Why do titles matter?

I recently wrote an article about why titles such as "Sexiest Woman Alive" are degrading and unnecessary and I thought it was relevant to some of the topics we cover in class.

On Oct. 7, Scarlett Johansson was named “Sexiest Woman Alive” by Esquire magazine for the second time since 2006, making her the only woman to reclaim the title. Though it comes as no surprise that people think Johansson is beautiful, naming her the sexiest woman alive is a blow to the self-esteem of every other woman in the world. Let’s face it: No one in this world looks exactly like Johansson, so therefore it’s a ludicrous idea to impose this so-called ideal upon society.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and thus it is unfair to force one magazine’s idea of the most beautiful woman upon society. Sexy comes in all different hair colors, eye colors, skin colors, shapes and sizes.

But Esquire magazine is not the only culprit. Each year, People magazine announces who the “Sexiest Man Alive” is, with past winners including George Clooney and Channing Tatum. The title of “Sexiest Man Alive,” though awarded by a magazine with a predominantly female readership, can have the same negative effects on society as the title of “Sexiest Woman Alive” does. Men are compelled to reevaluate their look, and others feel the need to reconsider what their ideal guy might look like.

In addition to giving women an ideal image of unattainable beauty, the notion of “Sexiest Woman Alive” convinces men that their significant other must look a certain way. Because Esquire is a magazine written for men, this title is virtually telling men what to look for in a woman. This brings self-image anxiety to not only women, but to men as well, who might feel compelled to date a woman deemed “sexy” by society’s standards.

In USA Today’s article about Johansson claiming the title, all that they mention is that this is the second time she won, a quote about her current career as an actress, and information on her engagement to a former French journalist.

There is no backstory about her life or how she became famous, and the very short article makes it seem like the only thing Scarlett Johansson is good for is named the “Sexiest Woman Alive.” If young girls want to look up to Johansson, there isn’t much that the title allows them to strive for.

With a long history of the media causing self-image issues in young adolescents, the “Sexiest Woman Alive” title does not help. According to AdMedia, “69 percent of girls concurred that models found in magazines had a major influence on their concept of what a perfect body shape should look like.”

And now with Scarlett Johansson’s image on the front of Esquire with the bolded words “Sexiest Woman Alive,” young women have something else to unfairly compare themselves to. It promotes the idea that Johansson is the objective standard of what beauty looks like.

Female screenwriter who calls herself a feminist and why

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/diablo-codys-lamb-in-las-vegas

I recently found this article about screenwriter Diablo Cody (Paradise, Juno, Young Adult, Jennifer’s Body,) regarding her directorial debut “Paradise” and her experience working in the industry, especially as a female who identifies as a feminist. I think the article speaks to what we’ve been discussing in class. All of her films have a female protagonist who go through some sort of transformation and in the article she explains she wants her female characters to be intelligent (which is not something we always see on screen). Her new movie, Prodigy is about a woman who is exceptionally smart but does not know how to be social and interact as well as most women on tv seem to do.

When asked about identifying as a feminist, she replied, “CODY: I don't, really. Unfortunately, I can't fault other writers and directors for how they choose to present themselves, but I just think people are very fearful of declaring themselves as feminists because it's just confused with being misandry. And if you get labeled a man-hater in this town, you're screwed. Men are still the gatekeepers.


For me, I'll never stop identifying as a feminist, and I think the conversation about women in film is very important. I know there are other women who don't agree with me and say, "No, we need to stop talking about that and start talking about our work and just do the work and just show them that we can do it." And I'm like, "No." I don't know how to say it. If we really had just sat back and not engaged in conversations about feminism, we would have no projects thus far. So, you have to have the balls to talk about those things, even if other people might find it off-putting.”

The article continues to talk about the pressure of being a female  in the industry and how there is a burden of representation for minorities. Do we think that females have to write strong, good role model characters since they are so limited? The same question can be asked of queer representation? But if women should only write strong independent female characters isn’t that limiting creativity?

These questions can be tied to so many of the shows and female represents we’ve watched like Sex and the City, Orange is the new Black, Here Comes Honey Boo Boo and more . It will be interesting to see where the industry goes both on and off screen.

article about a screenwriter who identifies as a feminist

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/diablo-codys-lamb-in-las-vegas

I recently found this article about screenwriter Diablo Cody (Paradise, Juno, Young Adult, Jennifer’s Body,) regarding her directorial debut “Paradise” and her experience working in the industry, especially as a female who identifies as a feminist. I think the article speaks to what we’ve been discussing in class. All of her films have a female protagonist who go through some sort of transformation and in the article she explains she wants her female characters to be intelligent (which is not something we always see on screen). Her new movie, Prodigy is about a woman who is exceptionally smart but does not know how to be social and interact as well as most women on tv seem to do.

