys appear to be happy to be ruled over by Andy, he is like a God to them, someone they look up to and rely on, even after he has thrown out a lot of the toys. Heck Woody loses the his love interest, Bo Peep all because Andy grew too old for her, but Woody looks up to Andy in a way that this doesn't deter him at all. This is something Marx hated. He hated religion, he called it "the opium of the people" because it was and is something that some people blindly follow even if they don't agree with everything they are doing. It is something, according to Marx, that wealthy people created to keep the poor subdued. Lenin called it "spiritual gin" and this seems to be the case for Woody and his friends. They all follow Andy or Bonnie (presumably) no matter what. Heck, Jessie was cast aside by Emily and even she eventually gave into another human.

What Woody does with Sid is a perfect example of a revolution from the "underclass" the toys all group together to prevent another injustice being done aka the killing of one of their kind. This, to me, is amazing, it is exactly what Marx wants from all the working class people in the world and it is exactly what I want to see in my favourite movie series of all time. 

Thanks Pixar for introducing adult themes into kids movies, they have influenced me so much in my interest in politics and other issues like pollution, bravery, and feminism. (See Wall.E, Monsters Inc, and Brave)

So yeah, there are a few thoughts I had about Toy Story, this was fun for me, I basically got to combine two of my favourite things.

I haven't decided on a topic for next week so let me know what you would like to see and I will give it a go.

Until next time,

Stephanie

The Sociologist Series: Feminism and Women in Music

For a long time now more and more women have been making their way onto the charts and have been winning big time at award shows for music. Despite this growing representation of women in this section of the media, is there an institutionalised sexism in the music industry?

The first thing I should mention is that I am not in any way musically inclined, I only listen to what's on the radio and I am a massive mainstream pop fan because I love singing and dancing and that genre is easy to listen to, sing to and dance to, but I feel like for this topic it is the only section of music that is a necessity for me to look at as this is the music that every generation will hear when they are driving in their cars, shopping, or just watching tv.

The first female artist I want to look at is Nicki Minaj. Nicki Minaj is, perhaps, the most successful female rapper in history, for this reason she gets a lot of negative comments. Your basic "She can't sing" "So much autotune" "She's not as good as [insert male rappers name here]", but she also gets called a "bitch" for demanding respect from those around her and she is called a "slut" because apparently she is fucking every other male artist out there. This is the kind of abuse that someone like Drake or Lil' Wayne or Eminem would never suffer from. (Literally the only male artists I can name off the top of my head) They don't suffer this kind of abuse because if they slept with multiple women or had them gyrating against them in music videos (which they do) they are players, they are male role models. If one of them demands respect they are given the respect they crave. Nicki isn't. And Nicki knows that. In this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzGZamtlRP0) she talks about the sexism against her in the industry she has chosen to go into. (I will not be mentioning the recent spat with Taylor when talking about Minaj's career and experiences as a woman because Minaj's problem was not about gender, it was about body image and race)

However, speaking about Taylor Swift we can mention this spat. In case you haven't heard Minaj
tweeted about the unjust nominations for the VMA's Music Video of the Year. Minaj's Anaconda was snubbed for the award despite it breaking multiple records and influencing our culture. After she tweeted Taylor Swift took it personally and basically called it "girl on girl hate" which was, frankly absurd. For a long time now Taylor Swift has done well in promoting feminism and she has been making massive strides for female success, but she jumped the gun a bit calling Nicki out on something that was never directed towards her in the first place. Minaj is not one to shy away from conflict and if she wanted to call Swift out, she would have just done it. This is an excellent example of White Feminism forgetting that some matters are just specific to black women or minority women and that's not something that should be a problem for white feminists. If anything support black feminist and minority group feminists in their bid to end racism and sexism.

That being said, Taylor did realise her mistake, Taylor apologised publicly and privately and she and Nicki are friends again and I for one would love to see a collaboration between the two.

