Posts

Many of us are familiar with the popular ‘90s sitcom, Friends. It is a comedy about six White, straight best friends who live in New York and the integration of their lives as they struggle through relationships, jobs, fights, children, and other dramatic experiences. As a fan of the show, I can say it is very funny and entertaining when you need a laugh. However, as you may predict, the show also contains many problematic themes that are hard to miss when examining the show’s content with a critical eye. For the sake of this project, I will focus on just one problematic theme that is evident across the entire show: the transphobia and stigma around trans people. 

There is one main trans person that is featured in the show and that is the father of Chandler (Chandler is one of the six best friends) who has come out as a transwoman. During the entire show, Chandler is mocked by his peers, even his close friends, for having a father that is not a man. He claims that he has been traumatized by the experience of witnessing his father, Helena Handbasket, transition into becoming a woman and instead of receiving proper help or communicating with his father, Chandler uses his experiences for comedic purposes, and his trauma is a running joke. Additionally, when Chandler and his friends are around his father, they act as if she is some type of character, not a person. When they speak about her, they use he/his pronouns at times, and the phrase “gay dad” at other times, completely disregarding her preferred pronouns. 

I would argue that the obvious issue concerning transness in Friends is a direct result of clashing identities between straight men/women and a transwoman. The interactions between the straight best friends and a trans woman was something new to them, and it was difficult for the friends to interact respectfully. During the ‘90s, the straight friends were in a place of privilege and failed to put themselves in the shoes of a trans woman. The overall production of this sitcom always reminds me of Spivak’s concept of the subalterns and the lack of voice subalterns possess. Friends was produced and released during a time in which producers were less educated on transness and representation in pop culture, and while this is no excuse, I feel as though they did not know how to handle this theme. The subalterns in this example are trans people who were left out of the conversation regarding the production of this show. Their exclusion from the discussion is evident considering the transphobia and offensive content in the show. Even the woman portraying Chandler’s father is a ciswoman which further proves how trans people have been positioned as the subalterns. 

From this show’s content, I don’t think the creators were trying to be offensive on purpose, but their lack of education on the topic was surely evident and as a result, their show displayed problematic themes. While the content in Friends doesn’t completely deserve to be celebrated, I think we can examine the sitcom with a critical eye so as to understand how certain time frames and identities shape certain content and how important it is to avoid creating a subaltern group.

Driving Miss Daisy: Movie/Text Review 

The movie Driving Miss Daisy is a movie about an African American man named Hoke Colburn, who drives a wealthy white woman named Daisy Werthan. The story takes place during the time of of the freedom marches of Dr. Martine Luther King Jr. Over the course of the movie we get a glimpse into Hoke Colburn and his longing to be an “educated” and working American in order to be independent. Hoke cannot read or write, but earns his income as being a charismatic and kind taxi driver. Yet, he is stuck with no other way out then driving Miss Daisy for his form of income. During the course of the movie we see Hoke and the way that he is treated in comparison to Miss Daisy and her friends. We also learn on the opposite side of the spectrum that the only reason Miss Daisy can gain her independence as an elderly single woman is through Hoke, which creates an interesting parallel. Although the two unlikely candidates become friends in the end, there are several instances in the movie when Hoke questions why he is treated inferiorly to a white individual.

After watching this movie recently, it made me think back to Spivak’s “Can the Subaltern Speak?” The character Hoke played by Morgan Freeman, had a lot of brilliant ideas and suggestions in certain scenarios but was put down or rejected completely due to his race and the color of his skin. Miss Daisy being from the opposite side of the spectrum, as a wealthy white woman, had the final say in everything (wether it was the right or wrong answer). Further, this shows the systematic injustice of power loss just due to the color of one person’s skin. Just because Hoke was a person of color, Miss Daisy refused to listen to his ideas or give him any sort of power, creating this subaltern position for Hoke.

Even though the movie points toward serious issues Martin Luther King Jr. was protesting against, there were still often scenes in which humor was involved. I think the overall point of the movie was to get the audience to understand where each character was coming from and also show how each individual’s background created the divide between the main character’s of Hoke and Miss Daisy. I also believe the movie wanted project to the audience the feeling of being inferior as a black person to that of a white person, especially during the particular time in history in which the movie took place. All the more it brings to light and makes audiences reflect on how African Americans are being treated in today’s world.

