End of the world?

I have never been fascinated with end-of-the-world films and ever since our class on movies and the Apocalypse, I have been trying to understand why so much of the world loves to imagine the end of its own being.

Conrad Ostwalt, in his chapter on apocalyptic films suggested people are preoccupied with the end of the world imaginations because it is connected to the postmodern context that tends to deny anything absolute. As he stated, “if the absolute falls, so falls all else.” I think it’s a little more complicated than just a tendency to deny anything absolute… but I have yet to understand what that may be.

I definitely find comfort in believing in a world that will exist long after I am gone. Surely, my need for the world to be absolute is partially what results in my disinterest in apocalyptic films. But I also enjoy feeling connectedness to the people around me. Apocalyptic films bring about feelings of desolation and loneliness – feelings I don’t yearn for on a daily basis.

I have seen several end of the world films but the one that stands out in my mind is Left Behind. Now that I think of it, it was a bit of a funny experience. My friend (who happened to be Muslim) invited about 15 friends to watch a movie for her birthday. None of us expected to watch such a horrible film as Left Behind proved to be (4.5 stars on IMDb). I clearly remember leaving the movie theatre feeling as though I had lost an hour and half of my life forever. But at the same time, I felt a small sense of relief know I was “safe” if the apocalypse were to come since I had been going to church at that time. Perhaps I am just being ignorant to reality but I would just rather live without having to worry about the end of the world looming over me.

With so many successful end-of-the-world films such as Independence Day and Armageddon and the extremely long list of apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction listed on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_apocalyptic_and_post-apocalyptic_fiction) can you please help me understand why it is so popular? Surely, there is something I’m missing out on.

Response: If you're not enraged, you're not paying attention

Hi Georgia,
I can sense your frustration about Bristol Palin and what the Republican government has done. I agree with you in that abstinence-only education is utterly ineffective.

I believe there are advantages and disadvantages to both abstinence-only education and sex-education that need to be addressed. Neither is perfect but in my opinion, sex-education is definitely safer and more effective than abstinence-only education.


Abstinence-only education promotes refraining from sex until marriage and avoids the discussion of use of contraceptives. Advocates for abstinence-only education believe education around the use of contraceptives and safe sex encourages sexual activity. In my opinion, their thinking is flawed. However judgmental this statement may be, I know many will agree that teenagers aren’t the most willing people to refrain from what they are told not to do. Questioning authority and making their own judgments is part of the process in going through the teenage years (I can personally attest to that). I disagree with those who say abstinence-only education is ineffective because teenagers will be sexually active whether we like it or not. This views teenagers as animalistic beings with no agency. Instead, I believe abstinence-only education is ineffective because sex becomes forbidden and strikes even more curiosity among teens.


Underage drinking can serve as an example of how keeping something prohibited will be more detrimental than allowing for its familiarity. In 2004, The Washington Post found that Europe has a lower prevalence of underage drinking than in America. Researchers concluded that the familiarity of moderate alcohol drinking (i.e. wine with dinner) within European families likely resulted in less binge drinking among youth. On the contrary, in America alcohol was seen as more of a prohibited activity for youth and therefore resulted in more binge drinking.


Having sex-education classes for youth and teenagers will be more effective than forcing abstinence-only education upon them. Not only is abstinence-only education an interference of religious teaching in schools, but it is also fails to prepare teenagers for the real world. Critics of sex-education say that it encourages teenagers to be sexually active. They are pointing the finger at something that is seeking to help teenagers make safe choices, should they need to rather than looking at the broader social context and the thousands of pro-sex messages teenagers encounter everyday. Sex is everywhere in the media and I don’t imagine it disappearing anytime soon. Trying to tell teenagers they should not and cannot do something while the media is sending the opposite messages will not be a difficult battle. The media will be more powerful and transmit more enticing messages than any abstinence-only educator. It is only logical to help teenagers be aware of safe sex than trying to deny its existence altogether.

Ageism and Abortions

Condit (1987, 1990) categorized representations of abortions on television into three types: 1) regulatory programs, 2) miscarriage/false pregnancy and 3) pro-abortion. These three types form the norm of generally acceptable abortion themes on television. Women going through abortions were portrayed as having autonomy over their decisions, but were always depicted as having to endure emotional conflict throughout the decision process. Press & Cole (1999) believe a woman’s decision to go through with an abortion and social class codes the viability of their choice.

The authors go on to suggest middle-class women portrayed on television are often shown contemplating abortions under selfish motives for a problem that has multiple solutions. In contrast, lower-class women are depicted as having financial hardship, which is considered a legitimate circumstance for choosing abortions.

I agree with Press & Cole in that abortions on television (and in film) have become dependent on the character’s social class, however, I believe a character’s age equally reframes the viability of choices for abortion.