The last thing I want to address is the way women are treated in music videos. The most obvious example of absolutely disgusting and vile treatment of women in a music video is Blurred Lines. Not only is the song about rape and ignoring the word "no" or absence of the word "yes", the women are also naked in the explicit version of the music video and are treated like props. It's not just pop music that treats women like this either. Hip Hop and Rap has not always been a place where women are used as props, but recently Black women in particular seem to be treated as sexual objects for men to grope or oggle at. This is just not right, but more props have to be given to the women who are slaying the music industry like Minaj, Swift, Beyonce, Fifth Harmony etc. they all manage in one way or another to ignore or even speak up against all the body shaming and sexualising of themselves and they are all winning so many awards and showing the world that women can do it too.

There is so much more I could address, but I think that's enough for today.

As always feel free to comment your own opinion below,

Until next time,

Stephanie

UK Election Results 2k15

WARNING: This post contains A LOT of brackets and I mean A LOT!

Right, so I know I have a few readers who are not from the UK so this might not be as easy to understand for you so just this once you get the excuse to not read this... BUT if you do want to know about the problems facing Britain right now then stay tuned because it is about to get ugly up in here.

In the UK we have two major parties: Conservatives and Labour. In their most basic forms Conservatives (The Tories) are a party for the wealthy and Labour are a party "for the people". During the 2015 elections David Cameron was the leader for the Conservatives (And he still is) and Ed Miliband was the leader for Labour (Miliband has since stepped down). Other parties involved were the SNP (Scottish National Party: Leader Nicola Sturgeon) who can't actually be in charge of UK politics because of their "national" status. UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party aka one policy party to be strict on immigration aka "the Racists") The Greens (Probably the one I identify the most with they are the most liberal, but again on the surface appear to be one policy in that they are very much pro-environment) Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) Let's be honest they weren't as important this year. And then some other Independent ones and some Welsh and some Irish ones... ceebs go into it.

Now you know the basics I will launch into my many rants which I will title so you don't have to read the ones you aren't interested in.

VOTING SYSTEM

In the UK we have a system called "First Past the Post". Under this system we vote for who we want to represent our area (constituency) and whoever gets that majority becomes a seat for their party in the House of Commons. E.g. in my constituency (Eastbourne) we have had Stephen Lloyd as our MP (Member of Parliament) for the past five years, this year Conservatives won by just over 700 and so Caroline Ansell is now our MP. Her MP-hood becomes 1 seat for the Conservative Party. The party with the majority of seats (326 as there are 650 constituencies in the UK) wins the election. SIMPLE! But, alas, this is an unfair way of going about it.

Below is a chart showing you how many people voted for which parties in the UK:

This is how many seats these parties won... SPOT THE DIFFERENCE!

This is how many seats would be given under PR (Proportional Representation) this seems a bit more fair... no?:

I personally don't think PR works all that well. It is more difficult to get a majority vote especially when it comes to making decisions after a "winner" is declared (In this case it would still be Conservatives, but I'll save that rant for later) HOWEVER, I still think it is closer to the sort of politics I want to see than that of FPTP as it gives a chance to parties like the Greens to have their say in what happens to our country. They get the chance to make a difference!

And I'll just sit here and imagine your "But what if UKIP" arguments. Yes, FPTP mostly kept UKIP out of Parliament this year, but THIS ISN'T DEMOCRACY!!! UKIP are awful, I disagree with everything they stand for, but they got the votes and their voters deserve the right to have their voices heard! It's simple democracy. (Plus they might be able to finally see how bad the party actually is)

I hope this helps you to see how flawed our current system is.

CONSERVATIVES vs LABOUR 

A hashtag that has been trending, and I have shared and partaken in this hashtag, is the #ToriesOutNow tag. This is trending in light of demonstrations and petitions against another 5 years of the buttcrack of parliament that is the Conservative Party. And I know I've been discreet, but yes, I do not like the Tories. I feel their policies are very much in favour of the 1% and the fact they want to privatise and sell our NHS is not good (I happen to like the NHS despite it's problems.) But... If I was to try and be as unbiased as possible I would have to disagree with the hashtag. Whilst I do not like the Tories, either way you look at it they got the majority vote. Even through the more favourable PR.
In this section I want to discuss how they won over that majority.

