Perceptions of Normal/Deviant

All throughout life no matter how much we try we always have perceptions of people on the type of person they are and such. It is by no means a bad thing, but based on who they hang out with or what they look like it isn’t unusual to compare then to people we know elsewhere who are similar, in some cases looking down upon them. Who are the normal kids and who are those that are deviant, that are unlike “me”.  In High school it’s a super powered version of this where everybody has their cliqs and groups of friends, having different groups judge others base on what the media and social normalcy/deviancy has told us of these groups.

            Sometimes inadvertently high school life can create these judgments through the rest of your life. If in high school the big strong jocks were all jerks it is conceivable that until proven otherwise any bigger guy will be thought of as a jerk in that persons head; same going with the kid who was a slacker and did drugs back in school always getting late to class. If you go to college and you notice a kid doing this you might compare the two, not knowing that they work 3 jobs while being a full time student to pay there way through college. It’s all perception.

In the end what is normal to one person might be deviant to another. Does that make one person wrong and one right? Are they both wrong? Right? Or in the end is the perception of what is deviant and what is normal all in the “eye of the beholder”? 

John Plevel

In Response to Josh’s Post on “The Ideal Body & Retouched Celebrity Photos”.

This was a key example from the discussion on Tuesday in which we discussed normal and deviant. The touching up of photos example runs a very fine line between both topics considering that this touching up creates the image of this perfectionism as normalcy, thus creating a society in which deviancy in the sense of physical appearance is almost guaranteed. This creates a place where even those who come close to achieving this so called “normalcy” obsess over it, sometimes even using deviancy to try and get to the perfectionism known as normalcy. Instead of obsessing over this false normalcy and creating false expectations shouldn’t we just focus on what is; and not judge only judge it all on two opposite sided of perception without having an in-between?

Response to "Morgan Freeman is the Realist"

I agree with Allison's post with Morgan Freeman. I fully support furthering people's knowledge of different races but I also think that to a certain extent it shouldn't need to. As Morgan Freeman said in the video "Black history is American history", we should all be taught what it is brought up in Black History month, Women's History month, and other History months as well. We should all be brought up with an awareness of other races and ethnicities. I realize that this would be difficult to do, what with everything else we have to learn, but it is something to hope for. As a future educator I know that I will always figure out a way to make sure that my students are learning about those who are different from them and also make sure that they are respectful of them.

I also like the point Morgan Freeman brings up on ending racism. I think that his point relates to what we have been talking about. We have said that if you aren't a white christian male then you are deviant. Those who are not white are considered deviant. But what if we take on Morgan Freeman's view. Stop calling people by their skin color-call them by their names. Not "oh I have this black friend, Sarah..." but "my friend Sarah..." If people would do this it might help with our society's definition of normal and deviant and with the "us" and "them" thoughts.

Jillian Stephenson

Morgan Freeman is the realist

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=1131418n

I know this clip is over 5 years old but it’s one of the first things that come to my mind when I think about Black History Month. I think Morgan Freeman makes a powerful point that is relatable to what we discussed in class. We learned the origins of discrimination and racism are closely connected with the concept of being “normal” or “abnormal.” Although I of course wouldn’t say Black history Month is a racist institution, I feel it does in some way discriminate by categorizing humanity by physical appearance and assigning ONE month of the year dedicated to their history (perhaps insinuating the other 11 are white history months?). This is just one way in which the concept of “us” and “them” is reinforced. This clip really stood out in my mind because it shows how even today the differences between humans define them, rather than their commonalities.

Allison Brady

designer offspring

The readings for the week made me start to consider the effects of the norms our society has constructed. Concepts like “normal” and “freak” are relative terms created by our society that have had a profound effect on the way we perceive ourselves and other people in comparison. Stereotyping, racism, sexism and underestimation are all bi-products of the concept of being either “normal” or “different.” The human need to categorize and the term “Normalcy” have shaped our societal values in such an extreme way that people now choose to endure life threatening procedures, all for the sake of getting closer to the American stereotype of “beauty.” In 2010, over 9.5 million cosmetic (surgical and non-surgical) procedures were performed. This number is much higher than I initially expected it to be. The increasing pressure for people to reach this physical concept of “American beauty” not only drives people to alter their physical appearance, but it also has supported the idea that people can and should “design” their children. The genetic selectiveness initially was intended to ensure an infant’s health and well-being, but now it is becoming a trend for parents to construct an ideal physical appearance for their off-spring. This to me is an alarming and un-natural practice that in essence could ultimately create a new form of discrimination and segregate practices between the new class of “designed” humans and those humans of natural conception/formation.