In the television program Glee, the popular cheerleader Quinn Fabray becomes pregnant and at one point is not sure whether she will keep the baby. Although in the end she decides to go through with the pregnancy, the question of abortion was brought up immediately, without any thought. Also, in the movie Juno, the sixteen-year-old high school character, Juno MacGuff, becomes pregnant. Her first instinct is to visit an abortion clinic but, like Quinn in Glee, decides to go through with her pregnancy. Both characters later give up their babies for adoption. In both situations, it seems as though youth, like financial hardship of lower-class women, is seen as an equally legitimate circumstance to choose to have an abortion.

Press & Cole’s study aimed to understand the relationship between women’s ideas about abortion, the family, and their own identities with television images. Their findings resembled Detweiller & Taylor’s (2003) arguments on the roles of television in that they looked at how television acts as a teacher in both molding social behaviour and reflecting our values in its programs. If television acts to inform us and molds social behaviour, will this result in society adopting an even more exaggerated ageist mentality? Perhaps young characters on television and in film will continue to be portrayed as having legitimate circumstances for abortion because of their youth and this will be reflected in the attitudes of individuals. I believe this would be an unfortunate outcome since every situation is unique and complex and needs to be looked at under its own lens.

Response: Teen Pregnancy: Media Influence or Bad Parenting?

This post is in response to:

http://lifeisbetterinblackandwhite.blogspot.com/2011/04/teen-pregnancy-media-influence-or-bad.html

Hi Kathleen,

I enjoyed reading your post and I think you brought up some really important points.

 The growing rate of teen pregnancies in America is definitely concerning. I don’t think we can point the finger at one cause for teen pregnancies… rather, it is a very complex issue that is likely a result of several sociocultural factors.

Firstly, like you mentioned, teen pregnancies have taken the spotlight in the media with television programs like MTV’s Teen Mom and 16 & Pregnant. Celebrities’ babies are more famous than ever before and share the covers of People magazine with their famous parents. This growing trend of having pregnancies so popular in the media makes me wonder whether media is driving the increase in teen pregnancies or whether popular culture is just a reflection of what is actually happening in America.

Another contributing factor to the growing rate of teen pregnancies is the lack of education on safe sex. Earlier this week, my classmate told me about her experience teaching health education to a class of grade 7 students. When discussing methods for practicing safe sex, she was shocked when many of her students believed withdrawal was one of the most effective methods to avoid pregnancy! It seems as though the popular culture and the available education (which is lacking) send contradicting messages to teenagers - the media seem to often glorify pregnancy while of course, education seeks to control it.

Is media just a reflection of the population? Perhaps popular culture is partially responsible for the rise in teen pregnancy rates. Or maybe they are mutually informing.

The last point you made about the four eighth grade girls was definitely a shock. This just speaks to the fact that there is a lack of parental guidance, which is another contributing factor to the growing rates of teen pregnancies. There is not enough critical dialogue happening between parents and children about the responsibilities that come along with raising a child, how to deal with peer pressure, and methods of birth control. If teenagers were more aware of the realities of pregnancy, it is very likely that fewer would be getting pregnant.

The issue of growing rates of teen pregnancy is complex and there are many causes that contribute to the problem. Influence from the media, lack of education, and lack of parental guidance all contribute to the increasing trend. I believe the key to lowering teen pregnancy rates is communication and education.

Response: Commit the Crime, do the TIME!

Response to Diana's post:

http://dianaferlenda.blogspot.com/2011/03/commit-crime-do-time.html

Diana,

I enjoyed reading your post! This is definitely a topic I am unsure about… so I might as well spill my thoughts and blog about it!

Are musicians just artists or are they public figures? All musicians lie along a continuum measuring their status as public figures. On one end of the spectrum, there are musicians who create music for the sheer purpose of artistic expression. They don’t have articles published about them in the magazines and they don’t have to worry about the content of their lyrics based on who could potentially be listening to their songs. On the other end, we have artists like Akon and Eminem (like you mentioned) who are definitely public figures whose music reaches large audiences. It is these artists who are often criticized for any explicit content in their lyrics and are blamed when violent acts seem to parallel their music.

But, aren’t these “famous” musicians, who are now public figures, once artists creating music for the sole purpose of artistic expression too? How do we differentiate between those musicians who are allowed to say whatever they want in their lyrics and those musicians who should be more cognizant of their content?

On one hand, I don’t think it is fair that musicians who have “made it” should be expected to compromise the content of their lyrics because of people who might potentially listen to their songs. This takes away from the artist’s freedom in their expression and becomes less of an honest work of art. As discussed in class, Eminem was criticized for stating such violent fantasies in his songs, yet he claimed those songs served as an outlet for him to remain non-violent.