Playground Politics.

They basically made a mockery out of Ed Miliband by posting front page news with full page blown up pictures of him eating a sandwich in an, admittedly, poor way. They slated every move he made! As well as this they used the SNP and possible maybe coalition with Labour as a fear tactic and, because the Tories own about 70% of UK newspapers, it worked. They successfully bullied the people of Britain into voting for them.

WHERE TO GO FROM HERE

The most important thing we can do over the next few weeks is keep talking about it! Keep protesting this system that allows room for oppression and bullying and immature politics. In the long term, if this doesn't work out, the best idea I can fathom for those who aren't planning on leaving the UK and starting an underground DJ group in Berlin (Like me and my friends Shannon, Rachael and Eric are planning on doing... We'll be called Holy Trinity feat. Steph incase you were wondering) the best idea I can think of, when all hope is lost and protesting is no longer happening, is to just sit tight, hope we as a country can get through this and, once it is over, in 5 years time, we can regroup and try to start something new.


I hope.


As always, comment below and let me know what you think and ask me any questions, stay open minded.

Steph

My Relationship with a Working Mother

My mother is a retail worker, always has been, probably always will be. I don't have the normal relationship with my mother most teenagers have with their parents, but that doesn't make it any less special to me.

Let me explain.

This is a very personal topic for me to address online, but I feel that society often thinks of the types of relationships you can have with one or both of your parents is either very loving and providing or abusive and disconnected. For me, this hasn't been the case.

For as long as I can remember I have always wanted more attention from my mum than I receive, this comes partly from the amount of children she had to raise (3 from my father's previous marriage for a while and then 4 of her own) and the fact that both of my full-brothers have behaviour problems. Add onto that that I am one of the middle children, the results are conclusive, I didn't receive that much attention.

I am not saying in anyway that my mother neglected me, she was brilliant, kind and, above all, she cared for all of her children and this is where the problem lay. Whilst my mum was out working I would be in school, but when we (me and my siblings) were all old enough to walk home and be left at home on our own my mother would take on longer hours and would work for more days so that she could afford to send us all on school trips, buy our clothes, food etc.

During the first four years of my life my mum and dad went through a divorce, I have never been able to remember my dad being a full-time part of my life and a part of me will always grieve that, but we still went round to his for the weekends and slept over every other weekend (Boys one week, girls the next and so on). For my mum this meant 4 hours of peace (which usually meant housework) and then only half the kids to deal with for a night. This did result in me getting more attention than I would usually so I was happier with that, but I never really cared or realised this was as good as it got.

At the time this was all happening I was blissfully unaware of how it would affect my relationship with my mother, as she strove to make sure I had the same chances all the other kids had, in the future.

Now I bring you to present day.

I am working every Saturday, at least, for four hours, earning my own money so my mum doesn't have to take on the hours at work to provide for the family as I can now provide for myself, but she still does because she still insists that I don't have to pay any rent for living under her roof (Despite my offers of money) this is why I say, my mum's intentions have only ever been to care for her children.

However, I would argue me and my mum have a relationship with no obvious signs of love. If you were on the outside looking in the only thing that really connects us is the way we look similar. I love my mum more than anyone else in the world and I am thankful for every day I get to spend with her, but it isn't something we say to each other a lot.

Me and my mum don't sit and gossip about who I like, who is annoying me, any boys or girls on the horizon for my love life. She isn't always there for me when I need a shoulder to cry on and I can't rely on my siblings for help as the only two who live with me are younger and don't really understand. I can't vent when I get home if something happened at college that has particularly set off a nerve because I do the dinner every night for my family and, yes, sometimes I feel like a second mum, but without the financial burden. When my sister wouldn't go to school I sat down with her to find out why it was she didn't want to go in and convinced her to go in the end.