Allison Brady

Modern Freak Shows

In the reading for Thursday it said that Freak Shows have died off in the 1930-1940 but, have they really? The Freak show of the late 1800's and early 1900's was a type of entertainment for people and families. Now there are TV’s and the internet. With the invention of technology comes a more private way to view freak shows. I believe the ‘freak’ shows have ever completely gone away they have just become more private, used for learning purposes and/or idolized. Looking at the shows on television or the top ten new stories on search engines there are always stories about 600 pound people and how they live their lives( which is kind of what the pamphlets were like in the old ‘Freak’ Show standards). The cable network TLC (The Learning channel) has made tons of money promoting “learning” by making documentaries about different people, Little People, Big World is a show about a family of little people. The producers make up story lines or adventures for the family to take. How are these shows any different from the old ‘freak’ show from the past?  Didn’t a business manager set up story lines and make the little people act the part? Or for example look at American Idol for a moment. American Idol has weeks and weeks of “auditions” which are filled with people or ‘freaks’ for Americans to judge and gawk at. Sure the American Idol contestants can’t see the American public laughing at them as they stand there in a cage but, it’s doing the same thing. People are natural curious and want to see ‘freaks’ so that they can measure themselves against the ideal and deviant. Just because people are not putting other people in cages and traveling around the country doesn’t mean that there aren’t still freak shows. It is just cheaper and more convenient for people to view the ‘freaks’.

The Facade

An interesting concept arose during Thursday's class which I would like to expand upon.  This is the understanding that many displays at freak shows were not all that deviant, but rather they were presented in such a distorted, dramatized fashion.  This facade created by the institution led people to preconceived notions of the subjects' nature.

Such a facade likely exists in many institutions big and small.  It seems as though the only reason institutions might employ the creation of a hierarchical labeling is they have a something to gain, a goal, be it want or need, be it innocently/unconsciously or on purpose, for better or for worse.  

Health insurance companies use this discrimination today by excluding people with a "pre-existing condition".  Obviously, if agencies had to pay for their care would lose money and perhaps even go bankrupt.

~ John

In response to Brian and Shawna's disagreement

In response to Brian and Shawna's disagreement,

Brian stated, As Davis said "the problem is not the person with the disability, the problem is the way normalcy is constructed to create the "problem" of the disabled person." There is a shift of what is viewed as undesirable to now unacceptable and rejected. Instead of having an "ideal person," wouldn't the world be better off having an "ideal perspective" - despite the differences people are equally treated and respected.

Shawna's response was, I like the idea of the world having an "ideal perspective." However, I do not believe it is going to happen. In my opinion I believe our society strives on hierarchies. Though I disagree with it, our society is so used to have people on top telling others how they should look, act, and be. The people on top are not going to let their position go. It's sad.

The way that things are right now, I think that Shawna is correct in saying that the ideal perspective probably will not happen. However, I feel that it would only take one person to change this. It would take just one celebrity to come out and mix things up. The only problem is that people get so caught up in the fame that they lose sight of what originally made them famous. In class we talked about how Lady GaGa is not afraid to show her true colors and be different. She might be onto something. If other people start following in her footsteps, we could see a time where everyone is accepted for who they are. Our country has already made significant progress in acceptance and toleration. If we continue to have unique individuals such as Lady GaGa being idolized, it is very possible that these norms might be forgotten altogether. One person can make a difference. 

Justin Lynch

Frame of Mind

Bogdan defines "freak" as a "frame of mind", a set of practices, a way of thinking about and presenting people. I think this subject differs from the normal vs. deviant topic because it looks more on to the scientific/biological abnormalities of the human race. That is also why I think it has continued on for so long; Only if there was a scientific purpose. 

I was able to watch a show called BodyShock that introduced the life of disabled or deformed people. The episode I watched was on the worlds tallest man. It was very interesting to learn about the cultural and social adjustments that person had to make in order to live a normal life. The show portrayed the worlds tallest man almost as a hero, to show appreciation and attention he needs to overcome their disability.

Personally I am ok with the exploitation of "freaks" through these shows. I think it's a way of having positive attention given to them to feel somewhat accepted by society. I'm sure those who went to freak shows were not there to yell or put someone down. Those who went were there because they enjoyed/respected their difference from normal.


Brian Gallagher

Overcoming Diversity

It's never easy being different. Most of us are blessed with a perfectly functioning body. We can't even fathom the thought of only having one arm, not being able to use our legs, or not being able to see or hear. Some people have to deal with these disadvantages every day of their lives. Back in the '60s, there was a child born without a right hand. Rather than sitting around feeling sorry for himself, he did what he loved. He played sports. His name was Jim Abbott. Jim was an all-american hurler for the University of Michigan, and went on to play professional baseball for ten years. He was a pitcher, and he even threw a no-hitter in 1993. Today, Jim is a motivational speaker, and a fantastic inspiration to show that anything is possible if you want it badly enough. My favorite quote from Jim Abbott is as follows, "There are millions of people out there ignoring disabilities and accomplishing incredible feats. I learned you can learn to do things differently, but do them just as well. I've learned that it's not the disability that defines you, it's how you deal with the challenges the disability presents you with. And I've learned that we have an obligation to the abilities we DO have, not the disability."

