On the CBS television show How I Met Your Mother, Barney Stinson (one of the 4 main characters in the show) has always wondered who his father is. Barney also has a half brother named James who is African American and clearly has a different birth father. Despite this, when James finally meets his birth father, Barney is convinced he has also found the father he has dreamed of meeting for decades. At this turning point in the episode, Barney takes racist stereotypes that pertain to blacks and apply them to himself (basketball, gospel singing, etc.).
Although this episode does not apply to the TV Tokenism thesis created by Mr. Bolos specifically for network dramas, I found it interesting that the show chose a white man to deliver racist stereotypes and jokes to amuse their audience. Barney and the audience can both justify the offensive things the character is doing because of the mentality that if you are the minority, you can make fun of yourself, right? In the image above, Barney is inserting himself within his "fellow African Americans", as if saying "It's okay! I'm one of them!"
I believe that comedies use racist stereotypes and jokes as a "cheap shot" and is an easy way to obtain laughs from their viewers. I personally find How I Met Your Mother a hilarious, light hearted comedy, but I admit most of their jokes lack sufficient depth. Barney, for example, saying that his newfound race explains why he was so good at basketball, is a prime example of an easy, racist one-liner. Barney was clearly talented at basketball before he "discovered" he was black, so why is it funny that he justifies his talent now? A caucasian man does not have to be African American in heritage to be good at a sport, such as basketball, but the audience still reacts to this mindless joke and encourages them to create more. To watch the clip for more examples, click the video above this text.
Enjoy!!!
For all my YouTube junkies out there, I found a video of Zac Efron that has recently gone viral to be very applicable to what our American Studies class has been discussing. There is a clip of Zac Efron walking on the Red Carpet for the premiere of the Dr. Seuss movie The Lorax. In this clip, you can see after Efron reaches to get something out of his pocket, a gold condom falling out and onto the red carpet in front of thousands of viewers (including children). To watch this funny clip, click here.
You are probably wondering why so many people want to watch a condom fall out of Zac Efron's pocket. As a matter of fact, why do we care if he has a condom or is having sex at all? Isn't it a natural human urge and activity that millions of people participate in? That, my friends, was exactly what I thought. In American Studies today, we were discussing the two things that drive the human race: sex and death. Clearly, this idea that a celebrity dropped a contraceptive in front of thousands of viewers is amusing, but looking at the world around us, why would something as trivial as this get so much attention? There are hundreds of people dying every day across the world. Why don't they have over 3 million people looking at their names and lives instead of a silly thing that happened to a Disney Superstar on the glamorous red carpet? Are we, as Americans, just more fascinated by sex? By fame? Or do we just try to avoid death since it is so prevelent in out lives?
Today I was talking to someone about commercials and what makes certain ones memorable and appealing to consumers versus ones that don't exactly leave a huge impression. A huge portion of the advertising industry is involved with objectifying women. An example of this can be seen in a commercial for Kaiser beer: two men are on a beach and manipulate a beer bottle, which is controlling a young woman with minimal clothing on. It's difficult to explain, but to watch this promiscuous commercial, click here. I also found an image online of a St. Pauli beer commercial, making a connection between the woman ("drop dead" gorgeous) and the beer (just as "refreshing" as the sexy woman). I found the ideas behind these advertisements very interesting. In society today, we are constantly exposed to objectification and sexualization of women to encourage men to buy products. Are actions such as these diminishing women and their rights? Is it wrong to use women's bodies to sell products, such as a beer? Are these commercials even, in a sense, violating women's civil liberties?
As we all know,today is a very exciting time of year. A day we all know and love. Yes, that's right: Valentines Day. Every year on February 14th, a day is set aside to acknowledge and celebrate the love we have for everyone in our lives, emphasizing romantic lust and romantic lovers. I had never really known how Valentines Day was "created", so like any curious American citizen, I googled it. I discovered on History.com that St. Valentine was a priest in the 3rd century in Rome. The Emperor (Claudius II) made the decision to ban marriage for young men because he believed single men made better soldiers. This outlaw of marriage outraged St. Valentine, and in response he rebelled by secretly marrying people. When this act of rebellion was discovered, Valentine was immediately put to death. Despite this gruesome end, he is still remembered as a man who kept love alive and is praised for it annually
I found this new information very interesting, especially after our discussion in class about the drastic increase in prisoners in America. There are currently over 2 million prisoners in America at this moment in time. In 1970, there were approximately 300,000. This overwhelming change makes us question our laws and if over 2 million people deserve to be locked in jail, even if it's the most minor infraction of the law.
On one hand, America idolizes the justice system it has and the honest way our country enforce the laws it creates. On the other hand, is there a point that we are taking these small steps out of line too seriously? Was it just to put Valentine to death when he was doing something so harmless? Preserving love--one of the most noble things to fight for?How can a governing system decide who commits a "minor" crime versus those who need to be punished for their actions?
