J.Says Online
  • Home
  • Entertainment
    • THE J. LIST
    • J.LIST BLOG
    • GENERAL HOSPITAL
  • Seriously Beyonce`, WTH?!?
  • Society/Culture
  • So This is Life?
    • J.Says Daily
    • J.Says & the "Quarter-Life Crisis"
  • Contact/ Info
  • Feedback

V. Stiviano & Donald Sterling: Sexism at its Best 

5/29/2014

0 Comments

 
PictureSterling with alleged girlfriend, Stiviano
I probably don’t need to recap, but just in case you hadn’t heard for some reason, audio recordings of NBA Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling going on a racist tangent leaked in late April. The league took near-immediate action, placing an indefinite, broad-reaching ban on Sterling from NBA-affiliated activities, in addition to a 2.5 million-dollar fine. League Commissioner Adam Silver declared he’d insist that the Board of Governors force a sale of the Clippers. The general public was appalled by Sterling’s statements, but then, a funny thing happened on the way to the game. The media had a peculiar fascination with V. Stiviano, the woman in which Sterling was having his salacious conversation with. He was chastising her for making it apparent that she associates with black people by taking pictures with sports legend Magic Johnson (she herself is black and Mexican). Just as surprising as Sterling’s remarks was Stiviano’s fairly composed-and almost apologetic-tone on the tape. I personally was taken aback by this and found it sad and self-disrespecting that a person of color would surround themselves with someone so racist for any reason, but that wasn’t the primary reaction to her demeanor by the press, nor was there sympathy or concern that Sterling may be verbally abusing or controlling someone in his circle. The interpretation of her composure was instead that she was the one who leaked the tape. I never wondered who released the recording or why, because, who cared? The bigotry of a person in power in an organization full of African-Americans was exposed. Shouldn’t we be applauding the individual(s) who let the proverbial cat out of the bag (or at least be glad that they did it)? Apparently not.

Without any confirmation that Stiviano was behind the tape’s disclosure (not that it actually mattered), she was stalked by the paparazzi and vilified. Dug-up information on her background revealed that she had plastic surgery, a criminal record (which included arrests for petty theft and driving under the influence), several aliases and that Sterling’s wife, Rochelle, was suing Stiviano for the return of property and expensive vehicles purchased for her by Donald. The court documents also detailed that Rochelle was accusing her of being a seducer of wealthy older men (there is almost a 50-year age difference between Stiviano and Donald). From this it was deduced that Stiviano was a scorned snake of a mistress who sought out to record Sterling and sell the damning audio for a quick buck and maybe 15 minutes of fame. Even if this assumption is true to any or all extent, again, who cares? Does it change the fact that Sterling made those comments and is a bigot? I saw one news panel where the entire broadcast of the story was just about Stiviano and the hosts angrily theorized about her “motives.” Aren’t we mad at the racist or nah? Isn’t he the true villain here?

Stiviano began to take interviews and tell her side of the story. One would think the primary questions would be to establish if Sterling had a pattern of discrimination and hate speech, the details of the conversation in mind and what Stiviano may have endured while around him, but it was all about the nature of her relationship with the embattled team-owner. A relationship that, despite Sterling frequently appearing with her at events and games, no one examined, detected or inquired about. No one seemed to notice or care that he possibly had a mistress before. In one of the more disgusting and poor instances of journalism I’ve ever seen, “Entertainment Tonight” correspondent Brooke Anderson repeatedly asked Stiviano if she had sexual relations with Sterling (episode airing on 5/21/14), making sarcastic facial expressions, comments and groans each time Stiviano denied, even saying she didn’t believe Stiviano. When Stiviano became (understandably) perturbed, Anderson accused her of being “combative” and “defensive.” Afterwards, while at the ET panel table, Anderson and the other hosts dissected paparazzi footage of Stiviano, labeling her as attention-seeking for wearing a visor to cover her face from cameras and flaunting herself when she wasn’t wearing head gear. When she asserts herself under Anderson’s berating and aggressive interviewing, she’s “combative,” but her polite greeting and compliments pre-interview were to “butter [Anderson] up.” I directly tweeted Anderson: “How dare you call V. combative when you berated her and continued to repeat questions because you didn’t get the answer you wanted. I thought interviews were to get a person’s perspective, not convince a journalist of their truth.”

