Pleasant I decided to play around a little bit since I believe this is going to be my last official blog. As I mentioned in a comment I am going to write on last weeks genders stuff since I got confused and wrote about the gaming stuff last week.
Anyway, to make things a little different I am going to live blog my reading of the article “The Portrayal of Women in Television”, beginning right now, period.
Alright, this seems to be working. I have now begun the reading of the article.
I just got to the part that discusses how women are significantly under represented in television. I have heard this before and I really like this argument because it is such a straight forward and obvious reflection of the fact that yes men are in fact favoured in t.v. and indeed dominate television in a reflection of patriarchal society that promotes the hegemonic view that men are somehow more important, and superior to women – so much so that in the world of t.v. there can 1/3 as many women as men because generally no one is concerned with what women are doing unless the women part of the more exciting story of a male character.
Now I will continue reading…
1.5 years watching advertisements… holy shnikees!
Of course when are portrayed in t.v. they are done so in stereotypical ways. So, like the article mentions most women’s lives on t.v. are dominated by family and personal relationships of the ‘private sphere’ while men are more often depicted as having lives outside the home in the ‘private sphere’. Not thought to see what is going on here… t.v. just like in the 50′s wants to keep on portraying the white picket fence scene where daddy goes to work in the morning and comes home to a loving wife, 2.3 children, and a hot supper every night.
This probably is also in keeping with the idea that the women are only important so long as they are tied to the story of a male character. The housewife is not exciting without her spy husband… although at least they have desperate housewives now. Where the central characters are all women hurrah!
“…shown to be obsessed with cleanliness and alpine fresh scents.” but who doesn’t want their home to be alpine fresh? Oh wait.
I liked the part that talked about the portrayal of men as incompetent in domestic situations. I think I have probably been influenced by these ads quite a bit and I think I like many men have been using them as evidence of an actual inability to do my own laundry, cook and clean up after myself. This is however a lie. I too can clean and even cook, but the typical ad as man as incompetent in the domestic sphere sure helps to reinforce the idea that I should be no good at these things and that I should ultimately be trying to find a woman to help me before I burn the house down.
This post is already getting kind of long so I might just have to end now.
I almost forgot.
A split infinitive or cleft infinitive is an English-language grammatical construction in which a word or phrase, usually an adverb or adverbial phrase, occurs between the marker to and the bare infinitive (uninflected) form of a verb. One of the most famous split infinitives occurs in the opening sequence of the Star Trek television series: “to boldly go where no man has gone before.” Here, the adverb “boldly” splits the full infinitive “to go.”
As the split infinitive became more popular in the 19th century, some grammatical authorities sought to introduce a prescriptive rule against it. The construction is still the subject of disagreement among native English speakers as to whether it is grammatically correct or good style. Fowler wrote in 1926, “No other grammatical issue has so divided English speakers since the split infinitive was declared to be a solecism in the 19c: raise the subject of English usage in any conversation today and it is sure to be mentioned.”[1] However, most experts on language now agree that the split infinitive is sometimes appropriate.[2]