What would you expect an article with “Bridesmaids” as the headline to be about? Not this…
This headline comes from the Wisconsin State Journal for Sunday, March 27. I wonder if anyone in my politics of sex class this semester wants to comment on why this headline might be a problem?
Check out these two commercials. Both attempt to capture the excitement of the holidays and the anticipation of opening presents from the perspective of kids. One is for Target and one is for Walmart.
Target:
Walmart:
So, you may wonder, what bothers me about these commercials? I’m not quite sure….I just know that it has something to do with class, rural vs. urban, conservative vs. “progressive”, tradition vs. innovation. Also, I keep thinking of Target and how they have managed to maintain the image of cool and progressive even as their practices aren’t. Is this type of commercial one of the reasons why?
This week in my queering desire class we are discussing queering the non/human. I thought I would cross-post a “queer this!” example (in two parts) from that blog. It also seems appropriate as an oh bother example.
Part one: Animal Planet, Surprisingly Human.
Part two:
In “Queering the non/human,” Noreen Giffney and Myra J. Hird write:
Recognizing the trace of the nonhuman in every figuration of the Human also means being cognizant of the exclusive and excluding economy of discourses relating to what it means to be, live, act or occupy the category of the Human. This has real material effects. For every ‘livable life’ and ‘grievable death,’ there are a litany of unmentionable, unassimilable Others melting into the pace of the nonhuman” (3).
Surprisingly human? Oh bother! Before watching the commercial, I was already troubled by the potential anthropomorphizing going on here. Then I saw the commercial and was even more troubled by the objectifying/ignoring of non-human animals. What do you think? Does this bother you?
Yum. Can I get some butter to go with my heternormative spaghetti please? (This image was pointed out to me by STA.)