Jim Abbott Biography: http://www.jimabbott.net/biography.html

Justin Lynch

National Geographic

The "Hottentot Venus" reminded me of National Geographic magazine. During my public school years, the magazine was easily accessible in not only libraries, but other institutions such as the doctors office...well anywhere were you wait for a public service. What I remember is that in almost every magazine you were guaranteed to come across tribal women of various races. The women were most likely naked. As described in the "Hottentot" article, to me these women fell somewhere between "man and animal." That is to put it roughly though, I never viewed any woman as an animal; I was raised better than that. Nonetheless the women did not evict the same response as seeing a naked Caucasian woman. Besides the hormonal aspect of viewing these tribal women (lack of hormones), they were also "fascinating" to me. I wondered why they were not dressed, what was with the ornate but distasteful piercings? The background consisted of some shacks and dirt...always dirt. Where were these places? It did not matter, because I did not live there.


I have grown up since then; I have been on two deployments, read some books and have taken a few years of college. I now know those pictures featured in National Geographic contained "real" places and people. The point is when I was in my tender years, anyone that did not look like me or those around me and adhere to my customs were odd. The problem is not everyone can afford college. Also like college the military, is not feasible for everyone. I think that if I was taught in school (K-12) of the various races or received a more worldly education, I would not have viewed those pictures as I did. A Euro-centric education does not help anyone. It is obvious that the exhibition of "exotic peoples" still exists, maybe not as direct as it once was, but in mind set and less subtle ways. The "Hottentot Venus" did not disappear, for one can find her on any porn site, and for some a National Geographic magazine...

Response to Golden Girls post

Josh, it's really interesting that you bring up those particular episodes of "The Golden Girls." Being a fan of the show, I've seen both of them and found them equally thought-provoking. I especially liked the episode when the three women pose for the artist and he creates a sculpture based on features from each woman. I really liked the message about beauty and the female body that this put forth. It's not often that you hear about a nude model being a senior citizen or an artist being so taken aback by the beauty of an older woman. It gave its audience a great, positive message about the timelessness of beauty and how every woman is beautiful in her own way. The episode's storyline is so similar to the story of Aphrodite, and I have no doubt that it served as some inspiration for the writers of the show.

I think it's important to keep in mind that even though media has been consistently criticized for putting forth negative ideas about beauty, perfection, and normalcy, there are shows out there like "The Golden Girls" that give us some positive reinforcement. They remind us that beauty comes in all shapes, sizes, colors, and ages, and these are the kinds of messages that we need to surround ourselves and our loved ones with.

Sarah Bradley

The Ideal Woman

In class we were discussing the characteristics about being an "ideal woman" and they all happened to be physical features. They included tiny waist, big breasts, long legs, perfect hair, ect. For many women this is ideal but not achievable. Many of the characteristics named are met by cosmetic alterations or crazy workouts and diets. Someone mentioned the Victoria's Secret Fashion show and it made me curious to how they achieve their perfect shape. As it turns out, their diet is very unhealthy and dangerous. They begin an intense workout months before the show and begin dieting weeks in advance. They do not eat solid food, drink gallons of water a day, and workout some more. 12 hours before the show they stop eating and drinking all together for extra "tone." How do they not pass out on the runway?? I wonder how many women actually try to follow the footsteps of these dehydrated and starving models and succeed. It would be hard for anyone who needs to eat to stay alive or keep from passing out from dehydration. Here's an article where VS model Adriana Lima tells girls not to follow the diet she does because it is unsafe and she only does it when she has to, but how can we be so sure? 


http://blisstree.com/eat/adriana-lima-tells-fans-not-to-starve-themselves-704/


Valerie Walden 

Freak Shows

The idea of freak shows to display people with physical handicaps or just people playing a role has always been thought of as discrimination and wrong. While taking an American Popular Culture class, we discussed how the industry of freak shows was the only option for some individuals. Parents were not being insensitive by sending their children off to tour with these shows, it was their only option at income or purpose. Most of the acts that were displayed in the freak shows voluntarily joined and had the feeling of acceptance around people like themselves. In the case of Tom Thumb, he became an international celebrity because of P.T. Barnum. This was an opportunity he would not have had unless it was for the entertainment industry, particularly freak shows. As a result of his tour and fame, he ended up in a happy marriage that attracted as much wonder and attention like his act did. Some performers emphasized their disabilities so that they would be more appealing and interesting to the public. Some may think this is wrong to dramatize disabilities, but when the freak shows were popular they were not seen as average and accepted but as unique and unknown. Therefore, the idea of playing up something different was a huge contributor for freak shows. For example, a person with hair all over their body could be known as the "wolf person" or something along those lines. I am sure that at some point in their life they felt alienated and ashamed of their condition, but seeing all the people willing to come and see them and pay attention to them was something that was ideal. I believe that freak shows were an important part of history, not only for the entertainment industry but for the people who were involved.