When asked about identifying as a feminist, she replied, “CODY: I don't, really. Unfortunately, I can't fault other writers and directors for how they choose to present themselves, but I just think people are very fearful of declaring themselves as feminists because it's just confused with being misandry. And if you get labeled a man-hater in this town, you're screwed. Men are still the gatekeepers.


For me, I'll never stop identifying as a feminist, and I think the conversation about women in film is very important. I know there are other women who don't agree with me and say, "No, we need to stop talking about that and start talking about our work and just do the work and just show them that we can do it." And I'm like, "No." I don't know how to say it. If we really had just sat back and not engaged in conversations about feminism, we would have no projects thus far. So, you have to have the balls to talk about those things, even if other people might find it off-putting.”

The article continues to talk about the pressure of being a female  in the industry and how there is a burden of representation for minorities. Do we think that females have to write strong, good role model characters since they are so limited? The same question can be asked of queer representation? But if women should only write strong independent female characters isn’t that limiting creativity?

These questions can be tied to so many of the shows and female represents we’ve watched like Sex and the City, Orange is the new Black, Here Comes Honey Boo Boo and more . It will be interesting to see where the industry goes both on and off screen.

Culture and Feminism

Aniko's comments in class about writing on My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding really resonated with me. As I tried to blog las week about the strong reactions I felt towards the show, I too was afraid of passing judgement on another culture. Something that I often struggle with about feminism is how cultural differences dictates societal norms. Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, had taken the stance that no matter what cultural practices degrade women, women should have equal opportunities and treatment. This view comes under scrunity in countries like Saudi Arabia, where women are not legally allowed to drive. Am I as a western woman supposed to impose this view on the world?

The thing that really struck me about My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding was not the class aspect of the show, but rather the treatment of women. Specifically, how women are not allowed an educated, married off by 18, and are "grabbed" as a form of flirting. There entire existence is based on chores and male pleasure. The role of women within the traveler society to me seem very old school. But how am I at liberty to judge norms of another culture? Is it when women are abused like with the recent rape cases in India? Or when women drive in protest in Saudi Arabia? Or when women are "grabbed" in the traveler culture? Is it ever really appropriate to criticize someone else's culture?

Framing Female Visibility Through Facebook

The readings we’ve perused this week have addressed the impact of new media on self-branding and the drawbacks and advantages of the internet for women in general, but there was one issue that wasn’t entirely covered which I feel deserves closer analysis in terms of female visibility on the internet and the function of social media in self-promotion and self-branding.

This article: http://thoughtcatalog.com/brianne-garcia/2012/02/how-facebook-has-changed-the-way-young-girls-view-themselves/ provides some relevant food for thought on the ways in which social media websites such as facebook have irreparably changed the way women and young girls view themselves and project their image to the world. On a personal level this article really resonated with me and emphasized just how almost imperceptible this aesthetic shift has been and yet how widespread it has now become within social media practices for female users. Especially for teenagers and young adults, the culture of visibility, judgment, and body image comparison that facebook promotes can be deeply problematic and makes it ever more difficult to escape notions of women as objects of a gaze – this time, an invisible user’s gaze. Moreover, as the article argues, this newfound internet visibility encourages young women to spend time intuitively learning how to ‘pose’ for pictures at social events which they know will end up online afterwards. Discourses of ‘tagging’, ‘detagging’, how many likes certain images get (and from whom), and time spent building up one’s profile and selecting profile and cover images can act not only as self-branding as a commodity but as markers of an identity we choose to present to others. This problematic dynamic can lead to reductive identity formation and a delicate conceptualization of how one is publicly ‘consumed’ by millions of users online. In an era where people are able to ‘research’ others through social media websites for every possible reason from personal investigation for potential partners to employers looking to check-up on future employees, online identity construction via social media has become disturbingly significant in both private and public spaces.

In light of the above, it is worth questioning how far we have been able to distance ourselves from Mulvey’s conceptualization of ‘the gaze’ and just to what degree the internet can be considered liberating and empowering if it also enables discourses of visibility that can encourage the kinds of restrictive self-regulatory practices that feminism aims to curb.