I don't want my mum to feel bad for this happening, but the fact is, it does and I understand while I am the one my sister might choose to go to when it comes to emotional support, without my mum I wouldn't have been able to go on all of the school trips I went on and I probably wouldn't have my friends I have now as the independence and confidence I have gained from taking on the role in my family I have taken on is a huge part of my personality.

I digress.

The point is, me and my mum have a complicated relationship that works as almost equals, until I do something wrong then she is the parent and what she says goes. All I can hope for is that, once I have moved out and my siblings are earning their own money, my mum can cut back her working hours and relax because she has done so much for me and I couldn't possibly thank her enough.

As I am literally crying I say to you, find someone you love and tell them. I am trying to build up a new relationship with my mum where I can go to her for gossip sessions like my friends inform me they do with their respective guardians or find the time to sit with her and chat, but it is hard work and I think people are often too focused on their own lives to look at the relationships they hold with those closest to them.

As always if you have any questions then feel free to ask me,

Until next time,

Stephanie

The "N" word

There has been a lot of controversy over Jeremy Clarkson, UK presenter and newspaper journalist, saying the "N" word when reciting the poem "Eeny Meeny Miny Mo". I have watched the video and whether he actually says it or not is not clear as he was mumbling.

Clarkson recently released a video apologising for the mistake and he claims that he was trying his best to conceal the word that is in the original poem. He has said that they did the shot in 3 takes. In the first two he tried to mumble the word and make it incoherent and in the final take he replaced it with "teacher". He has told anyone who will listen that he is extremely sorry for any offense he has cause and assured us that it wasn't meant to sound like he was saying it at all. His apology has been pretty quick and he has dealt with the issue very well.

My problem comes in a different form.

I am appalled that Clarkson is receiving so much hatred for something that he may or may not have done when rappers and celebrities use this word so often that it might as well be a part of their dictionary. Yes it is slightly different coming from a middle-aged white man, but if the term is considered offensive then why use it at all?

There is a lot of horrible terms that probably shouldn't be used, but are. "Chav" as previously discussed is one of them, but you don't see working class people calling each other chavs because it isn't nice. By using the "n" word on each other, black people are giving an excuse for the word to stay in circuit. I know a few people will think I have no right to say that as I, myself, am a white female, but I would 100% argue that language i one of the harshest realities against equality and by getting rid, or at least trying to lessen the use of, the words with negative connotations we can start thinking about everything else.

Clarkson has apologised, so know I believe we can move on from it.

Thanks for reading and feel free to comment and ask any questions.

Until next time,

Stephanie

Demonisation of the Working Class

So the class system has been around in the UK for centuries and one of the biggest issues isn't to do with the money, as I first thought, but the horrible sense of elitism that stems from the class system being so segregated.

In the UK we have "chavs" who are, by urban dictionary definition: "a young lower-class person typified by brash and loutish behaviour and the wearing of (real or imitation) designer clothes." In England chavs are often described as dangers to society. And, yes, this type of person does exist.

My problem comes from the stereotype that all working class people are chavs and this is what makes the working class seem like they are not worth the time or money the government gives them. 

I am working class. I have friends who are both working and middle class, but they don't label me as a chav or not their equal. (At least I hope not) So why does this stigma arise from?

One reason the working class are often seen as unable to be treated the same as upper or middle class is from the Industrialisation of Britain. We did it rather badly to be completely honest. We segregated the lower classes as the working force from the middle class business men very early. From this came the stigma that we are dirty, we cannot afford nice things, we are awful people that can't cope with the class labels and that eventually developed into the stereotypical "chav" that we see hiding in the alleyways between shops, desperately smoking their last drag of the day before they have to head back to school.

