Stereotype this

Stereotypes are created when ideologies are adopted and applied generally to a whole group, without distinction or merit. Stereotypes are an inevitable result of diversity and ‘otherness’ coupled with the media’s immense power of representation. The ideologies are circulated and perpetuated by the media because they are produced and transformed by the media. These racist ideologies can only extend from ‘some single-minded and unified conception of the world’ (Hall, 2000: 281). These ideologies are so constrained; in fact the power of both the media and this carefully constructed discourse is its ‘capacity to constrain a very great variety of individuals’ (Hall, 2000: 281).

The media have constructed important ideologies about what race means to us, what the definition carries and the immediate problems associated with race. The media helps us categorise the world according to these categories of race. The media have not only constructed these ideologies of race, they have also reinforced, transformed, and elaborated upon them (Hall, 2000).

The 9 11 attacks would not have had the same impact worldwide without the media. The images of terrorism from 9/11 are mainly focused on the consequences and the aftermath of what had happened. ‘The actors are less specific. Published images of the suicide bombers who carried out the attacks blur into a generic mug shot of a man of Middle Eastern ancestry’ (Elliot, 2003: 52). The media’s representation of 9 11 reinforces the Middle Eastern stereotype. Circulating and perpetuating.

Those terrorists who were blamed for 9 11 wore turbans and sported thick, black beards. Turbans certainly don’t fit the dominant Western image, so it makes sense then that the media and thus the public allocate derogatory labels to people with the general look and feel of a terrorist.  And it’s just as easy ‘to extend that label to stereotypically include other people who happen to share that religion, culture or physical look, or even to encompass an entire geographical region as the home of terrorists.’ (Elliot, 2003: 52).

In much the same way that the media creates and perpetuates simplified racial categories, it creates religious ideologies that allow the world to see religious groups the way the mostly secular media wants them to. During the 2004 presidential elections, American news organisations portrayed religious Americans as conservative Americans ‘motivated by opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion…’ (Media Matters, 2007) The media drew on an already constructed ideology to perpetuate a stereotype about religious Americans; they just did what they had to exert their influence. Really are we at all surprised? We have allowed the media to think for us, to control our beliefs and to shift our culture. Why? How have we, intelligent, moral man, allowed this to happen? How have we allowed something we call media to claim so much power and present us with well, whatever they feel like?

Image Source:

http://openparachute.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/religion-in-the-public-square/

References:

Elliot, D. 2003. ‘Terrorists we do like and Terrorists we don't like’. In PM Lester and EE Dennis Eds., Images that Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media, 2nd Edn, London: Praeger, ch7, 51-55.

Hall, S. 2000. ‘Racist Ideologies and the Media’. In P Marris and S Thornham, Eds., Media Studies: A Reader. 2nd Edn.,New York: New York University Press, Ch.22, 271-282.

Media Matters for America. 2007. Left Behind,  The Skewed Representation of Religion in Major News Media,  May

Stop the persecution

When I interviewed Dave and Tracey Roake for my essay I gathered so much interesting information that I couldn’t use because it would mean the introduction of yet another topic in my already over-crammed 1200 words.  This may seem ignorant and you may think I live under a rock, but I really knew nothing at all about the persecution of Christians. Dave is currently writing a book about underground churches as a result of this savage, unfounded persecutory behaviour. He has attempt to answer difficult, confronting questions: Why are Christians persecuted? How can they prepare to stand strong in times of persecution? What does the future hold for Christians? Will the violence continue?

In many parts of the world, the persecution has advanced to brutal proportions:

Literally hundreds of thousands of people today are being killed, brutalized, sold as slaves, imprisoned, tortured, threatened, discriminated against and arrested solely because they are Christians. They are being subjected to persecution and suffering, the extent of which we can hardly begin to comprehend, because of their faith. (Esper, 2004)

Dave spoke of the impending doom for Christians all over the world. He believes it’s only going to get worse for Christians; that what is happening in places like India, Sudan and Ethiopia will eventually become the reality for contemporary Western societies, and that the violence and persecution will continue to advance through its stages of development. An article in published in The Bible league of Canada on March 2011 said that Christian persecution in Ethiopia had reached crisis point:

The attacks on the Christians lasted a week, during which time the Muslims had burned down the homes of 30 Christian leaders, they had killed one Christian, wounded several others and burned down 69 churches, a Bible school and an orphanage.

