oh WOW!

                After reading Ritter's piece, I thought that it was really interesting that a game would incorporate different races. I've never played RPGs before so I never really thought about it. Although, I have thought about other games in a different way since reading this piece. The article made it clear that the Horde or 'evil' creatures live in minority style towns or speak in their languages. At first I was skeptical. I thought that while I'm sure that some buildings resemble tepees, the makers are just trying to create a variety of features. After playing as a Tauren, I realized that the game creators really took it to an extreme level. The people themselves are supposed to have a love of nature as well as having braids and feathers in their hair. Their buildings are distinctly based of Native Americans not just merely resembling a teepee. The correlation was so blatant that I actually started laughing. The Orcs terrain was clearly made to look like a savannah and others were a colony of islands. The details in the game are so specific that it is undisputable that the creators were influenced by these cultures.

                However, I don't think the game-makers are racist, just simply following standard protocol in America. They certainly don't seem help equality but I feel that most of the characters are based on stereotypes and fantasy. I don't remember any black characters in the Lord of the Rings which seems to have a influence on WOW. I think the game-makers established themselves as the heroes in the game and while I have no data to prove it, they were probably white. They wanted to live an adventure and there are two options: be the hero, or the villain. If you are the hero, you naturally want to save the damsel in distress (much like we talked about in class) and defeat the most terrifying monster you can. Most monsters in our culture are depicted not depicted as white. Unless you count serial killers. Our monsters are giant creatures like werewolves, sharks, all kinds of aliens of terrifying designs, and even Frankenstein was green.  Now the only white monster, vampires, have become the heroes in movies. It actually just occurred to me that the werewolves in Twilight were also natives. The makers of WOW were also most likely male. This leads to all of the females ,humans at least, having large breasts and small waists. Again, I think it is less about sexism and more about trying to entertain a largely male audience. When the percentage of female games rivals that of male, then maybe the games gender portrayal will change.

                The points that Ritter makes are very interesting and will likely lead to the study of many other games through a racial viewpoint. I couldn't tell if he really thinks the creators are racist but his essay brought up very intriguing questions.

gender in adverising

                I was definitely one of those people who thought that everyone in this country is pretty much equal. Other than the pay discrepancy, I figured that women are able to occupy all of the same jobs that men do even though it may be a bit harder for them to gain respect. I have found, through several other classes here and reinforcement from this one, that I was very wrong. Last semester I watched the most recent "Killing Me Softly" presentation by Jean Kilbourne which focuses on the image of women in advertising. It illustrated how hard it has become to be a woman due to main stream media and advertising. She talks a lot about how women are made to appear much like you were describing in class about the Disney princesses. The only body type shown on T.V. account s for 5% of the population. She says in the beginning that advertisements sell normalcy. This concept really stuck with me. Women are led to believe that looking like models is what normal looks like and everything else is bad. She also points out that ads represent even less than 5% by combining images of 4 different women or lightening up black women to make them more Caucasian.   

                Another point made was that while men may not look like their model counterparts either, they are still portrayed in positions of power. To use your word, men are comodified  as leaders, representatives of strength or intelligence. The hyper masculine, Amurica, drive a truck, get dirty, etc is very strong. While this may alienate some men, they are still shown to be dominate no matter what. Women on the other hand, are made to look passive, innocent, foolish. The fact that the school girl outfit is a popular turn on is kinda creepy when you think about it. Going back to the 'object' argument, the women look as if they are to be used by the male, positioned in pornographic poses, shown to be part of a fleeting hookup.

                I think these practices are what forces your female colleagues to present a masculine image. Women are constantly made to appear inferior and more importantly, made to feel that this is normal. Hopefully more people will take similar diversity classes or at least watch this video to understand the obstacles of women are much farther reaching than the stereotypical feminist crap that no one listens to anymore.

digital representation

Sorry this is late, I totally spaced yesterday.

