(Blog 2): Regular entry / Ethnography /Jerry Maguire

(Blog 2): Regular entry / Ethnography /Jerry Maguire
(Regular Entry): In today’s society, it seems accurate to say that most define men and women in a very structured way. If you go into a clothing store, you will see that the men’s clothing section is totally separate from the women’s section, in opposite areas of the store. It is also labeled as for “men” or “women”. Although this is the norm, I can’t help but feel that it truly is very labeling. As I am fascinated and interested by people who are involved with the LGBTQ community, I come across a lot of people who are cross dressers, transsexuals, transvestites, gender queer, etc. etc. and what they where and the gender they identify with completely ignores the regular, conventional society norms of what is male/female, what is a man/woman, and what type of clothing they should wear. According to Barker’s chapter on Sex, Subjectivity, and Representation (chapter 9), “at stake are the cultural questions what is woman? And what is a man?” (Barker 287). It seems that we are obsessed with these questions and want them defined perfectly and clearly—as a result the LGBTQ community suffers a lot of insults and attacks from society for their out of norm styles. Perhaps that something as society we should consider is that these labels of man/woman should just be ignored. They are labels, after all. People should be able to wear whatever they want to. The differences between clothes as for men or for women are simply labels, anyways, and labels are created by society, which in fact is simply made up by humans. That is the big thing: everything that we take so seriously is just made up. Rights, labels, etc. for so many things are just made up and invented by founders of society. Society also has such a high power and pressure that members of it feel that need to fit into society in order to live a comfortable lifestyle. There is then more distinction between what is masculine and feminine. These can be bounced around, as there are men who act feminine, and women/girls that act masculine. It seems that they form the bulk of our identity, and “sexual identity is formed through a developmental process” (Barker 294) of being born and then reacting--either going with or rebelling against--into a society with specific gender norms and expectations.
In relationship to the aforementioned argument regarding sex/gender, females seem to suffer an equal amount of pressure from society, specifically when in relationship to males and when being compared to them. It seems that women are downplayed in society, and are “not an essence per se, but rather that which is excluded” (Barker 289). Men are seen as superior to women, and were given more rights in the past and taken more seriously. Men are expected to work outside and climb social ladders of business, whereas females are to be kept hidden in the home and do housework, take care of the kids, and cook. In essence, females are more “centered on an ethics of care” (Barker 288). They are seen as caretakers and as a result seen as weaker and inferior as opposed to their male counterparts.