Essentially, in the debate about whether feminism can benefit from the prevalence of new media and the internet, this is a strand that seems to have been somewhat sidestepped, but it remains very much a pervasive phenomenon that deserves renewed attention and analysis.

Kelly Clarkson is NOT a Feminist

In a Kelly Clarkson interview that came out today on Time.com, the singer adamantly declared that she is not a feminist. When asked if she would consider herself a feminist, Clarkson adamantly declared:

“No, I wouldn’t say feminist — that’s too strong. I think when people hear feminist, it’s like, “Get out of my way, I don’t need anyone.” I love that I’m being taken care of and I have a man that’s a leader. I’m not a feminist in that sense … but I’ve worked really hard since I was 19, when I first auditioned for Idol.”

This quote made me think back to our very first class discussion about the word “feminist” (or the F-word) still having a very negative connotation. This is a woman whose songs are based on the freedom and power of women. Even the titles of her songs, like Stronger and Miss Independent, bleed female strength. Yet, Clarkson, like other celebrities such as Beyonce, is quick to dispel the idea that she is indeed a feminist. She states that she likes having a man taking care of her. However, wanting to be taken care of, liking “leading” men and being a feminist are not mutually exclusive. I would argue that Kelly Clarkson is very feminist, working hard for her status and declaring to the world that she is, in fact, Miss Independent. Yet, this is just another example of how tainted the word “feminist” is and how women everywhere (especially those in the public eye) are not yet ready to stand up for women and declare themselves feminist.

Here’s the link to the interview:

http://entertainment.time.com/2013/10/30/kelly-clarkson-not-a-feminist/?utm_content=buffer31b53&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

Honey Boo Boo and My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding: Ideas of Class and Confusion

Confusion - sheer and utter confusion is the feeling I get while watching both Here Comes Honey Boo Boo and My Big Fact Gypsy Wedding. To my surprise, I actually had strong feelings about both these shows for different reasons.

            Here Comes Honey Boo Boo is a show that I will admit to have watched in the past and every time it has left me speechless. To begin, I do admit that it took me a long time to actually respect the family because the only thing I could see was a manner less family that is comfortable farting, burping, and doing other actions society deems inappropriate to do. To make matters worse, it disturbed me that they seemed to take pleasure in the fact that they do things such as the aforementioned bodily functions in public. They see nothing wrong in being “rednecks” and actually take pride in the fact they are from the South and are of a “lower class.” All these opinions and judgments I felt guilty for feeling and knew that they were a direct result of my upbringing. I was born in a traditional Catholic family where manners were and are incredibly important. Analyzing the show in class at a time where I haven’t seen an episode in a very long while, I do see my opinions changing. For one, I definitely have respect for Mama June’s parenting style.  She is a mother who has such a positive outlook on body image and I take pleasure in seeing her relay a positive body image to her children despite my worry’s of their health. I feel empowered to see a woman confident in herself as well as her children. I do feel however that the redneck culture, as described in class, is exploited by both the producers and from the family. The way the show is edited heightens the stereotypes that are placed on people in the South but I also feel as though the family play’s up the redneckedness of their family, for example going to the redneck games. While I respect Mama June, I still feel a sense of uncomfortableness while watching that I feel won’t go away despite my newfound respect.

            My Big Fat Gyspy Wedding on the other hand took some time for me to reflect on. For one, the show is shot in a documentary style that posits the show as a realistic and truthful depiction of the life of gypsy’s and travelers. I however believe that it merely sensationalizes the life of the gendered women who are enacting gendered rituals on the show. There is this confusing juxtaposition between traditional values and modern morals that I have a hard time dealing with. These girls come from a very traditional religious family. Most of them are forced to drop out of school in order to take the traditional gendered role of taking care of the kids and the home. They then are married off at the latest by the age of 18 and enter a life of a traditional gender role in which she takes care of her husband and stays at home taking care of the house the children. However, their traditional views wouldn’t be evident by the way these girls dress. Despite their traditional outlook on marriage on gender roles, they wear skimpy clothing, pile on the makeup and essentially slut themselves out visually to get a husband.

            Overall, I think it is interesting going back to the readings for this week that class level is indirectly based on taste. I never looked at Honey Boo Boo’s family as lower class because of the house they live in or the clothes they wear, it was entirely their taste and manners that they possess.