Valerie Walden

Barbie: Normal or Deviant?

I took an Intro to Women Studies class where we talked a lot about the media and companies who place certain ideals and standards on young girls. I was reminded of what I learned then when I read Urla and Terry's section on womens' deviance being related to the Barbie figure. In that section, Urla and Terry say that women can't live up to the Barbie figure. That it is unattainable and oppressive.

The look of Barbie has a role in showing young girls what the "norm" is in our society. They see the way Barbie looks and think that is how they are supposed to look when the get older, what they should strive for. But is that what we want young girls to think? I looked up what Barbie's proportions would be if she was real. If she was she would be 5'9" tall, have a 39" bust, 18" waist, 33" hips, weigh 110 lbs, and have size 3 shoes. For those of you who would like an example to match those measurements, Galia Slayen a student at Hamilton College, has made such an example.

I don't know about the rest of you but that is not what I would want young girls to strive for. With those proportions and weight, Barbie would be considered anorexic, be unable to menstruate, and would have to move around on all fours. What has happened to our society that the "norm" has become this? The company, The Body Shop, created their own "anti Barbie" named Ruby in 1998. Her body is more realistic to what a woman's body can be like and what more than likely is healthier. Ruby was created to "challenge stereotypes of beauty and encounter the pervasive influence of the cosmetic industry". Here is a poster of Ruby that went along with The Body Shop's campaign. She is nude but I have decided not to black out her areas. I chose not to because I believe her to be beautiful and to do so would only inhibit that beauty as well as her purpose as the "anti Barbie".

 I feel that if Ruby was available on the market that maybe what was considered deviant would no longer be considered so. Young girls would understand that not everyone has the same body type. That everyone's bodies are beautiful no matter what their shape. But I suppose that is another matter in itself. What are your views on the Barbie industry's influence on young girls? Do you think that Ruby should have her place in the doll industry?

Jillian Stephenson 


For more information on Galia Slayin's project click here 

For  more information on Ruby click here

This Week's Readings & "The Golden Girls."

A line from the "Constructing Normalcy" reading by Davis reminded me of an episode of the TV sitcom "The Golden Girls," "in order to select in each her ideal feature or body part and combine these into the ideal figure of Aphrodite, herself an ideal of beauty. One young woman provides a face and another her breasts."

In this episode, Blanche meets a Hungarian artist at the museum where she works, and agrees to pose nude for his sculpture. However, once he meets her room mates Rose and Dorothy, he decides there are other qualities he wants to capture. Consequently, all three women pose for him, and he creates a woman with strength, character, sensuality, vitality, softness, and sweetness - features that come from all three women. I think it is interesting how you can take characteristics of different people and put them together to create an interpretation of the "ideal of beauty."

The mention about the Ringling Brothers in the "Search of Freaks" reading reminded me of another episode where Rose is volunteering at the hospital and meets a celibate monk named Martin. It turns out he is her biological father, and when he asks Rose what she knows about her father she responds, "There was a rumor he was a clown with Ringling Brothers, but it seemed like too much to hope for." Interesting how that possibility excited Rose, and Blanche has called her a freak at least once, but if you are familiar with her character you know she is simple minded, unique, and smart - sometimes.

- Josh Steffen

The "Ideal" Body & Retouched Celebrity Photos

During our class discussion on Tuesday, we talked about how Victoria's Secret models are expected to have this "perfect" look about them. This got me thinking the same is true for celebrities, so I've posted some retouched and untouched photos of Mariah Carey from a 1999 photo shoot. I feel that photo retouching represents the "ideal" body - a desired perfection, and the untouched photo is the reality. Which do you prefer?

- Josh Steffen

"Normalcy" vs. "Deviancy": The Vastness of the Deviant Body

The class activity of creating a list of traits that would fit under “normalcy” and “deviancy” was something I felt truly helped demonstrate the complexity of what we consider deviant. The attributes of deviancy are described as “having excluded from society, culture the norm,” whereas the traits which were listed under normalcy are described as “having not deviated from the norms, standard, or regular,” and are very particular and the ideal self.

One example I had for deviancy was other languages, as I felt the norm was English. We often hear things such as, “Speak English, this is America!” The norm is strict, and when applied to other countries (even Western ones) only describes a comparatively small amount of people, whereas the number of people who may be fluent in other languages is quite vast. However, non-English speakers in the U.S. are often treated as deviant and are generally regarded as less educated. Another example I had which shows how deviancy is rather encompassing and can be applied to a variety of demographics was our attitudes toward nonreligious individuals, or those who practice religions other than Christianity. Also, religion can help illustrate how “deviancy” is social constructed and illustrates the climate of society. For example, following 9/11 attacks, practicing Muslims have been stereotyped and labeled as deviant. Normalcy is a narrow ideal, one which only a small majority of people can obtain, whereas deviancy is applied to a mass of population.

