Entries by tag: television
Maher crossed a line with his joke, but that's what comedians do. It's the taboos that make jokes funny, the fact that they refer to something that is painful or secret. The US history of enslaving Africans is not secret, but it is painful. The pain is felt by many of us, perhaps not the same for those with other colors of skin, but there is no doubt that it has marred many generations of our society. When/how will we ever get past it? Can the descendants of slavery ever forgive?
My great grandmother lived in the piedmont of North Carolina and owned a slave. Am I guilty? Should I be punished for that? I have been punished, and I'm sure I will be punished more. Do I deserve this punishment? I go out of my way to protect and include black people. Does my calling them black people make me a racist? How about brown people, red people, white people? Does my effort to be inclusive make me an ass? Is there any way for a white person to broach this subject without it being negatively received? I know I am priviledged but I am not immune to the attitudes of people around me of every description.
Racial relations get worse when people are unfairly punished. I was born with no ill will toward any group. Painful experiences in my life have led me to be wary of certain groups of people. Usually it is the people who have historically been abused who later become agressive or condescending. Jewish people have treated me badly, moreso than Blacks but some of them too have assumed that I am a racist and helped to make me into one. It is understandable, but it does not result in the whirled peas that we seek.
Those who say Maher should be fired for racism, seriously now? He did not call anyone else a nigger, he was referring to himself. His joke was on TV and showed that he understood the class system that was applied to black slaves in our nation. Who else but a comedian can publicly break taboos and get people talking about it? If we are to heal these wounds, we need to talk about it. Keeping it secret and taboo does nothing to reduce the pain. Time passing, generations shifting, that reduces the pain... but I wish we could do it faster.
This brings me to the question about words. The word nigger is apparently 100% taboo, at least for a white person to say on TV. It appears to me that it is just a word. It is not the word that I am worried about, it is the attitude. Certainly words and attitudes are linked, but it is not a 100% correlation between saying the word nigger and being a racist or promoting racism. I do not believe that Maher is a racist. I think he is trying to defuse the tensions around our dark history and get us all to laugh, together, and let the pain slip away.
What other words are taboo? I can't think of any that the two white men I live with react to as strongly. Honky? LOL.
I wish "bitch" were less acceptable. The word has been applied to me many times in my life, usually because I refused to do what a white man wanted me to do, or because I got angry. The word bitch has been used to suppress the will of a huge class of people, and it is still in common usage and acceptable in rap music and other places. I am allowed to get angry and to assert myself without deserving denigration. But women have been put down for a long time and a large segment of our population would like to keep us down. If Maher had said "I'm a bitch", I would not have been offended. That is not the same as him calling someone else a bitch.
I would like to hear from the descendants of slaves in the US as to whether they think Maher should be fired. I bet they will say no. He is doing his job, making us laugh out things that hurt.
My great grandmother lived in the piedmont of North Carolina and owned a slave. Am I guilty? Should I be punished for that? I have been punished, and I'm sure I will be punished more. Do I deserve this punishment? I go out of my way to protect and include black people. Does my calling them black people make me a racist? How about brown people, red people, white people? Does my effort to be inclusive make me an ass? Is there any way for a white person to broach this subject without it being negatively received? I know I am priviledged but I am not immune to the attitudes of people around me of every description.
Racial relations get worse when people are unfairly punished. I was born with no ill will toward any group. Painful experiences in my life have led me to be wary of certain groups of people. Usually it is the people who have historically been abused who later become agressive or condescending. Jewish people have treated me badly, moreso than Blacks but some of them too have assumed that I am a racist and helped to make me into one. It is understandable, but it does not result in the whirled peas that we seek.
Those who say Maher should be fired for racism, seriously now? He did not call anyone else a nigger, he was referring to himself. His joke was on TV and showed that he understood the class system that was applied to black slaves in our nation. Who else but a comedian can publicly break taboos and get people talking about it? If we are to heal these wounds, we need to talk about it. Keeping it secret and taboo does nothing to reduce the pain. Time passing, generations shifting, that reduces the pain... but I wish we could do it faster.