Another reason this subculture developed is because the working class are less fortunate. I speak from experience when I say that watching my mum miss meals so I could be fed and clothed for school the next day was heartbreaking. She still takes 48 hours of minimum wage work a week to help pay for my college fees and tries her hardest to book one holiday for us to go on a year to the next beach town over, but none of this compares to the look of dismay when I had to tell her the reason I had that bruise on my arm was from the boy at the back of the class who called me a chav and told me my family smelt weird. This label chased me through to the end of secondary school.

I wouldn't put myself into the chav subculture purely because I wouldn't consider myself "loutish" and I don't wear designer clothes at all really, imitation or otherwise. I do think chavs as a culture exists, but I don't think they are as common as the ruling classes would have you believe, nor are they a big problem to society, all they want is a little less class discrimination and the bitterness could end with this generation.

Please feel free to leave any comments or ask any questions.

Until next time, 

Stephanie

Miss Representation

Upon suggestion from a great friend of mine I am going to be watching the documentary "Miss Representation". This is a documentary that explores the way women are under-represented in powerful positions in America and it challenges the media's portrayal of women which, lets face it, is pretty awful.
In this post I am going to be doing a review as I watch the documentary so everything you read will comment on things that have been said and it will be chronologically analysed. However, I encourage you to go and watch it and I will leave a link to the trailer at the end.

So the documentary starts off with a great quote:

"The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any" -Alice Walker.

I think this is a great way to start the documentary because it outlines the reasons why you don't find women in places of high power. They have been raised believing that it can't get better and there is no point in trying to fix any problems they may have.

The documentary then gives the viewers some facts. Including:

• "American teenagers spend 31 hours a week watching TV; 17 hours a week listening to music; 3 hours a week watching movies; 4 hours a week reading magazines and 10 hours a week online"

This is basically highlighting how much of a teenager's life is revolving around media, where they will get fed the misrepresentation of women.

Within the introduction of the documentary they have already covered the basics of the debate they are about to put forward and therefore, I can already tell this is going to be a well-structured argument. I am looking forward to watching the rest.

After addressing the media and pointing out just how corrupt it is there is a short anecdote about a woman with terrible experiences in terms of self worth and how horrible she felt after a certain experience where a peer took advantage of her vulnerability. 

She says "My experiences are unique, my struggle is all to common" which is true. A lot of women do go through what she has been through in terms of sexual abuse or general oppression or even just feeling crap about the way you look after flicking through the latest edition of the newest teen magazine that every little girl is reading.

I don't want to explain the entire documentary, because I feel as though you would get the most benefit from watching it yourself, but what I can say is my opinion on the media and how it portrays women.

As far as I am concerned things are most definitely looking worse for wear in the media department for women. We are targeted as the sex appeal to sell anything from cars to toilet roll. Don't believe me? Google it. For this reason young boys are being brought up in a world where looking at girls as sexual objects is considered natural. No. Stop. 

A lot of men have put forward the point that women tend to sexualise the men they see in the media. For me that would be people like Benedict Cumberbatch, Tom Hiddleston and (don't hate me) Harry Styles. I find these men attractive, but I don't think they face the same problem women do. For one example, Scarlett Johansson, wonderfully talented actress, but she is always asked about her looks or the romance, never the fact that she can kick butt on the battlefield. Scarlett Johansson is very good at dealing with these questions though so good on her, but still. Tom Hiddleston is never asked about these sorts of things, nor is he every draped across a vehicle, half naked for a photo shoot. Why? Because he is male and therefore not objectified in the same way.

I also want to link you to a great Youtube channel called "FeministFrequency" who deals with media's "tropes". These are things the media has done to women in major film franchises and I strongly suggest watching them to open your eyes to what the media does. See if your favourite films can pass the Bechdel Test.

That's all for now and remember that you can leave a comment stating your opinion or ask me any questions you may or may not have.

Until next time, 

Stephanie

Miss Representation Trailer

FeministFrequency