Research suggests that there are varying expert opinions about the stages of persecution. Some document that there are three stages, some five, some seven. Dave has written about what he believes are the five main stages of persecution. The various stages that have been documented are all quite similar – either collapsed or expanded based on the number of stages.  

The first stage is people being criticised or mocked for their faith.

The second stage extends closely from the first, as disinformation is spread throughout society. ‘Disinformation begins more often than not in the media’ (Esper, 2004); Dave is explicit about the media as the primary tool used by evil forces to perpetuate the circulation of negative images and information. Most Western countries are in this second phase, where lies are represented as the truth and cultural beliefs about Christians and their faith begin to change.

The third phase is a shift in status of these people as they are deemed as a lower social class – inferior and unworthy of the same, fair treatment that others may receive. This is what is happening in India at the moment.

The fourth phase is when this inferiority shifts to a sub-human level, where they will be viewed as low lives or animals.

The fifth stage is torture, imprisonment, and ultimately genocide. This is what German Jews experienced, and Dave believes this will eventually be the reality for the Christian faith in contemporary society.

I didn’t even know that this was happening. Why isn’t there more of an outcry? Why aren’t we signing petitions and making posters? Kony got posters. I know what Beyonce and Jay Z named their daughter and that Tom Cruise’s daughter has millions of dollars worth of shoes but I didn’t know that Christians were being locked up with murderers for attending Church. I blame the media.

Image Source: http://unfriendlyatheist.tumblr.com/post/10140544160/christian-persecution-in-america

References:

Esper, J.M. 2004. ‘Anti-Christian bias: the five stages of religious persecution.’ Homiletic and Pastoral Review. Retrieved from:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1173387/posts

The Bible league of Canada. (2011).  Christian persecution in Ethiopia reaches crisis stage. Published 16 March 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.bibleleague.ca/news-detail-inter.php?id=36

www.religion.com

The following are my reflections about online religion based on the knowledge I gained from the interview and essay we just wrote. 

We certainly don’t need any more reason to take to the online world. There are already far too many of us who type more than we talk and click more than we walk. As contemporary society spends more and more time online, it is inevitable that a significant portion of Internet users are searching for something religious, online (but also in real life, I suppose). That there is greater accessibility to heaps of religious material does not mean that this platform of gathering information should become one’s primary means of practicing religion.  The Internet is a great platform for secondary practice, watching additional sermons, discovering new music, and accessing diverse arenas of information, stories and opinions.

But the Internet should not replace the real thing. Sharing your faith with your supportive community, growing and helping others grow through shared experience is living your faith. It’s not even that you’re not in a sacred space, that sitting in front of your computer in your pyjamas is profane; it’s that you’re not out there living your faith, actually practising your religion in the community. If you invited the entire congregation to your house to praise God, it would absolutely be sacred.  What is sacred about the church is not the building or the space as a place where God is worshipped. What is sacred about the church is the people and the coming together of people. As people join together in their like-mindedness and shared beliefs and love, faith in God is increased. It is these people and this community that is sacred, because it is in this community that people come together to give and heal and connect though their love for God and their dedication to Jesus.

We all know that this community isn’t really possible online, even though people have tried to deceive themselves into thinking that social media is about real community and interaction. Your faith is sacred; allow it to be the one thing that doesn’t involve you hunched in front of a screen.

Does popular culture dilute religion?

This is pretty generalised and may seem short-sighted, but these are the questions that filled my mind when I thought about this. And the answers that flowed weren’t the answers I wanted to hear. You see, I’m not religious, (I’m confused) and I often dream of having enough money to fill my wardrobe with designer clothes. Does this make me human? Or, does it make me one of those people letting the side down?