We touched on it in class but the most interesting part of Militainment was the concept of a "Clean War." The different techniques used really changes the feel of a news story. The camera angles towards the sky and far away, removing any images of humans in bomb sites. Soldiers mistakenly killed a family and are shown helping to dig the graves. Civilian deaths are "collateral damage." Our giant missiles are "precise" enough to avoid civilian deaths. As if the bomb released something that can only damage violent people. This film made it clear just how much the news can be manipulated to present "facts" yet still only show what they want Americans to see.
 
I also had a question that I didn't get the chance to bring up in class regarding Digital Arabs. My problem with the end of the essay is that it doesn't really present a solution. They mention several games that focus more on the cultural aspect and producing realism but bottom line is no one will buy those games. It might be great as an educational game in schools but the population wants to shoot something. What should be the next step in this genre of gaming?

More to Come

            I didn't want to list out the communities I belong to like a bullet point on wikipedia because I know I would end up sounding like a jackass so I thought it would be easier to explain where I come from and where I'm at now. I have been a part of very different cultures in these last few years and many ideologies affect my daily state of being.
            I'm the 21 year old, white dude who had an easy time in school and is well supported by his parents. I was an athlete in school but my high school didn't follow the typical popular jock/cheerleader hierarchy. I belonged to a lot of different groups of people and that hasn't changed today. Half of my best friends in high school were (and still are), in a heavy metal band and partied hard every weekend and all could give you a run for your money with profanities. The other half were honors students who would rather play apples to apples. I really connected with each group and enjoyed them separately. They helped me understand that while completely different, each culture offered things that still influence me now.
            I have brought that attitude to WSU and found myself a part several new but still different groups. I have close friends from the club tennis team, Scott-Coman dorm, ping pong club, architecture and now DTC. I have found that again, each group exposes me to new things as well as ideas. Watching the different ideologies act among them is especially interesting when different groups are faced with the same problem.
            I see myself as a easy going guy with a lot of creativity that I'm too lazy to develop completely but I've been working on that.
            I don't know what people thought in high school but here, I am often asked if I'm in a frat even though I've never had any inspiration to join. I think it's the hat and sunglasses. Apparently I dress like a frat guy even though I kinda just buy whatever catches my eye at the time. Maybe it's the confident attitude that can be mistaken for cockiness. Maybe it's the cockiness.

            Last semester really changed the way I think and I can tell that this class is just going to push my exploration even farther. I read Althusser's "On Ideology" for English 301 which is still the single hardest thing I have ever read although Faucault seems to share fondness for run on sentences and overcomplicating ideas than can be stated with 1/3 less words. While difficult, both of these authors present ways to question the world around you, especially the decisions and motivations of other people. I found myself questioning my own choices and especially my reservations after watching "Pump up the Volume." Why do I need to be anonymous to truly be myself?  
            This class specifically has made me think about how we define race and sexuality. Previously, I tried not to think about race to define people, even though it's always the first way to describe someone. I'm not racist. I don't care if people are gay. I don't hurt other people because of it so race/orientation doesn't really affect me. This class has shown me already that race/orientation/gender/etc always plays a role. The comment about a woman having to dress masculine while a man can dress however really stood out to me.
            Something that was said today in class brought me back to my years in architecture. There was several gay people in the class which didn't really affect me yet I still noticed. There was one guy who I wasn't sure if he was gay or not (now noticing that I immediately followed the gay or straight dichotomy). I remember discussing it with other people but eventually he came out and we had the answer. Then, nothing happened. I didn't think of him any differently and there weren't any significant consequences. This is all from my perception. It was probably a much more significant moment for him.
            I would stop, or maybe take an extra long look at the gay couple on the mall because it's simply different and unexpected. Not necessarily because I think it's wrong. But why did I want to find out? Why was another person's sexual choices any of my concern or even worth talking about? I think that maybe I just wanted to find something unexpected, even if it ends there. This class has alluded to that fact that my motivation are probably much deeper. I'm excited to discover more about how I've been trained and maybe discover more about myself.

Side Note:
I just discovered this website and a lot of posts have to do with our class content so far. These two were especially powerful and extremely relevant to our discussion today.  

Sup