Somehow, it’s been more important to discern whether or not V. Stiviano is a “slut” that outed a man for gain, versus the bigger story from whence she came. We claim that Sterling’s mindset is deplorable, yet, we’ve sought to punish and scrutinize the person we believe to have brought it to light. A sin is a sin and a wrong is a wrong, but the media’s irrelevant and unbalanced focus on Stiviano would imply that possibly being a mistress and possibly outing a man is worse than being a racist. Why is this happening? It’s because of sexism. 1) Regardless of gender, infidelity is frowned upon. However, because promiscuity is a more acceptable and expected behavior for men than women, “the other woman” or a woman who cheats is often more heavily ostracized (and for a longer period) than a male in the same position. Indicia of this is how the masculine forms of the word “mistress” (ex. lover, paramour, kept man) are either lesser-known or don’t withhold the same level of insult. Furthermore, there are multiple slurs to call promiscuous women (ex. slut, skank, whore, hoe, tramp, etc.), but hardly any for men. In effect, these words are so closely tied to women, that “man” is used as a pre-fix to apply it to a male (ex. man-whore). 2) Women who challenge or disrupt the gender-hierarchy of control (women are to be in a subordinate role when amongst men) are generally viewed as an enemy of values and/or men. Stiviano recording an incriminating conversation that ultimately took a man out of his station of power makes her deserving of retribution.

Even after giving a far from humble and remorseful interview with Anderson Cooper, Donald Sterling will likely spend the last of his years rather comfortable and manage to get back into business-life. Meanwhile, V. Stiviano will probably struggle to evade her now destroyed image for at least a decade because of a sexist witch-hunt to shield a xenophobe. Sexism at its best. 

0 Comments

Petraeus, Facebook & Your Job

12/3/2012

2 Comments

 
Picture
David Petraeus
As most likely know, highly decorated and revered military general and CIA director David Petraeus resigned in early November after his affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, was exposed. Petraeus joins the lengthy list of American government officials caught in extramarital scandal, but this time, the response of the media and public was a little different. Usually angry, unforgiving, critical and demanding a resignation from a position of power, crowds seemed to feel sorry for the officer and wished he hadn’t stepped down. Does this mean our morality is deteriorating as a culture or have we become more benevolent and merciful? I think we’re just starting to better evaluate relevancy.

In the years after President Bill Clinton’s 2001 impeachment in which he lied under oath about the details of his own affair, many in media began to question whether the punishment fit the crime. Yes, he broke the law, but media and political analysts were looking at a bigger picture. Some made the argument that our cultural reactions to the transgressions of public figures is so harsh, that it could’ve pushed Clinton to lie to cover it up and we ended up losing a president who stabilized the economy over an issue that only affected his home life. Taking it a step further, imagine the reduction on smear campaigns if we only responded to scandals that correlate with the duty of public office. Politicians might have to actually rely on only politics to get ahead of their opponents, but that’s another issue for another day, I suppose.

Picture
All of these events have us talking about fairness and when a personal indiscretion should cause you to lose your job, consider resignation or be denied a position (by the way, as of this time, it hasn’t been concluded that Petraeus’ affair lead to confidential information being compromised). It’s been widely reported that employers and college admission counselors are now taking advantage of social media and browsing what they can of candidate profiles before making a decision. This is absolute crap to me. I have so many issues with this practice. First, let me say I find a lot of things about the traditional interview process discriminatory and unfair (for example, the over-emphasis on appearance. Not everyone can afford nice dress-wear, but they might be able to do a job well). Assessing a candidate based on their Facebook or Twitter page opens all kinds of doors for discrimination, not to mention it’s an infringement of privacy (are they going to ask for personal diaries or talk to our priests next?). If job-seekers are regularly discriminated against in the traditional process with laws in place, imagine the rate of prejudice when social media is factored in. Who’s to say that an employer won’t disqualify a job-seeker simply because they have opposite political views or over something petty like being a fan of Britney Spears? It might be over an unsavory status or suggestive picture, but how do we formally and fairly define “unsavory” and “suggestive” and how it correlates to the job position? Formal background checks, job references, resumes and interviews should tell you all you need to know about a candidate’s ability to perform a task well. Whether they hit the gay bar last week has nothing to do with it. 

The reality of it is if everyone was denied a job for personal gaffes, no one would have work. My stance is that if one’s missteps or personal choices doesn’t harm anyone or literally damage an establishment or company, they should be able to get and keep a job. Thoughts?

2 Comments

My Beef with Women's Magazines

8/17/2010

1 Comment

 
Picture
The mind-numbing slush that is Cosmo.
I am a self professed magazine whore. If someone I adore is on the cover, I’m buying it. If there are enough features or articles that look interesting to me, I’ll likely get it. The amount of magazines I have in my home are insane. I never throw them out, no matter how old they are. I look at them as history, a “sign of the times.” As much of a “magazine whore” as I am, I’ve recently developed a beef with a lot of women’s magazines. I noticed that when you look at some of the magazine covers, most of the headlines have something to do with beauty or sex/relationships. I find it agitating that MEDIA MADE FOR US narrows us down to blush and dick. It’s like really? That’s all we are?? Sure, style and relationships are elements in the average woman’s life, and there’s nothing wrong with it being covered in the magazine, but other things should accompany style and relationships. The average woman’s magazine cover has 0-1 headlines about personal growth and development. These same magazines praise certain celebrity women for being strong, smart or groundbreaking, but the overall material they print doesn’t encourage or foster the same characteristics in their readers. It’s contradictory and annoying. Now, there are definitely some great women’s magazines that have the perfect blend of beauty, relationships, life and personal growth; they’re just in the minority. 