“Mulan” is a 1998 American animated musical adventure film produced by Walt Disney Pictures. The plot takes place in China during the Han dynasty where Mulan, the daughter of a very old aged warrior impersonates a man to take her father’s place when there is an invasion. Mulan knows that her father’s health and age will interfere with his time in combat, so she protects him and fights not only for her father, but for herself, proving that she was more than just a housewife. Women are taught growing up to fulfill their gender roles as a woman, like cooking, cleaning and being a good housewife. We are taught at a very young age that there is a difference between masculinity and femininity, and since this movie is often shown to children, it starts them thinking about the differences in gender at a young age. Over time though, we have seen that women can do things that men do and succeed beyond their gender roles. We see in the movie Mulan how she breaks gender roles when she proves that women can be tough and endure the pain and sacrifice men did when going to war. 

As the movie plays out, we can see ideas that are parallel with what we have learned in class. For instance, de Beauvoir’s theory of Other is present in this plot. Mulan is oppressed as a woman and she has to hide her true gender because she is underrepresented in the warfare, so this could be considered Otherness as women are looked down upon and treated differently. The men in this movie are considered the One as they have power over the woman in this movie, being stereotypically the more powerful ones in the war. In addition to Otherness, we can also refer to Spivak’s Subaltern, “Can the Subaltern Speak.” Spivak says “identity is its difference.” In this movie, Mulan, as the non-represented subject (women) hides her true identity to make it evident that her gender does compare and even succeed beyond the comparison to the more powerful/dominant one (men). The producers of this movie therefore, inspires conversations about gender roles, power and injustice and we can see how Mulan’s Otherness appeals to the viewers of this movie as she shocks the world with her ability to overcome gender stereotypes in war and even sparks conversations of stereotypes of everyday life.  

At face value, 28 Days Later is another zombie flick: a film about a group of people who struggle for survival in a twisted version of our own world in which some event has resulted in the transformation of most of the human population into mindless, angry cannibals. While the premise of many of these films is the same, one must not forget to look for ways in which this genre may critique our world through its own. Fiction offers a way for us to view the flaws in which we act as people because it presents a world, often one that is not spectacularly different from our own, through which we can view the absurdities and contradictions of our way of life from an outside perspective. In the context of the disaster genre, we are shown the degree to which we take our comfortable and convenient lives for granted. Disaster films, especially ones in which the main characters are isolated or pressed for survival, can and do offer valuable critiques on our fallacious social constructs.

Many would be surprised to find that 28 Days Later, a film which presents to its audience an experience that pretends to be nothing more than a horror film featuring armies of flesh-eating enemies, takes advantage of its setting and circumstances to make valuable points about gender equality.

A common trope in zombie films remains the idea that humans can be enemies to the same degree as zombies, with the main separation between human enemies and the undead being the nature of their malice. In 28 Days Later, the protagonists Jim and Selena arrive at a military compound which presents itself as a refuge from the hordes of people infected with the Rage virus. It is later at this compound that they learn that the refuge is a trap in order to capture female survivors, who are then supposed to be inducted as slaves in an attempt to repopulate the United Kingdom.

28 Days Later is unique among films of its type in that it critiques the common damsel-in-distress archetype by featuring the female protagonist as strong and competent. Selena is often responsible for protecting or saving other characters, and in this sense, she rejects the classification outlined by Simone de Beauvoir in her introduction to The Second Sex, in which women are viewed as being different from the default, or as a simple derivative of man.

With the world in ruins, 28 Days Later is able to pick apart assumptions we have about gender. With the collapse of the world’s traditional systems of social control, the various stereotypes and negative dualities of gender fall with it. Selena’s rejection of these categorizations represents a return to normal. Upon my first viewing of the film, one quote stood out to me as proof of the film’s deeper meaning:

“If you look at the whole life of the planet, we, you know, man has only been around for a few blinks of an eye. So, if the infection wipes us all out… that is a return to normality.”

To say that the disaster genre is capable of showing a world without social constructs is an understatement. In fact, as illustrated by the quote above, the film is aware of it.