-Angela B.

Erie County State Fair's Freak Show (1968)

In reading the articles “In Search of Freaks” by Robert Bogdan and “From Wonder to Error: Monsters from Antiquity to Modernity” by Rosemarie Garland-Thomson, in regards to freak shows, I couldn’t help but recall the time my father shared with me a story from when he was 15 and was working for the county fair. He would walk by the freak show tents every day and hear the speakers blaring, advertising the “smallest man in the world” or “the fattest woman alive”. They also would announce a story of a man with two noses and three eyes. In one instance, my dad, having walked passed the tent several times over the course of a few days, decided to finally take a look. When he got inside the booth, there was a “the fattest woman alive” whose size was enhanced by the use of her husband (who was referred to as the “smallest man in the world”). There was the "rubber-skinned man," “snake woman,” the half man/half woman, and the “three eyed, two nosed man.”

The “freaks” performed where animals were displayed, such as three-legged goats or two-headed calves, most not alive but within jars. My father shared that he was unimpressed having worked on a farm most of his life--seeing birth abnormalities from farm animals every now and then was not uncommon. However, as mentioned in class, perhaps the exhibition of animals among the “freaks” is a way to make them appear more primitive and perhaps closer to animals. I also believe that perhaps the showing of animals with true birth defects attempts to suggest that the freaks which the people will observe too are “freaks of nature”, plagued with biological abnormalities. As suggested by Garland-Thomson, the “freaks” were no longer to be treated as nature’s fantasies or viewed with wonder, but instead were to be classified as errors of nature, (Garland-Thomson). However, my father, chalking it up to being 15 years old at the time, was skeptical of the authenticity of the freaks. He caught on to their exaggerations, and even noticed that the so-called three-eyed, two-nosed man's third eye was really just painted on, and his two noses simply just split slightly down the middle. The performer would walk off and come back on to perform, having removed his third eye to swallow fire and later be the “rubber-skinned man”.

At one point, my father was up walking around the empty fairgrounds in the morning and went to get some breakfast when he saw the “three eyed, two nosed man.” The man, my father shared, was not a “freak, but simply a normal person. A normal guy getting some breakfast at the fairgrounds, trying to make a living.”

-Angela B.

Freak Shows Week 2

I think it is very interesting to see how society's views of something change over time, and also change the perception of the public on a particular idea or thing. The Freak Show is no different. At one time, it was found to be very entertaining, but now proves to be despicable. I find it truly amazing how much society sways our opinions and ideals. Today, we see certain behaviors and styles as freakish, whereas the the 19th and 20th centuries when the freak show was popular, it was indeed the actual person that met the definition of freak. I think in that time period though, people of certain social classes did anything to their appearance and behavior to set themselves apart from lower classes. And that's part of why the freak shows were so popular. It showed a very distinct difference in the class of people, as well as the very rigid social construction of what was beautiful, accepted and normal. And if there was such a thing as abnormal, there had to be the opposite to compare it to, the "freak".

Thursday, Feb. 2, 2012

I saw this on tumblr today, and I thought that this really related to what we were talking about in class. I think in our society, a lot of emphasis is put on physical attributes that can be seen with the eye. When we step out of our houses we are constantly put on display by others. People view us, and watch us, and we subconsciously know that we are on display. When we are in public, we are on our best behavior. We do not necessarily look or act the same way we do in the privacy of our own homes as we do in public. This is because we know we are being judged by society. In my opinion, this is conforming to society's norm. We are acting (by either dressing, presenting ourself ect) to conform to a certain norm. Because we are a very visual species, we are constantly looking at others and ourselves. Mirrors have caused us to conform to a societal norm within ourselves. It allows us to look at ourself and identify what might be "deviant" to society. Not only do we have to worry about how people outside will view us, but now with the mirror, we are constantly judging ourselves because we can actually see what might be "abnormal".

I really liked what Brian posted, he said:

As Davis said "the problem is not the person with the disability, the problem is the way normalcy is constructed to create the "problem" of the disabled person." There is a shift of what is viewed as undesirable to now unacceptable and rejected. Instead of having an "ideal person," wouldn't the world be better off having an "ideal perspective" - despite the differences people are equally treated and respected.

I like the idea of the world having an "ideal perspective." However, I do not believe it is going to happen. In my opinion I believe our society strives on hierarchies. Though I disagree with it, our society is so used to have people on top telling others how they should look, act, and be. The people on top are not going to let their position go. It's sad.