In such a fast-paced, mediated world, we have become conditioned to seek constantly. We look for instant gratification but we never seem fulfilled. Are we all constantly searching? Are those people who have chosen religious lifestyles still trying to find something more? Has materialism reached us all, or does it just lie with the superficial and the weak?

Pop culture provides us with instantly gratifying, although fleeting, answers to the questions we ask. The questions we are ask are determined by pop culture, and pop culture answers them the only way it knows how – commercially. Is leading a wholesome, religious lifestyle kept separate from pop culture? Probably not. People who have embedded their lives within a religious framework may not be seeking what pop culture can provide them with. They’re seeking to become better people, to sin less, to forgive more. But people who have embedded their lives within a mediated world, a commodity, a world informed by pop culture and celebrity obsessions, are seeking to find the money to buy that new pair of shoes or concert tickets to see that singer that we love. Is this the real difference? It seems almost impossible to refuse to allow pop culture to inform your sense of self. How sad is that. Does the answer to the materialism-obsessed, insecure society rest in a selfless worshiping of God? Is it even possible to really be selfless, to not chase money, to not become consumed by consumption?

I wrote a blog about spirituality versus religion a few weeks ago. I wasn’t sure why it mattered that new-aged, individualised spirituality was becoming more and more popular. Now it seems that this kind of religiosity, the kind that is highly personalised and tailored to suit your own needs does not allow the self-development necessary to become selfless, to stop chasing the high or the money or the fashion. If we adapt religion to fit our new, fast, 21^st Century lives, we’ll only become what the 21^st Century is, obsessed with things that are faster, more expensive, better. What if, we eventually lose sight of humanity and community because we’re always competing with each other? What if religion becomes so diluted by popular culture that we lose the grounding, the values and the selflessness that comes with it?

Family guy: anti-religious? Surely not.

Kozlovic stated that “there are many ways cinematically to signify a Christ-figure” (2004), this is certainly true for Family Guy. It seems depicting Christ figures in popular culture is all the rage. While most portrayals would be implicitly representative or symbolic of Christ or God, Family Guy depicts Jesus (albeit the producer’s version of Jesus) explicitly and without restraint. One particular episode depicts a world without Christianity, ‘a futuristic, happy world where Christianity ceases to exist. The reason it is so advanced is said to be because the Dark Ages never happened’ (Wikipedia, 2012).The show has been accused of being anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, and really just all together anti-religious. The show was criticised for ‘its negative treatment of religion’ arguing that it constantly mocks God (Wikipedia, 2012).

Apparently, the only real connection between scripture and film or television is the connection that the specific viewer supplies, subjectively: “there is no such entity as an objective cinematic Christ-figure” (Walsh and Aichele, 2002 xi).  While watching Family Guy, I’m not sure anyone could mistaken their Jesus or God for anything else. On a consistent basis, God is portrayed as a womaniser, a drunk and generally out of control. Jesus is portrayed as a magician.

James Snare, from Hillis Bible Church on Family Guy’s treatment of religion: “The irony is that their mockery and satire has probably done more to bring Jesus and Christianity into the minds of Generation Y than most preachers in the world (Jesus has appeared in Family Guy in 19 episodes…” (Batdorf, 2011)

The fact is: Seth Macfarlane is anti-everything that isn’t him. That’s the spirit (or maybe lack thereof) of the show; it’s part of the appeal (again, could be lacking).  Is it enough to argue that those offended by the show should just not watch it, or should the show be banned?

References: 

Batdorf, Turner. Family guy and Jesus in Popular Culture. 2011. http://ecarson.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/family-guy-and-jesus-in-popular-culture-by-turner-batdorf/

Kozlovic, Anton K. Fall. “The Structural Characteristics of the Cinematic Christ-figure.” In Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 8. 2004.

Walsh, Richard and Aichele, George. “Introduction: Scripture as Precursor.” In George Aichele and Richard Walsh, eds., vii-xvi. Screening Scripture: Intertextual Connections Between Scripture and Film. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 2002.

Wikipedia. Criticism of Family Guy. 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Family_Guy#Allegations_of_anti-religious_sentiments

Image Source: http://www.hulu.com/family-guy