Parasite is a must see film this year. It was writtened and directed by Bong Joon-ho. Among its many awards this season, Parasite won four Oscars including Best Picture, Best Director, International Feature Film, and Best Orgininal Screenplay. Parasite was more than deserving of every accolade it received, and is my number one recommendation for an insightful film to watch. Bong Joon-ho explores wealth disparity in South Korea through a social satire. The plot begins as the Kim family infiltrates the home of the Park family as employees. As the film progresses, the plot line only gets more complex as the cast plays out an upstairs-downstairs family dynamic.  

The movie is set in South Korea in two separate locations. The juxtaposition between the urban basement apartment of the Kim family and the suburban mansion of the Park family parallels the relationship between the two families in the movie. In one particular scene, the Kim family comes home exhausted to find their half-basement apartment flooded with sewage water. In direct opposition, the Park family is inconvenienced by the rain ruining his camping trip. This moment marks a pivotal recognition of social divide for the Kim family. As the viewer, we are left to decide who is the real “parasite” in the struggle of class aspirationalism.  In a larger sense, their families represent a dangerous gap in classes. This injustice is often overlooked by those who ignore the realities of poverty.

Although it is completely in Korean, it has widley circulated Western audiences. In the context of this class, I think it is important to mention that most Americans, myself included, do not watch films in other languages often. We are missing out on so much cultural awareness and insight by only limiting ourselves to movies that fit our Western agenda. This is why I wanted to highlight Parasite as a film that really opened my eyes to a gap in my education as well as excellent commentary on wealth disparity, and recommend this film as material for this course in the future. 

In the television show, Grand Army, various issues are addressed that create a realistic appeal to audiences. The plot of the show revolves around high school students that encounter identity crises’ which play a role in their social development as they transition into adulthood. It realistically depicts the lives of teenagers without romanticization of the plot or the happy, unrealistic endings. These characters are forced to deal with adult issues at an age that is meant to be enjoyable. By watching the characters in Grand Army who experience such issues firsthand, the audience is able to understand and empathize with such characters they feel they may know personally. One character in particular, Joey, is someone who voices her opinions, fights against the objectification of women, and explores sexuality without caring how it’s perceived. Through her, we witness realistic conversations that arise during adolescence which aren’t commonly portrayed in television. Overall, it shows the value in bringing awareness to such topics which are commonly dismissed because of their heaviness. 

In the show, we follow Joey, a high school student advocating for feminist beliefs that heavily focus on the objectification of women. She is a character who unapologetically remains confident in her femininity, and is heavily supported by her three male best friends, George, Luke, and Tim, who are all considered the most popular students of their class. Most of her class supports her in these empowering endeavors, but in the third episode, we see an unforgivable betrayal when Joey and her friends get drunk. On that night, George and Luke rape her while Tim silently watches. When she finally speaks out concerning her rape, many of the same classmates who formerly supported her refused to believe that her own best friends could do such a thing. She is then accused of being perceived as a “slut” and a liar for being open about her sexuality and assumed to be the one who initiated the events that had led to the “alleged” rape. Throughout the rest of the season, Joey rapidly falls into a state of depression and uncertainty, showcasing the effects of sexual assault/rape as a high school student. In conversations with her therapist and lawyer, she came to the conclusion that her words didn’t hold as much value over the boys who were simply trying to protect themselves while she was looking for justice. In a session with her therapist Joey explains that, “They were acting like nothing happened. Or no, like it was just some f*cked up orgy. And the whole week I was questioning what I was remembering, which is.. Which I couldn’t. And I’m just so f*cking angry. They don’t get to do that to me. But now I’m the bad guy.” … “I’m already getting texts. I’m ‘f*cking them over.’ And even though they did what they did, and they did, I’m still f*cking them.” … “And it’s probably obvious, but you know what sucks more than anything?” … “They’re my friends. And I love them. Or I loved them. And part of me feels like I’m betraying them. And then I also don’t regret what I’m doing, so I’m just-” (Episode 5, 22:52).

In connection to Gayatri Spivak’s theoretical work, “Can the Subaltern Speak?”, the audience witnesses Joey and her experience ignored by many she once believed supported her. Regardless of the truth, others quickly assumed that it was Joey’s fault and that the boys had played along in a game that she started. While the boys are given the benefit of the doubt despite their being guilty, Joey is shamed for being the victim and for being honest about her rape. Throughout Grand Army, it is evident in the way that people easily assumed the events without truly listening to the victim. The show addresses the fact that these events do not affect survivors only once, but rather long term through their lack of trust, uneasiness around men, and the inability to fully process their traumatic experiences. For Joey, it does not end in high school, but will remain with her for the rest of her life.