Shawna Racino

Freak Shows

My entire life, I've always been really intrigued by "freaks." I hate to use that word because I do find it offensive, but it's sort of the easiest word to use. I've always felt kind of bad about my weird fascination with freaks, freak shows, and circus performers. After reading the articles by Bogdan and Garland-Thomson, I realize that my fascination, along with many other people's, comes out a natural curiosity for the unfamiliar. I'm really glad that I decided to take this class because it's allowed me to be around other people that have the same weird curiosities as I do and I don't feel as bad about it. I also feel that learning about these freak shows and their place in society is really important for us. It helps us to understand where the modern-day ideas about freaks or those who are perceived to be abnormal have come from, and how to change the negative perspectives into positive ones.

Sarah Bradley

What if

Dear Bros, 

Who says that those who stray away from normal are deviant? What if those who were different were actually praised and had more authority over those normal? As kids, aren't we told to become our own individuals? That if we stay true to who we are, you will always be happy. In reality, if we dare be different we are looked down upon and mistreated for trying to find that happiness.

As Davis said "the problem is not the person with the disability, the problem is the way normalcy is constructed to create the "problem" of the disabled person." There is a shift of what is viewed as undesirable to now unacceptable and rejected. Instead of having an "ideal person," wouldn't the world be better off having an "ideal perspective" - despite the differences people are equally treated and respected.

For my own example of being deviant, I have always been a runner on the cross country and track team from High School to here as a Blue Devil. One thing that stood out was how short our shorts were as distance runners. To us we didn't mind because it was a pain to wear long shorts going on a 10 mile run. But of course, I got harassed and called "gay" just because "only girls should wear that  short of shorts." We clearly went against the social norm of what guys wore compared to girls.

It is very interesting to think about how this attitude and perspective of what is normal came about. Before this class it's something you didn't think about. My attitude was - well, thats just the way it is. It's enjoyable to think a little deeper on how this came about.

"You should read my blog, I heard its getting better"

Brian Gallagher

thursday readings

The readings that we read for today dealt with freak shows and what they are all about and how freak shows have changed tofay. This relates to today's world because this is how we still look at people who are different from ourselves but in a different way. Back then we looked at people for the way that they looked and now we look at people for the freakish things that they do. This also has to do with the world today because we still have "freak shows" for example we have Riples Believe it or Not books and museums. Also today we still classify people as freaks if they are different just by the way that they dress or act. In class it was also said that this kind of relates to today because back then when freak shows were around it kind of created a community of people who all had something wrong with them and its kind of the same today as well because people tend to hang out with people who are like themselves and have similar things in common. The article also show how the term freak has changed today because now we want to be more like people who have freakish things about them because they are famous where when people were scared about people with differences they didn't want to be like them.

By: Ashley D'Amore

Do I dare say

First, I would like to share a personal project:

https://sites.google.com/site/benwareparadigm/home

It very much pertains to what some people briefly brought up Tuesday about standardized testing and how just thinking about eating makes somebody gain weight (most of you laughed, but there is truth behind it).

Now I'll share some thoughts on the Davis article.  Interestingly, the supporters of eugenics, though originally may have had some intentions of reducing personal suffering caused by inherited diseases, argue more in terms of making a body "useful".  Forget just letting a person live their life to their fullest, they need to be functional for our businesses or military so we can later exploit the fruits of their dirty work.  Take a look at page 10, top of column 2 in the article.

This is much more apparent when it comes to race and gender.

"Slave, work the field!" "Woman, wash the dishes!"

Humanity has come a long way, but we still have a ways to go.

~ John Benware

Normal isn't Ideal

Normal isn’t Ideal; normal has to deal with the most common the statistic mean. Most people don’t strive to be just normal. We are a society and culture searching for the ideal. People (women especially) are not looking to be average.  If people wanted to be just average we would all look the same, and live in a very boring world. As humans we strive for more, we don’t want an average job, in an average house, having average health and beauty. We want the ideal. Our society shows us the ideal, the “ultimate” of things. In the Davis reading from Tuesday there is a sentence that relates to theUnitedStates society in a way “if individuals citizens are not fit, if they do not fit into the nation, then the nation body will not be fit” the paragraph goes to say that this is false by asking if “as if a hunchback citizenry would make a hunchback nation”. Well I believe the first statement to be true in a way. If in the United States for example all the citizens wanted to do was to be “normal” or AVERAGE, then the nation would not be where it is today. If on state testing and schools all the government wanted was to be average among other nations then there wouldn’t be programs like NCLB or Race to the Top. The country and world feed off of the notion that to be the best we need to reach for the ideal goal.  The country wouldn’t a market economy without the vision of the ideal. What would happen to the buyer economy if people didn’t measure themselves to the ideal and just measured themselves as normal?  People would buy new products or have any motivation to be better. People would be content with normal (the mean). Having the ideal makes us as students and people motivated and attempt to be perfect and fit into the mold. If we as people were content with normal we would be a very stagnant world.