There was one particular instance where my beef went into overdrive. In fall of 2008, Beyonce` was getting ready to release her album “I Am…Sasha Fierce” and a film, “Cadillac Records,” in which she was playing music great, Etta James. Beyonce` also had finished filming another movie, “Obsessed.” Despite all of these projects, most of the magazines she covered during that time focused on her nuptials to rapper/entrepreneur Jay-Z earlier that year. One magazine did a 5pg article on her, and spent most of the interview probing her for wedding details. Beyonce` has always been quite private, so the probing was a waste of time in my opinion, but that’s beside the point. Anyhow, one cover read “Beyonce` on playing Etta, her new marriage and baby plans with Jay-Z.” Beyonce` was not pregnant at the time (and isn’t pregnant now as far as I know), so they could have deleted the baby line and mentioned her album. But noooooo……Another read “Beyonce’s world tour!: she much rather be in bed with Jay-Z.” I guess now that she’s married, she’s not a real person anymore. Jay-Z, however still is. When Jay-z graced men’s magazine covers in the fall of 2009 to promote his latest project the “Blueprint 3,” the headlines were quite different: “The personal success issue: insights and advice on making it now from Tommy Hilfiger and Jay-Z.” 
“Now 14 albums deep, with over 30 million records sold, plus rocawear, roc nation, fragrances, the nets, 40/40 and Beyonce`, is Jay-Z bigger than hip-hop?” 
“Jay-Z: Music Mogul”

Notice how Beyonce` was only mentioned in one headline, and at the end at that. With the exception of magazines like Maxim and FHM, most men’s magazines feature multiple cover headlines in regard to music, movies, politics, money/business, style, sports and leisure IN ADDITION to headlines about women. Who would’ve thought that men’s magazines would be more multi-dimensional than women’s? Ladies, make sure you’re absorbing some more productive material outside of magazines, and if you DO pick up a mag, pick one that’s more well-rounded.

1 Comment

I HATE THE MEDIA!!!

5/31/2010

1 Comment

 
I hate all forms of celebrity news media. This includes blogs, ironically. I hate them because they use a lot of “sneaky journalism.” They word and do things in crafty ways so they aren’t technically lying and won’t get sued; meanwhile America “drinks the Kool-Aid” and believes everything they’re told. People believe it because they wouldn’t expect “professional” news media to purposely lie. Everything comes down to dollars and cents. Celebrity news media has money to make and attention to get, and nothing makes money quite like scandal. At any cost, they will exaggerate, assume and “create” scandal for gain. Now that you know that they’re lying to you, I’m going to tell you all the clever ways that they do it.

1. Where they don’t have hard facts or answers, they provide suspicions, unconfirmed details and speculation.
Here’s an example I got from a TV celebrity news program’s website about Michael Jackson’s memorial service a WEEK before it happened: “The service is liable to happen soon, and artists like Usher and Beyonce` will probably perform to pay tribute. Diana Ross and Quincy Jones, those closest to Michael over the years, are sure to be there to eulogize him.”
It’s obvious that they didn’t have any confirmed details about his service; otherwise, they would’ve noted the details as valid and stated who they were confirmed by. Other indicators that the report was speculation are the use of the words “liable”, “probably” and “are sure”; these are all assuming and anticipatory terms. As it turned out, Beyonce` did not perform, and Diana Ross and Quincy Jones were not at the service. Instead of just waiting until they actually had some confirmed details, they jumped the gun with no evidence to gain ratings.

2. Tricky wording.
As mentioned in point #1, wording plays a role in news media deception. Although the words in the Michael Jackson example were anticipatory, they’re designed to go unoticed and sound factual. The word “sure” is similar to “guaranteed”, and the viewer is supposed to walk away taking the story for fact.  Another example of tricky wording is a magazine who called Mariah Carey’s “Glitter” album “low-selling.” The album went platinum, which is a million records. That’s not a small amount. A million is just “low-selling” in comparison to Carey’s other projects. Using the phrase “low-selling” perpetuates the idea the album was a failure. Media uses wording to get THEIR idea across, be it fact or not. Their main goal is to make things sound dramatic, scandalous or attention getting.