George: You were all up on Tim’s d*ck, then five minutes later, you’re up on the both of us. I mean, that’s on you. Luke: Did you ever say no? (Episode 9, 17:32)

Joey: I was hysterically crying. I tried to push you guys off of me. I f*cking bled. (Episode 9, 17:32)

     In the 2019 film, What Men Want is about a sports agent named Ali Davis who faces obstacles at work with her male colleagues. For example, she was passed up for a well-deserved promotion and was told by her boss “just stay in your lane” instead of listening to her and giving her a chance. In the film, she visits a psychic who ends up giving her the ability to read men’s thoughts. Throughout the movie, she uses this new ability to her advantage at work as she tries to climb up the latter. The audience gains a good understanding on what it’s like for a woman to work in a male-dominated career field. She is excluded from certain social gatherings at work because of her gender, is often overlooked to handle big responsibilities, and overall isn’t taken as seriously as her male counterparts. For example, there is a regular scheduled poker game with the employees at the agency and have never once invited Ali to attend. She found out about the secret poker game with her new ability and surprised everyone at the gathering. At the table, one of the men asks Ali, “Little lady, what are you doing at the big boys table huh?” This film tests gender stereotypes and showcases how an ambitious woman may be treated in a male dominated industry. 

     Ali is treated as the “Other” whereas all her other male counterparts are seen as the “One.” She is considered unfavorable in the workplace by both her colleagues and clients. These obstacles push her to fight the gender stereotypes in the workplace specifically. The Othering concept is prevalent throughout the film. In the end, she succeeds and can be considered the “One.” However, it took a lot of perseverance and determination to get to that point. The movie also touches on the idea of the subaltern which is someone who is not heard from while experiencing oppression or discrimination. Generally speaking, some women in careers may be seen as subalterns as they face inequality in the workforce.

     It was interesting to note that the film is categorized as a comedy, so serious topics such as gender inequality in the workplace were demonstrated in a lighthearted way. The main character is a smart, independent, ambitious career driven woman. This isn’t seen as common in the media and the creator highlights these characterizations for women. It’s empowering to see this as there have been many instances of injustices with gender. The creator wants to break the stereotypes towards women in media, and in the workplace so they can be seen as equals with their male colleagues which the film does a good job in emphasizing.

In the movie, Princess and the Frog, it is set in New Orleans and we see a young black woman named Tiana. Tiana lived her whole life working hard to make enough money to open up her own restaurant. One day everything hit a bump in the road when Prince Naveen shows up in her life. The only problem is that Prince Naveen has been turned into a frog by the evil Dr. Facilier. Naveen mistakes Tiana for a princess and kisses her, thinking he might defeat the curse put upon him. Only to find out he turns Tiana into a frog as well. The two of them thus go on an adventure through the bayou in search of finding a way to reverse the spell put on them. Throughout this movie we see a lot of problems with race and gender. if we look outside the story line and focus on the movie itself, we can see that Princess Tiana is one of the first main character in a Disney movie to be Black. This movie depicts the black community in New Orleans and how they live their day to day lives. The problem with this movie is that we see Tiana, a black woman working a minimum wage job as a waitress, and this girl named Charlotte. Charlotte is a white woman who comes from a very wealthy family. In this movie we see people of wealth being white and we see the poorer community as black. Tiana works insanely hard to get what she wants out of society while charlotte, who is friends with Tiana, does not have to work at all. This can be seen as a problem with power and injustice because the black community is depicted as less than the white community. I think that this movie expects us to take away that no matter where you come from or what you’re going through, you can achieve amazing things. Tiana started out barely making and ends the movie rich and achieving her dreams. We can reflect this back to some other works we have read in class, like “Can the Subaltern Speak?”. We see the author talk about women of color who ultimately are not the same level as men, meaning they are of lower rank in society. We see this in the Princess and the Frog because Tiana starts off the movie making ends meet, while Prince Naveen and even Charlotte’s dad, have lots of money and are of higher social class.