This brings me to the question about words. The word nigger is apparently 100% taboo, at least for a white person to say on TV. It appears to me that it is just a word. It is not the word that I am worried about, it is the attitude. Certainly words and attitudes are linked, but it is not a 100% correlation between saying the word nigger and being a racist or promoting racism. I do not believe that Maher is a racist. I think he is trying to defuse the tensions around our dark history and get us all to laugh, together, and let the pain slip away.
What other words are taboo? I can't think of any that the two white men I live with react to as strongly. Honky? LOL.
I wish "bitch" were less acceptable. The word has been applied to me many times in my life, usually because I refused to do what a white man wanted me to do, or because I got angry. The word bitch has been used to suppress the will of a huge class of people, and it is still in common usage and acceptable in rap music and other places. I am allowed to get angry and to assert myself without deserving denigration. But women have been put down for a long time and a large segment of our population would like to keep us down. If Maher had said "I'm a bitch", I would not have been offended. That is not the same as him calling someone else a bitch.
I would like to hear from the descendants of slaves in the US as to whether they think Maher should be fired. I bet they will say no. He is doing his job, making us laugh out things that hurt.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is just that, concerned. They've created a system by which any government-funded scientist can report the situation or the data if their science is challenged by politics. The UCS is not partisan, they are simply interested in maintaining this process by which we approach the truth in an objective manner. They want to see science continue in spite of the increasingly anti-science culture of our nation. Anyone who is not science trained is increasingly likely to have a negative opinion of science. Scientists in general are working to understand how things work which allows us to develop medicines and technologies that improve our lives. But television appears to be more entertaining when the doctor is the devil.
Recently my partner and I have watched almost two seasons of a series on Netflix called The 100. The premise is that a nuclear holocaust has occurred on earth, and the only humans surviving are the residents of the space stations that were in orbit when the earth was irradiated. The leaders there decide to send 100 (young and beautiful) criminals down to earth's surface ("the ground") after 200 years of waiting for the radiation to dissipate. The pretty criminals are outfitted with bracelets that transmit vital medical data back to the Ark (a composite of many space stations), so that those who stay in orbit can tell if they are dying of radiation poison or something else. It turns out there are some humans who've survived the radiation and are living on the earth's surface. There are also a set of humans who've survived because they are inside a radiation-sheltered palace underground. The evil elites living underground have been surviving by tapping the blood of the "grounders" who survive outdoors, and by enslaving them by way of addiction. The violence escalates as these groups all battle for dominance, rendering the show almost unwatchable by yours truly. I have never been habituated to bloodshed. I don't want to be.
The evil elites in their underground palace use science and medicine to live well, with infinite hydropower, delicious food, and vicious defenses from the humans on the surface. They only care about themselves, and consider that they have a right to the planet. They do not care about human suffering or life. Captured humans are either "harvested" for their blood or bone marrow or converted into slaves called "reapers" who do the work of fetching more humans to be harvested. The reapers are also cannibals, disposing of the harvested bodies. The medical scenes have two sides. One side of the wall shows white sheets and fluorescent lights like a hospital, and the other side of the wall is inhumane, with people in cages waiting to be used, giant needles penetrating people's necks and limbs, bone marrow being harvested without pain management or concern for the survival of the source person, and humans being scrubbed down like animals before a slaughter so that they can be hung upside down and drained of blood. It is utterly sickening.
The good people in the series are the "grounders"--barbarians who hack at each other with swords--and the "sky people" who crashed to earth and didn't die because they were smart and found a stash of guns. This series creates a world in which the educated are hateful and the barbarians and criminals are reasonable. It is a populist story without the overweening power of big business, and without the inquisitive media. The only media in sight is the television series itself.
This series is targetted at the young, and it is perpetuating a worldview in which science and medicine are evil and bad. Education is not valued except for the mandatory techie in each group who saves the day by being smart. Heartless "strength" is valued over and above love. This is the kind of television that sets us up culturally for longterm rebellious ignorance. If this one series has this perspective, how many more are there?