Seeing Honey Boo Boo In A Different Light

Pamela Chan

CTCS 412 Blog 

To be perfectly honest, I was more than appalled by the screenings that were shown in class last Monday—never before had I seen such crass, improper, and downright shameful behavior being acted out so clearly on public television, and it was shocking to learn that what I had just witnessed on Here Comes Honey Boo Boo was the exact spectacle-filled circus that many Americans had been raving about since the show’s 2012 debut. I mean sure, the network is TLC—which is known for airing shows with controversial nature with no educational purpose whatsoever. And we can all admit that little Alana Thompson is chock-full-of-attitude and surprisingly cute. But other than that, there is no context. There is no story. There is no point to having a show like this except for providing viewers with an in-depth look at classlessness, outrageousness, and offensive familial life. It gives what many view as the ‘American’ lifestyle an extremely bad name, and I was really struggling to see the point in watching these screenings—not to mention sitting through an entire couple episodes of horrible reality television.

However, it’s funny how different things can become when looked at from a different perspective—and after our in-class examination of Here Comes Honey Boo Boo and My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding in class this morning (as well as the readings we had over this past week), I was able to look at the show as something more than an exploitative and degrading exhibition of what Forbes Magazine called a “lice-picking, lard-eating, nose-thumbing” horde of hooligans “south of the Mason-Dixon line” – a horror story posing as reality television programming.

Reality television, as discussed in class, serves as a visual rhetoric to better understand various aspects of feminism. They also have an ability to make us forget about the systematic erosion of our uptight worlds, relieving us of the constant constraints of our normal middle-class American lives. By distancing their focuses from the normal public sphere, shows such as Here Comes Honey Boo Boo provide access to lifestyles that are filled with freedom and no restraint—of otherness and diversity. We are introduced to a world of people who live free of the everyday pressures and confines that plague the world we live in. And in a way, their less-than-urbane living patterns, poor manners, foul mouths, and not very socially-accepted body types can actually be seen as something hopeful and positive—not just something completely negative.

Throughout this course we have discussed what feminism is, what we think it should be. In many ways, it all comes down in the end to acceptance, freedom, and gender equality—being able to love and be loved as who you truly are--to create a society that is unfamiliar to prejudice and oppression. The crude actions of Mama June and her girls have obviously been criticized by more than a number people. The entire Thompson family can be seen as nothing more than a Southern mess to point and snicker at. But what’s incredibly interesting is that they don’t seem to care. They are completely content with who and what they are—farting and all. There may be some editing and manipulation done by TLC, but in the end, the Thompsons are, in more ways than one, comfortably embracing their authentic selves—far away from the status quo. Rather than judging the show from just the obnoxious behaviors exhibited on the screen, our class discussion helped me realize that there is actually a point in showing these more ‘alternative’ representations of American life—it not only helps us grasp a better understanding of feminism but ourselves as well.  

Honey Boo Boo: Are They That Bad?

"Here Comes Honey Boo Boo" receives a lot of criticism for showcasing what has been called the worst of American society. However, after watching the show, I found plenty of things worth admiring in her family. However, despite the many criticisms that they receive, they are extremely happy being who they are and where they are. They acknowledge that they aren't the most intelligent, the most beautiful or the most cultured and yet they have a completely refreshing acceptance of themselves. They also have a rare acceptance of one another and act without any airs or pretenses. As a society, we tend to value ourselves in relation to the other, and many parenting techniques stem from this - many parent's show acceptance and love through telling their kids that they are better than the others. However, the acceptance in Honey Boo Boo's family rather comes from a realization that they are who they are, they may not be the best, but they are happy.

I envy them for this. Isn't this the end goal of feminism and sexual equality? To act completely as we desire free from social expectations, pressures and confines? I believe that this is the end goal of any form of prejudice and social oppression - removing yourself from the ideals of society and simply being who you want to be. It involves making no choices because of the pressures of expectations from others. This, however, is extremely difficult to attain and no matter how free one feels the desire to conform or impress is usually present. The family in Here Comes Honey Boo Boo are as free from this pressure as I have ever seen and I think that this is a great characteristic and shows strength on their part. 

Overall, they seem extremely happy, which is what we all strive for in the end.

Here Comes Honey Boo Boo In a Positive Light

Much like the other screenings in this course, I viewed Here Comes Honey Boo Boo while simultaneously grasping for a feminist lens to view it under. Though I've never taken the time to watch an entire episode of the series it was definitely refreshing to have done so in the context of CTCS 412.