 -Sarah Fiorella

Carnivale

I enjoyed the reading on In Search of Freaks. It reminded me of the show Carnivale that ran on HBO a few years ago. The show was about a traveling carnival during the dust bowl era. And of course being a HBO series it was “Hollywood” filming; however, it was littered with facts and painted a great picture of a traveling “freak show.” In Search of Freaks gave four main types of “freaks.” And carnival did a great job including them all. The show had a bearded lady (made freak); Siamese twins (born freaks), turtle boy (gaffed freak) and fire breathers (novelty act). After reading that freak shows became an institution I realized that that’s exactly what the traveling freak show in Carnivale was. They had their own set of rules and in a sense it was a large family. In one episode they displayed carnival justice. After an outsider killed one of their own they held a trial. They did this by having the defendant pick a number and play Russian roulette.  The show was able to put the “onstage freak” and “off stage freak” into perspective. For example Carnivale had a “cootch show.” In NM they picked a beautiful young Mexican woman to dance the cootch. But the manager of the cootch show had quite the introduction for this woman. He declared that she came from the majestic and mysterious lands of the Middle East, thus he presented her as exotic. She wore Middle Eastern accessories to amplify that exotic image. I recommend this show to anyone interested in the dust bowl era and the traveling “freak show.” The show really helps one understand the concept of In Search of Freaks that the social construction of freaks or the manufacture of freaks is the main attraction. After the curtain falls, it’s easy to see that the performers in Carnivale are actually human beings just like you and I.

Domalski, Josh

Tuesday 1/31 Normalcy vs Deviancy

     The topic of normalcy and deviancy is extremely interesting considering that they are such vague ideas that are only constructed and defined by what society at the time decides that it is.  According to the reading by Davis, the word normal did not even enter the vocabulary of man until 1855.  What makes this even more interesting is the fact that you have to have a definition of "normal" before you can decide what the definition of "deviancy" is.  Why? Because they are the complete opposite of each other and you are in one category or the other.  You are either normal or you are a deviant.  However, what if you have characteristics of both categories?  What would you be labeled as then?  Moreover, why do we as a society have to pick out the people who are different from us and then find a reason as to what makes them different because of the fear that we may be seen like them?  Unfortunately this truth means that we live in an extremely judgmental society that I believe can be the blame of many of the controversial social issues that we have today. 

Post for readings for 1-31-12

When I was reading the material we had due for Tuesday's class, I was very surprised by what I was reading.  I saw myself relating this information to my History 105 class as well as my History 333 class.  The information given during the class discussion fueled my thinking.

During my History 105 class, we discussed the Eugenics Movement.  This whole normalcy and deviance discussion directly related to this.  Who has the right to say what is normal and what is not?  This question made me think about how doctors used to measure children's brains to see if they had a disability or not.  This discussion also related to my African American History class because slave owners thought that their slaves were inferior due to the color of their skin, their odor, cranium size as well as intelligence.  This relates to the Davis article because it is stated that normalcy is based on biological standards.  In relation to the Urla and Terry article, normalcy takes on the atypical WASP standards.  This did not surprise me because accorrding to Western Standards, they are the norm and anyone the deviates from is going to be looked down upon.

These articles were very eye opening to see how definitions of normalcy and deviancy can impact history.

By: Leslie Walter

blog for tuesday

Today's reading dealt with normalvy v. deviance. The first article said that normalcy was the psychical features that are ties to biology and deviance is the uncertain things that we do not know about. In the second article the norm was less about biology it was the ideal type of person and deviance were those who were "defective" or the extreme. These two articles and what we have talked about in class deal with the real world because it is how we look at people and classify them. For example in the second article we look at someone being of the norm if they have the ideal body with no imperfections yet at the same time these are just ideals and possibly not something that we can really achieve for example super models that we see on tv. In the first article deviance relates to the real world here because we try to link everything that is unknown to biology and if we can't then we find some other reason to why someone is the way we are. As stated in class we also describe someone as deviant because it is almost like a scape goat for scientists who cannot figure something out so instead of admiting their own flaws they make someone else seem flawed which contributes to us further classifying people as deviant. Again this all relates to today's world because this is how we still think. Another example is that we try to link problems with crime like in one of the articles they tried to link deafness to crime where as today we try to link drugs and violence together without looking at each individual and trying to figure out if there is something more wrong with them like they have a mental problem that was never diagnosed and instead of doing this we just say they are deviant and not the norm.

BY: Ashley D'Amore

Readings for 2-12

The change in the attitudes of society toward its people can present an interesting comment on the people.  The articles show the progression of “difference” from intriguing to repulsive and with it the comment on the society as it evolved. 

