Ruby Valdez on Trivialization and Pleasantville

The article "Trivialization" mentions that gossip and other things of that nature should be kept out of the public sphere. Mckee explains that many people dislike this idea of celebrity lives distracting the public from what the public sphere was originally created to do. However, we are are told a side of this story that I had never heard. The reason gossip and things of that sort were even put in the public sphere to begin with was because women believed that their issues needed to be put out in the public eye. In those days men's issues were politics and any out side of the home decision making and women's issues were the gossip, sex, and any homemaker decisions. Women's issues were not believed to be important, so they were not put out for the public to see. Many women believed they needed to do something about this because if men's issues were made public then so should theirs. Because of the lack of women communication, many women were often lead to believe that the stereotypes on t.v. were what they were supposed to be. This left many women confused about who they really were. What I mean is that if women acted outside of or questioned this fabricated norm they were believed to be unnatural or even crazy. This created a big movement for women that actually helped connect them and told them that it was ok to be who they were. I loved this reading because ever since I was a little girl I questioned many of the house hold chores I was told to do [which I mostly had to do because I was dealt that awful vagina card]. Any way I do think that it is important now to hold on to all of these past women issues because that was a form of women liberation. However, I do not agree with the fact that celebrity life has completely taken over the news hour. I'm not saying that they are shown more, but that they are portrayed to be more important than.... I don't know, maybe... the future of our country!!! I'm just saying that I won't lose a minute of sleep if Britney Spears misses another court date. To conclude my overview of this reading I think that gossip and actual news can be put on the same hour block, but the real news should be more important than the other stuff. After all, times do change.
If I am not mistaken we did have to write about how any movie of our choice constructs gender. I have chosen Pleasantville. In this movie many of the men and women from Pleasantville were a lot like the people described in the readings. The men were the bread winners and most of the women were homemakers if they weren't given "female" jobs. The men dealt with the politics and they were emotionally detached. The women gossiped and giggled together and were also a lot more emotional. As a matter of fact I only saw women cry in this movie. The women were very promiscuous and I also noticed that in this movie many of the women turned different colors before any of the men did. That may show us that women were more likely to try fruit from the forbidden tree before the men were. Also, the men were seen as tough and the protectors. What I didn't like about this is all the women [except Reese Witherspoon] needed to be rescued from a man and by a man. They were defenseless. That makes me so angry!! Even though the women were acting according to the time setting, this still bothers me no matter what time setting it is. Why do women need to be rescued? Why can't a man ever be rescued by a woman? I'm sorry, but I'm not a little girl anymore and this rescue bit is not cutting it. The last thing we need is more impressionable little girls getting the idea that "Prince Charming" will always come to the rescue. Don't get me wrong this movie did have a lot of good and interesting elements, but that rescue thing hit a nerve. I need sleep, so sweet dreams to all and please, no Prince Charmings!