Recently my partner and I have watched almost two seasons of a series on Netflix called The 100. The premise is that a nuclear holocaust has occurred on earth, and the only humans surviving are the residents of the space stations that were in orbit when the earth was irradiated. The leaders there decide to send 100 (young and beautiful) criminals down to earth's surface ("the ground") after 200 years of waiting for the radiation to dissipate. The pretty criminals are outfitted with bracelets that transmit vital medical data back to the Ark (a composite of many space stations), so that those who stay in orbit can tell if they are dying of radiation poison or something else. It turns out there are some humans who've survived the radiation and are living on the earth's surface. There are also a set of humans who've survived because they are inside a radiation-sheltered palace underground. The evil elites living underground have been surviving by tapping the blood of the "grounders" who survive outdoors, and by enslaving them by way of addiction. The violence escalates as these groups all battle for dominance, rendering the show almost unwatchable by yours truly. I have never been habituated to bloodshed. I don't want to be.
The evil elites in their underground palace use science and medicine to live well, with infinite hydropower, delicious food, and vicious defenses from the humans on the surface. They only care about themselves, and consider that they have a right to the planet. They do not care about human suffering or life. Captured humans are either "harvested" for their blood or bone marrow or converted into slaves called "reapers" who do the work of fetching more humans to be harvested. The reapers are also cannibals, disposing of the harvested bodies. The medical scenes have two sides. One side of the wall shows white sheets and fluorescent lights like a hospital, and the other side of the wall is inhumane, with people in cages waiting to be used, giant needles penetrating people's necks and limbs, bone marrow being harvested without pain management or concern for the survival of the source person, and humans being scrubbed down like animals before a slaughter so that they can be hung upside down and drained of blood. It is utterly sickening.
The good people in the series are the "grounders"--barbarians who hack at each other with swords--and the "sky people" who crashed to earth and didn't die because they were smart and found a stash of guns. This series creates a world in which the educated are hateful and the barbarians and criminals are reasonable. It is a populist story without the overweening power of big business, and without the inquisitive media. The only media in sight is the television series itself.
This series is targetted at the young, and it is perpetuating a worldview in which science and medicine are evil and bad. Education is not valued except for the mandatory techie in each group who saves the day by being smart. Heartless "strength" is valued over and above love. This is the kind of television that sets us up culturally for longterm rebellious ignorance. If this one series has this perspective, how many more are there?
I don't normally watch TV. When I stay at my mom's house it is running all the time. My first impression is that the programming is sensational, and that there is very little depth to any of the reporting or storytelling. There is a lot of redundancy with so-called news programs repeating clips over and over. Next impression: pharmaceuticals dominate the advertising. I saw an ad for the "female viagra", and one for Humira that says "don't take this if you have an infection" and others that speak of liver failure and other dire consequence. Direct advertising of pharmaceuticals should be BANNED. As a doctor I would rather that people come to me with concern and complaints from their lives, not requests for drugs. Television programs Americans to be shallow, ignorant, and demanding. So unappealing.
I don't remember the stats but I saw in the news that most 4 or 5 year old Americans already have a television and a "mobile device" of their own. Most babies are exposed to mobile devices before age 1.
I don't remember the stats but I saw in the news that most 4 or 5 year old Americans already have a television and a "mobile device" of their own. Most babies are exposed to mobile devices before age 1.
We're on season 3, watching the last season of Lie to Me. The first season is perhaps the best, with plenty of good information mixed in about how to read people's emotions on their faces and bodies. The second season turns into a FBI story, and the third season is more police oriented---they were trying for a larger audience but apparently didn't get it. Only dorks like me who are curious about nonverbal communication stick with it.
The lead character, Cal Lightman, is a great study in body language. I don't know the actor's name but I am impressed. He does this thing I call the "Lightman Flop" which is to say that he jumps up into the air and lands on people's couches in a sprawled position that says "I own this place" and also "climb aboard" to any attractive women. He also shows his distrust of various characters with a toothy "smile" that isn't friendly at all---it's more of a snarl, and he is showing his teeth as if to say "Look out, I bite". One other notable thing that Cal the character does is he is very relaxed, intentionally relaxed. Being able to shrug off tension, to grimace and then release the face, is something most of us could use some practice at. Watching his swaying walk and the way his mouth hangs open when he is listening carefully has me experimenting with new ways of relaxing myself, and of conveying that I am paying my full attention. One of the recent episodes in season 3 showed him training a cop to fool lie detection specialists, and the main tidbit I took from it is "relax your cheeks" and keep after it, to avoid showing emotions that you don't want to show.
There's a lot that is said out loud in this program to teach people about nonverbal cues, but there is more that is not said, it is simply modeled, and it is up to the watcher to identify it.