At one time these people were seen as acts of God.  The reasons for their conditions were usually explained in religious terms and were not to be questioned.  As our society evolved the religious explanations appear to have lost much of their value and people began to seek explanations that they could believe, thus we have the scientific community trying to provide the answers to the “why” questions.

 I cannot decide whether the “why” questions are too complex or whether the scientists, being only human, are not seeking the answers in the correct fashion.  While we know some of the reasons for these abnormalities of the human condition we still have a long way to go with our quest. I only hope that the shining light that they say is at the end of the tunnel does not go out before we reach that point.

Joyce Abbott

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

During class today, I found the topic of norm and ideal to be very interesting. Often times when we think about what is "normal" we tend to think about the average. I believe that I am a normal human because I am just your average person. However, I think it is important to remember that when it comes to society, the norm is seen as what is ideal. In or society we are constantly surrounded by mainstream media, that show us men and women who are seen as iconic figures. The media has a certain standard of people that they are constantly throwing at us (skinny, white, heterosexual, with the exception of a few celebrities), and we start to believe that everyone should look and act like they do. The topic of feminine deviance was discussed in one of the articles and in class. Along with what Erin stated in her blog, women are constantly being told to look a certain way. The creation of the Barbie as had a huge impact on how women are supposed to look. However, here are some facts about Barbie:

If Barbie was a real women she would have a 39 inch bust

Barbie would be 6 foot and only weigh 100 pounds

If Barbie was a real women her waist line would be 18 inches and she would be unable to menstruate.

Images like Barbie and extremely skinny models in the media give women an image of how the norm or ideal women should look. Society is immediately putting women under the category of deviant because no one can obtain the ideal female body. And yet, so many women are constantly straining themselves to achieve this unobtainable goal.

Here is a link that shows what a life size Barbie would look like: Real Barbie

Shawna Racino

I found Urla and Terry's section on women the most fascinating in these readings. I have previously taken courses that address women's issues and how these issues had come about and how they have changed over time. Women have always been seen as the inferior sex when compared to men, really only valuable for their reproductive capabilities (which as we all know doesn't last forever). Men have always been prized for their minds, which is thought to only expand with knowledge as they age. When women started questioning men's authority over every part of their lives, it sent waves of fear in men surrounding these "outspoken" women. Religion was also loosing its grip on people's behavior at the same time, with science taking over slowly. In an effort to suppress women from gaining any more momentum in their movement and thought, "intellectual" men applied science to women. What they tried to prove was that women with independence were somehow diseased for their radical way of thinking. As a result of trying to find the deviance in women that was attributed to a biological factor, these men ended up putting all women under suspicion and scrutiny in regards to their behavior. 


One point that was brought up today in class was the idea of a beauty standard for women. While doing a project last semester I came across this quote by Sally Kempton, "Men define intelligence, men define usefulness, men tell us what is beautiful, men even tell us what is womanly". I think this quote ties in so well with that discussion today. One student brought up that our society would rather see a woman try to obtain the body  and beauty (which is unattainable), than focus on having a truly healthy body and a healthy weight. The thing is, for women who do try to achieve these impossible standards set by men, some will end up with devastating results. Women who fail to reach these standards can end up ill, either physically or psychologically, perhaps even both. The ironic twist of it is that these "diseases" women end up with in the DSM were first classified by men. So no matter what women do, they will be seen as falling below the bar of beauty or end up being labeled as crazy if it goes too far. Either way, our beauty standards set women up for failure and keeps them from achieving their true potential. 


Erin Pattridge

Readings for week of 1/30/12

Readings: Introduction Mapping Embodied Deviance and Constructing Normalcy.

As I read these articles, I could not but remember an anthropology course I once took in which the professor proposed that all of society’s actions were traceable to our desire to prove that we are better than they.  We are the chosen, the one, the true peoples and that all of our actions, beliefs and practices are the proper and correct.  Anything that they do is wrong, deviant, evil. 

It is apparent that the “scientists”’ who did the research spoken about in these articles did not have the scientific detachment to realize that the society in which they grew to adulthood badly tainted their research.  Their early religious training and with it their social mores biased their research.  They were clearly attempting to prove that “European gentlemen were biologically and culturally superior” or to put another way “European male superiority”.  They were attempting to prove a belief system  not conducting unbiased scientific research.

If you are the European male cited above, then when your world, as you have constructed it, appears to destabilize you will react as they did. You will exhibit the “symptoms of male dread and discomfort over women’s changing roles and their demands for equal rights” you will believe that you must “guard against the uncertainties of changing gender relations” combine this with the your attempts at “mastery over troublesome women”  and it will lead to the creation of new diseases; nymphomania, hysteria, neurasthenia . These diseases only apply to women but with them women can be again placed “under the dominion of male experts”.

If all of these “scientific” studies had not had such a detrimental impact on our society they could be viewed as an amusing Victorian foible.

Joyce Abbott