        If not for many of the themes discussed in this class, I may have been quick to dismiss Here Comes Honey Boo Boo as humiliating and crass. Oddly enough, my initial reaction to the series last week was one of positivity as opposed to disgust. It's simple for viewers, especially female viewers, to peg the series as exploitative of a family who appears to lack education and standard concepts of hygiene. Some may even brand Honey Boo Boo's mother, June as the enemy here for putting her young daughters in the spotlight.  Oddly enough, I couldn't help but feel enlightened after watching the pilot episode of the TV series. 

Perhaps it's because - lest I admit - I am a fan of the sheer spectacle that TLC offers up on a daily basis. But Honey Boo Boo's mother June's frank methods of communication with her children and dialogue about her own body image reflected some of the most clear-cut feminist ideals demonstrated in this course so far. June knows that she's quite overweight but accepts her body type as well as the body type of her daughters. She enters daughter Alana into "natural" competitions and even after she doesn't leave with the crown, remains supportive. Most importantly, June sees the world of pageantry as an effective means of building self-confidence for Alana and her other daughters. Winners or losers, it's the process that matters to June - making many of her parenting techniques extremely admirable. Aside from allowing her daughters to eat spilled cheese balls from the floor, there wasn't much harm done here from my perspective. I would even go so far as to say that elements of June's approach to parenting could be considered very wise and to some degree - feminist. 

The reality TV genre is rife with competition between women who assert their presence with over-the-top publicity stunts, alterations to their physical appearance and material possessions. Reality favorites such as Keeping Up With The Kardashians and the Real Housewives series are platforms for female reality stars who further perpetuate that a woman's primary worth in Hollywood is on the basis of the glamour, sexual desirability and material relevance they can project on camera. 

  Honey Boo Boo's premise is hugely refreshing due to none of this. June, Honey Boo Boo, her sisters and father/husband Mike are winners here because they are true to a lifestyle that makes them feel comfortable and empowered regardless of how society will inevitably categorize them. 

- Marisa Okano

Similarities between BFGW and Here Comes Honey Boo Boo

I was really shocked to see both Here Comes Honey Boo Boo and Big Fat Gypsy Wedding during last class. Both shows totally threw me off and I could not make any connections between the characters in those shows and myself. While these people are real, since it is hard for most people to connect with them, I felt like the purpose of these shows were to make people feel horrified and distant from the characters even though these are reality shows.

First of all, in MFGW, I was really surprised to find out that these girls only go through elementary school (I don't recall them even graduating elementary school). And they live in England! Their mindset was so carefree and domestic-oriented that I wondered how they can be so different from most English girls when they live on the same piece of land. The things they valued, such as their desire to have the best dress ever, and the things they just accepted, such as letting the men choose women, was something that sounds so 15th century to me that it was hard to believe that such lifestyle is still ongoing.

Furthermore, it was even harder to connect with Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. I didn't really find anything that Honey Boo Boo does particularly funny or cute; I just hoped that she would grow up properly. Since it was reality tv, I had genuine concerns about her family.

Both shows made me feel uncomfortable watching it, and I was shocked (again) to read Skeggs, Wood, and Thumin's essay. It was about how women of different class react differently to reality tv. I wonder how those who are from different backgrounds would react to these shows? Would different people find these shows just amusing? Would they not be disturbed by these contents?

Questioning Honey Boo Boo

  Here Comes Honey Boo Boo is both hilarious and alarming. We find a guilty pleasure in the amusement of such a ridiculous family but I question the positive and negative effects of the show. The show seems to exploit country people, drawing on stereotypes to entertain the rest of the country. Furthermore, as the only reality show based in the south that comes to my mind (and probably the same applies to many others), it subconsciously plays a part in the way I imagine people from the south to be. 

With seemingly no education, a pregnant teenager, and an overweight mom, we find comedy in the absurdity of such a lifestyle. By presenting such representations (especially without another source of contradicting representation) small town people from the south are portrayed as silly and dumb. The show even uses subtitles to help the audience understand what members of the family are saying. The perpetuation of this “redneck” persona is only further exasperated by economic, social and class issues. McIntyre, the town the show is shot in, is said to be portrayed inaccurately as the show focuses on images implying poverty such as old garbage dumps and junk cars. The idea of the show itself reflects the exploitation of the child for capital that the family also benefits from at the expense of ruining any chance of the child or themselves being taken seriously.