On the other hand, perhaps these individuals who are now in the public eye should realize they could potentially influence audiences through their music, so they should encourage positive messages, rather than controversial themes such as violence.  There is little to no regulation of who is able to listen to what music. Although radio stations have “clean” versions of songs, all they are doing is taking out explicit language, but leaving all the violent themes. Other media outlets such as online file sharing and iTunes have nearly no regulations on who is able to download and listen to explicit songs. So, perhaps it is now up to the artists to take responsibility for restraining people from listening to violent themes through music and shield those who are unable to differentiate artistic expression from reality.

There is definitely a dilemma between artistic expression and social responsibility. This is certainly something I will continue to question in the future.

Response: Gaga the Fame Monster: Monsters and Christianity in PC

This is a post in response to:
http://ekhoy.blogspot.com/2011/03/gaga-fame-monster-monsters-and.html


Lady Gaga's New Breed of Monsters


As discussed in class, the problematic most often used in popular culture is that monsters are beings that can’t understand themselves as not being forgiven, so they one thing they desire most is redemption. I believe there is a new breed of monsters being born in popular culture today, thanks to Lady Gaga.

Lady Gaga has become notorious for her outrageous outfits (see pictures below) and when asked about her fashion, she said that she is expressing herself in a way that she was unable to do in high school. She has also become widely known as an advocate for LGBT rights. With the release of her newest single “Born This Way”, Lady Gaga made a very positive and bold statement to her fans: that it’s okay to be who you are and we are all born this way. The music video for this song begins with the Manifesto of Mother Monster, the prologue, where Gaga talks about a new race, born without prejudices and concludes with the view of a city populated by this race.

Lady Gaga’s theme of monsters has been apparent since the release of her third EP in 2009, called The Fame Monster. She has also referred to herself as Mother Monster on several occasions and she affectionately refers to her fans as “Little Monsters”. These fans came to her “Monster Ball Tour” concerts often dressed in unique Lady Gaga-inspired outfits.

In class, it was mentioned that the word “monsters” derives from the Latin “monstrum” or “moneo/monstrare” and demonstrates, shows, or reveals something to us. What are Lady Gaga’s monsters showing us? I believe Gaga and her “Little Monsters” are showing us a reflection of the true selves we often wish we were courageous enough to be. Unlike vampires, werewolves, and other monsters prominent in popular culture, Lady Gaga’s new breed of monsters are not yearning for redemption. Instead, all they are yearning for is to be themselves. In my interpretation of Gaga’s affectionate view, monsters are more human than humans. Monsters are honest representations of ourselves and humans are drone-like beings filled with hatred. Being a monster is encouraged in this sense so that we can strive to and be comfortable with who we truly are.

We have been exposed to monsters that represent fear and falling from grace. We have also seen monsters that show us at our best. We are now being exposed to a new sense of monsters that show us our true selves.

The Complexity of Violence

In my opinion, the two definitions of violence brought forward in class were both unsatisfying. The maximal definition only looked at the brutish, harsh view of violence and the minimal definition did not consider implied and discursive violence. This just speaks to the complexity of violence and the difficulty in accurately defining what violence truly is.  

We often talk about violence in sport and whether it can be justified. As mentioned in class and as discussed in Tracy Trothen’s (2009) article on violence in Canadian hockey, the ubiquity of violence in sport has resulted in its normalization. There is a tendency for people to think of violence in binary terms such as right or wrong. When discussing violence and sport, the focus is primarily on the perpetrator and the victim. For example, the recent widely discussed hospitalization of Max Pacioretty (the victim) after experiencing a violent hit from Zdeno Chara (the perpetrator) focused entirely on whether Chara should be suspended and how violence in hockey can affect youth. Rather than looking at violence under binary terms, I believe the theory of violence on a continuum (Falk, 2002) more accurately takes into account its intricacies. Violence can be seen as utility, risk management, and significant.

While continuing with the topic of violence in sport, I want to focus on the individual athlete and the violence they inflict on their bodies. Physically, athletes prepare for competition by working out at the gym and practicing technical skills. This physical preparation is an example of violence individuals willingly carry out on themselves. The underlying theory of exercise is the principle of overload – when an individual applies a greater than normal stress load on their bodies, training adaptation takes place and the body is stronger as a result. This type of violence can lie anywhere on the continuum of violence as utility (since the body is being made stronger for a useful purpose) and also as risk management (preventing physical injuries). The violence athletes inflict on themselves also have great significance to audiences. People who do not put themselves through physical training understand the importance of preparing the body for competition and see the importance for conditioning in sport.

Seeing violence under a continuum of utility, risk management, and significance not only takes into account the audience, but also understands the construct as more than just a binary. Defining violence is a difficult task since it is such a complex and our understanding of violence is constantly changing.