3. Sources (Or lack thereof).
You’ve heard it a thousand times. Most stories printed in celebrity news magazines and on blogs use the phrases “sources say”, “insiders say” or “according to sources close to…” A report given on television today said: “Barbara Walters underwent heart valve replacement surgery on Wednesday and is expected to be released within the next few days, multiple sources tell us. Barbara's rep tells us, "No announcements are being made at this time." Despite a lack of a professional confirmation from Barbra’s staff, it’s maintained that Walters had her surgery via nameless, faceless sources. For all you know, the “sources” may not even exist.

3.  Convenient Soundbytes.
This happens ALL the time. Depending on what story they’re trying to sell, celebrity media will take a single sentence or 30 seconds out of an hour interview and use it to prove THEIR point, taking the statement out of context. For example, I could have said “It’s so hard to pick just one male actor as a favorite. I don’t have a favorite. I love all of them! Johnny Depp, Denzel Washington, Zac Efron, all of them!!!” But, the media could say “We asked her who her favorite actor was”, and then they’ll only play the part where I say Johnny Depp’s name. I’ve seen and read countless interviews in their entirety and gotten a completely different impression once I saw them, vs. the short clip I saw on TV. It makes a big difference.

4. Use of “experts”
I’ve seen this on T.V. one too many times (mainly because my mom has to watch every celebrity news show known to man for some reason). The celeb media will bring on an “expert”, such as an alleged “child psychologist”, and have them analyze a clip or a photo, like of a celeb kid playing. Of course, the “expert” says something dramatic, like “The body language says that the child is distressed”, and the viewer walks away saying “oh well, that expert psychologist said this, so it must be true.” DON’T BUY IT!!

And it when it comes out that their story was trash, they’ll put a correction in small print in the back of the magazine or briefly talk about it on television bringing little attention to it. Stop buying the stories people!! Start being more analytical about what you read and see-don’t be easily mislead! Pay attention to HOW things are presented. If an incident occurs between a small group of people (or just 2 people) and there’s no evidence of what took place, the media is probably speculating! If someone is allegedly so incredibly reclusive, hard to access, or a loner, how can the media really know ANYthing? Celebrity news media are never well intentioned. They just pretend to genuinely care; with Michael Jackson’s children, they pretend to be “so worried” about what exposure is going to do to them, when they’re the main ones showing paparazzi shots of them chillin’ at the pool!! When Anna Nicole Smith was alive, they portrayed her as a drugged up, drunken “has-been”, but once she died, she was a “beautiful princess with big dreams.” Unbelievable. They either build you up just to tear you down, or vice versa. Moral to the story: Be more aware of what you’re being fed!

 


 
1 Comment
    Picture
    Picture

    Society/Culture

    My personal commentary on politics, race, gender, religion, social class, news media and several other things related to our society and culture.

    Note: Occasionally, other individuals will be writing posts and they will be marked as such. Want to be contributor for this section of the site? Click the "Contact/Info" tab and fill out the form to apply.

    Archives

    May 2014
    August 2013
    July 2013
    March 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    June 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    November 2009
    October 2009
    June 2009

    Picture
    Picture
    Click to support a cause

    Tags/Categories

    All
    18 20 Yr Olds
    18 20yr Olds
    50 Shades Of Grey
    Abortion
    Abstinence
    Abuse
    Activism
    Alexandra Wallace
    Arizona
    Bad Boys
    Barack Obama
    Beauty
    Birth Control
    Black Community
    Black Hair
    Books
    Bullying
    Bush
    C.Dyer
    C.G. Seymore
    Christianity
    Classism
    College Life
    Contributing Writers
    Corporate America
    Crime
    Cultural Egocentricism
    David Petraeus
    Debates
    Demi Lovato
    Depression
    Disabled Community
    Donald Sterling
    Education
    Employment
    Entertainment
    Evil
    Feminism
    Foreign Affairs
    Gender
    Gender Roles
    Hair
    Hate
    Healthcare
    Humanity
    Human Nature
    Immigration
    Independence
    Infidelity
    Iran
    Jersey Shore
    John Mayer
    Jordin Sparks
    Journalism
    Justin Bieber
    Lasheena Allgood
    Law Enforcement
    Lgbt
    Life Choices
    Marriage
    Media
    Men
    Morals
    NBA
    Oil Leak
    Parenting
    Partisanship
    Petraeus
    Political Cartoons
    Politics
    Politics On Facebook
    Pornography
    Race Relations
    Racism
    Rape
    Relationships
    Religion
    Reusable Coffee Cups
    Reusable Cold Beverage Cups
    Rihanna
    Rolling Stone
    Rush Limbaugh
    September 11th
    Sex
    Sexism
    Social Awareness
    Social Media
    Society & Culture On Twitter
    Suicide
    Taylor Swift
    Teens
    Teen Violence
    Terrorism
    Toxic Relationships
    Video Blogs
    Voting
    V. Stiviano
    War
    Workforce
    Youth

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.