In the words of online bloggers, TLC is the ultimate “human shaming” channel. The family is either too stupid to realize how they are are being portrayed on the show or too willing and desperate for fame and money that they take a part in shaming themselves. Either way, by watching the show, we support these capitalist antics. Even more alarmingly, we ignore the major social issues that the show presents us with by laughing about them.

While I feel this way to an extent, another part of me feels it is important for Americans who do not deal with such poverty to see these types of images and families. However, by just presenting the issues in a mocking way, the show brushes over these issues. While it seems horrible to watch a show to mock the people on it, the family seems happy and love each other which are things we can actually aspire for. Perhaps it teaches us that despite certain differences, families unlike our own are capable of  such love and happiness. We can even relate to the family at times, though this fact is often masked by things the family says or does that we would never do, such as farting constantly on television. I ultimately feel the negative stereotypes and the exploitation of a family that represents a type of people outweigh the positives of the show. 

Pleasure, Taste, Class and Questions

            I’d like to go back to the issue of reality TV and pleasure that Prof. Aniko mentioned in class last week as well as analyze the issue in relation to taste and class. 

            What I found inspiring in this week's reading is the idea of class that the writers convey through analyzing the receptions of reality shows. While I understood beforehand how taste reflects class, it seems to me that I did not have adequate knowledge of how reality TV could be a good place to “test” taste and class as effectively as the writers do in their essays. Also, reading these articles along with my responses to the screenings makes me think of the issue of class more carefully. 

            To be honest, I suffered through the show Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. After 15 mins of screening, I wanted to get out of the class because I did not have any pleasure and had no identification with any characters. On the one hand, I reminded myself that “this is an alternative representation of women and you need to get to know it.” On the other hand, my mind kept on “yelling” at me “OK you got a sense of what the “alternative representations “look” like; now get out of the classroom, no more suffering.” I eventually did not leave because I had to wait for the following screening but I did find myself distracted with the  internet while watching it. 

            On the contrary, I found myself enjoying and paying attention to the show My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding because of its enticing narrative and its good-looking characters with their gorgeous outfits. In both cases, my receptions were mainly based on pleasure and more particularly voyeurism. For Here Comes Honey Boo Boo, almost nothing attracted my eyes. While I find Alana pretty cute, I was annoyed of the way her mom prepares her for the child beauty pageant. For My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding, the gypsy culture--wedding, outfits and lifestyles, and the pretty young women and teen girls--attracted my attention. At some specific points I stopped to think of the “realness” of the representations, such as when the groom does not allow the cameraman go into his wedding room or when he got lost on his way to the church for his wedding. Yet, for almost the entire screen time, I was blown away with the process of narrative of the main characters’ marriage.

            With these perceptions, some questions came to mind when I was reading the articles:

            Firstly, to what extent do taste and emotion authentically reflect class? As I pointed out, I did not enjoy Honey Boo Boo, but liked Gypsy Wedding. Moreover, I have a negative attitude toward the lifestyle of Alana’s family but a positive mood toward that of the Gypsy Wedding.  

            Secondly, in terms of self-reflexivity and methods of interview, I think it is problematic because the perception of the interviewee is adjustable and unstable. In their article, Skeggs, Thumim, and Wood point out that middle-class women are more self-reflexive than working-class women toward reality TV. While this is understandable for me, I still question the level of the self-reflexivity. I believe that with the presence of the interviewer, the women in the interview become more conscious in terms of their perception of reality shows and adjust themselves because they are aware of the hierarchy of genre. Naturally, they want to portray themselves in a good light by emphasizing what they do not like about reality TV rather than openly expressing what they really like. 

            Thirdly, the awareness of the hierarchy of genre urges me to think of the variety of the cultures and audience’s awareness of the hierarchy of the genre which challenges the definition of classes through their tastes. Take me for example. I had not been knowledgeable of the hierarchy of genre before I came to study in the U.S. By that time I was fan of melodrama and some reality shows. I talked about my pleasure openly without any shame or guilt. However, after getting more knowledge about the hierarchy of genre and observing the cautious reaction of people in academia toward some lower genres, I have become more conscious of my reflection. Facing this situation I am very confused because if taste is something very precarious, the boundaries of classes which are based on the taste are also vulnerable.   Thus, I wonder how I can apply the lessons that I have learned about taste reflected through the reception of TV genre to investigate the class issue.  How is this possible, when I can see that--just like me before--my friends who are not aware of the hierarchy of genre are enjoying low TV genres and enthusiastically sharing about TV reality shows on Facebook daily? In the process of this reflection I am also questioning which class I belong to in terms of taste.