(Ethnography): Over the past weekend, I sat for approximately one and a half hours in a Coffee Bean located in my home area of Torrance, California। When I walked in, I noticed several large posters hanging in front of the windows depicting customers smiling and drinking from various types of drinks, all served within a cup clearly labeled with the “Coffee Bean” logo. As I sat down, I noticed the fragrance of cream and beans heavily in the air. The sounds of machines grinding also were noted, as the workers were busy making the drinks constantly. All of this background noise also consisted of mingling chatter from the customers. During our class we had a discussion on food logos and media usage of it, and the power of the logos with McDonalds, Target, Starbucks, Coffee Bean, and so forth. We mentioned how many of these consumerist companies have removed their word names and just have the picture logo, and I observe this to be two things: it is seen as socially cool to have these logos on you (ex: holding/drinking a Starbucks coffee cup), and #2: Mind control. The world of consumer culture, and selling products is competative. In our fast-paced society, we are moving quicker and so are our minds and reactions to intake products. It is easier for someone to see a picture and instantly make the connection of the product (Starbuck's Mermaid character), rather than take in letters and read the actual word and then make the connection for the product (s-t-a-r-b-u-c-k-s = coffe).
In terms of specific people observations, I saw a young white woman, presumably a student, sitting at a table with a laptop, typing away and every so often looking in books. She had wavy brown hair and a rather round, plump body shape. Her eyes were dark green and she seemed to have a somewhat odd habit of biting her lips every few minutes. She was drinking a large cold drink with brown crème on the top (I was not sure specifically what drink it was). It is also notable that there were several other people with laptops, mostly younger people. A few older folks used electronics, but mostly E-book readers such as Kindles or Nooks (not laptops.)
In the right hand corner of the room was a young man in a wheelchair. He was Latino and had short spiked hair with brown eyes. His head was titled at an odd angle and by the look of his body, his lower body portion was mostly crippled. The boy had the appearance of some form of mental retardation or semi-paralysis. Seated across from him was a woman, perhaps his mother or sister, with long dark brown hair (almost black), tied back in a pony tail. She wore a red dress with yellow flowers on it. This woman was feeding the boy with a spoon because he could not lift/move his head, arms, etc.
Another interesting person was an older man who walked in around twenty-five minutes after I arrived. He seemed to be in huge rush and was possibly going on a trip, or was just arriving here from a trip. The man walked in with a large suitcase and walked swiftly and breathed heavily. I couldn’t see his eyes, as he was wearing dark sunglasses, but his face was heavily tanned and his ethnicity was Asian-American (he seemed half Asian, and half white). When he ordered coffee, he was talking extremely fast and was handling the money quickly. Later after he ordered, the man was tapping his foot and looking around, evidently nervous about time and in a rush.
In terms of analysis, I thought it interesting that I automatically assumed the girl with the laptop to be a student. In addition, I also noted many other young people with laptops; all assuming they were students from a school. Perhaps they were not students. Based on the work of Elias during the years of 1978-1982, it seems that “identity is recognizable by ourselves and by others” (Barker 216). The qualities and characteristics of the people observed fueled by putting a label on them; the combination of a young person with laptops and books created the identification in my mind of a student. Perhaps if it were older people, I might see them as business men. Because there were more than one customers using laptops, there was also the assumption made that there was a school nearby. Stemming from the Cartesian subject and Descorte's theories, society has a way of forcing people to become “capable of organizing themselves” (Barker 219), and therefore make it easier to identify people, both in groups and individuals, by their characteristics.
I have always been fascinated with people who possess disabilities, because the person themselves have been changed internally, and yet external people cannot fully understand their way of life because they are not inside that person. I assumed the boy in the wheelchair was paralyzed or had a form of mental retardation, but the truth is that “identities are not self-generating or internal to the self but are […] constituted through the process of acculturation” (Barker 219). Coming from Stuart Hall, this idea/theory showed how I personally did not know what was going on through that boy’s mind, nor did I know what his affliction really was. But in culture and society, we have a way of labeling the way people are simply by looking at them. A person crippled in a wheelchair is often seen as dumb or useless, but outside people cannot really go into the victim’s mind to see the true emotions and feelings. People are so accustomed to taking things on the surface and at face value. Perhaps if we took the time to dig deeper beneath that “surface” and see from another’s perspectives, we could see their true selves.
My observation of the woman feeding the wheelchair boy was fueled by female assumptions, I realized later on in the analysis. Because the woman was helping and feeding the boy, I took it as motherly instincts and labeled her as a mother or sister. Why couldn’t she be a friend or a cousin? When looking at genders, there is a tendency to see females and males as “an organizing principle of social life” (Barker 223). According to Stuart Hall's and Nicholson's 1997-1999 ideas, we expect males and females to act a certain way, and there are further expectations as too what is masculine or feminine. Society places woman in the motherly roles and “asserts that sexual difference” (Barker 223) from males. As a result, males are generally not seen as caretakers, where as females are placed in the typically nurturing roles of the mother, the babysitter, etc.
There is a lot to be said regarding language and how it affects our study of society, people, and the popular culture that governs it all. When I assumed that the traveling man was in a hurry, I was using “language in relation [to] character” (Barker 225). Because of his hurried personality, his sunglasses and suitcase, he seemed to be embarking on a trip. Oftentimes we label people based on how they move and what they dress like, so I had assumed he was preparing for a trip.
People are constantly on the move and it seems that we have little time to sit still and keep our minds silent to observe all that is around us. If we sit just for a few minutes, we can observe how intricate and interesting the way society works, and the people that make up this society.

(Jerry Maguire): Question of what is Love from the film? In this film, the idea of what love is comes up between the various characters of the story. It sets up the idea that love must be a commitment between two people. If one of the persons does not like the other one, then that love will not fully work. There is also the fear of being vulnerable. Jerry can’t be alone, and he has intimate issues. At one point of the movie he even says “you complete me”. In this way, a working love relationship between two people must indicate that they are halves of one piece—in essence, they “complete” one another. Going with the idea of fear of being vulnerable, Jerry self-publishes a small manifesto book that thus opens himself up, and results in him being uncomfortable. For a love relationship to work, both partners must be totally comfortable with the other and be honest. The entire movie seems to hinge on the struggle of being honest. The two main roles seem to need each other in their business work, and through this their love and respect for one another grow.