The lead character, Cal Lightman, is a great study in body language. I don't know the actor's name but I am impressed. He does this thing I call the "Lightman Flop" which is to say that he jumps up into the air and lands on people's couches in a sprawled position that says "I own this place" and also "climb aboard" to any attractive women. He also shows his distrust of various characters with a toothy "smile" that isn't friendly at all---it's more of a snarl, and he is showing his teeth as if to say "Look out, I bite". One other notable thing that Cal the character does is he is very relaxed, intentionally relaxed. Being able to shrug off tension, to grimace and then release the face, is something most of us could use some practice at. Watching his swaying walk and the way his mouth hangs open when he is listening carefully has me experimenting with new ways of relaxing myself, and of conveying that I am paying my full attention. One of the recent episodes in season 3 showed him training a cop to fool lie detection specialists, and the main tidbit I took from it is "relax your cheeks" and keep after it, to avoid showing emotions that you don't want to show.
There's a lot that is said out loud in this program to teach people about nonverbal cues, but there is more that is not said, it is simply modeled, and it is up to the watcher to identify it.
This might end up being important:
Under the deal announced Friday, Verizon will pay $3.6 billion to Comcast, Time Warner and Bright House Networks to use a swath of cellphone airwaves that the cable giants own but do not use. That would cement Verizon’s status as the dominant wireless carrier and give it access to valuable spectrum at a time when its primary rival — AT&T — is struggling to expand its network through a controversial proposed merger with T-Mobile.
The rest of the story on the Washington Post
Under the deal announced Friday, Verizon will pay $3.6 billion to Comcast, Time Warner and Bright House Networks to use a swath of cellphone airwaves that the cable giants own but do not use. That would cement Verizon’s status as the dominant wireless carrier and give it access to valuable spectrum at a time when its primary rival — AT&T — is struggling to expand its network through a controversial proposed merger with T-Mobile.
The rest of the story on the Washington Post
The new finding is that 10 year old children of persistently depressed mothers have larger amygdalas. This new finding makes me wonder.......about our society. But-- a little orientation for those of you who don't read about the brain all the time. The amygdala is part of the mammalian or limbic brain, and it is the part that helps us feel fear and loathing, instinctive attraction and lust, and mystical or religious experiences. In other words, the amygdala drives a whole lot of instinct and emotion, and is completely distinct from rational thought. Another recent study showed that political conservatives have bigger amygdalas, whereas political liberals have bigger frontal cortices. So my question is this: is our current generational swing to the right side of the politic spectrum due to a generation of depressed mothers? Or were these mothers inattentive for other reasons? Did the advent of television cause a rewiring of our brains on a population level? Just asking. What other factors could have caused a generational swing toward amygdalic dominance??
( (new article from medscape)Collapse )
( (new article from medscape)Collapse )
Times article on same subject matter as lecture:
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2020815,00.html
( notes from 1/10/11 lecture by Daniel L Mark, MD, PhDCollapse )
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2020815,00.html
( notes from 1/10/11 lecture by Daniel L Mark, MD, PhDCollapse )
Nice post here by a medical student contemplating the effect of television doctors on the flesh and blood practice of medicine: http://boards.medscape.com/forums?128@158.qasxa9gFZrf@.2a09cdc7!comment=1
( the text of an interesting blogpost, visit the link above to comment to authorCollapse )
( the text of an interesting blogpost, visit the link above to comment to authorCollapse )
I got enough responses to my bit about preparing to resist radiation that it occurs to me to wonder, is the media really working so hard to inflame panic? Or are they trying to keep us from panicking so that we will all just go to the mall and buy movie tickets instead of concerning ourselves with radiation? I have no idea what the media is up to, because aside from this outward mental spew I participate in it very little. I do not watch TV. I do catch a few minutes of NPR from time to time, and last I heard was some expert saying that the situation at the plant there has surpassed the level of the Three Mile Island meltdown. That was enough for me to know that radiation has already been emitted. I'm not panicked....but I'm interested. These ARE interesting times. I'm fascinated, in fact, with the homogenaity of the responses I've gotten. So everybody thinks it is a hoax? What is informing you of this certainty? And what makes you so sure you are right? I'll have to wait for my other bit a media---a weekly called The Week---before I will have any more media hype to pass on.
Comments