Focus on the Family: The Medium

Focus on the Family has a clear message: anything outside the heteronormative standard is immoral, today's culture is a destructive force that must be combated, there is only one logical choice when it comes to religion, and that abortion is a destruction of life. It is normal to want to place an inordinate amount of attention on the message when it has the tendency to scathe so many. When looking at the viewpoints of Focus on the Family, analyzing the emotional medium seems like a more apt approach to pursue. What emotional drives propel an organization of this sort to lobby against the issues it does? And furthermore, a look into the emotional medium of the message may allow a clearer glimpse into Focus on the family's motivation as well as the effects of its pursuits. There are very valid reasons behind disregarding the message while paying closer attention to its medium.

When we examine the emotional medium of a message we are better able to discern the factors that supersede the message in magnitude of importance. From Media as Media (2008) by Strate, “The medium is the message because content cannot exist without a medium.” (p. 5) Without emotional context as incentive to drive a message there would be no message. People rely upon their feelings to motivate them to action, and without this motivation Focus on the Family would have no message to convey.

As well the emotional medium behind the message determines the nature of the message.

From Media as Media (2008) by Strate:

And the different forms that they take determine what their meaning and impact will be. The words we think to ourselves seem different when we utter them out loud. The words we write down take on a permanence, distance, and impersonal quality in comparison to speech. (p. 5). Emotions drive a message in a manner similar to how a medium affects the nature of a message. The nature of the emotional medium used by Focus on the Family determines how it is interpreted, experienced, expressed. The emotional medium is works in a way very similar to how the physical medium carries the nature of the message.

Examining the emotional medium of the message gives us two important insights into Focus on the Family.

Tracy, Amy. "Collateral Damage? Children With a Gay Parent Speak Out - Focus on the Family." Focus on the Family: Helping Families Thrive. Web. 10 Dec. 2010. <http://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/facing_crisis/my_spouse_struggles_

with_homosexuality/collateral_damage_children_with_a_gay_parent_speak_out.aspx>.

Strate, Lance. "Media as Media." 2008. Web.

Narrative Intolerance

Focus on the Family has been persistently set against the paragon of tolerance and acceptance when approaching perspectives existing outside their own. Evidence of this routine is potently perceptible in how the organization has handled people with an orientation outside the heteronormative standard. It is typical for Focus on the Family to lionize its cause while demonizing its detractors. And not always do people have to actively stand in opposition to Focus on the Family's goals to find themselves an obstacle to the organization's pursuits. When observing this kind of interaction by Focus on the Family, it is often difficult to discern what motivates their particular approach and the effects this approach has on those who unwittingly become the targets of it. The process of gaining a better understanding of the organization's motives and the effects of their actions lends itself to a narrative interpretation.

When observed on a narrative scale, it is much easier to segment and analyze the different aspects of Focus on the Family's agenda. This quality has a great deal to due with narrative's intrinsic and constant state of self-explanation.

In a chapter (2009) by Foss:

Narratives can be examined, as well, for what they reveal about an individual's or a culture's identity. Because stories "have to do with how protagonists interpret things, what things mean to them," they provide clues to the subjectivity of individuals and the values and meanings that characterize a culture. the stories told by a rhetor or group of rhetors, then, provide clues to their worldviews and thus to their motivations for action. (p. 401)

By observing Focus on the Family at this level it allows for a more appropriate approach to often abstract, metaphorical, and arbitrary ideas. While this method might serve to unveil the drive behind Focus on the Family, there seems to be the danger of either buying into or reversing the black and white characterizations that are a natural occurrence in narrative pursuits. The characters in a story are a generally astute place to start any examination of a narrative.

Observing the roles of the various characters present in Focus on the Family's narrative is vital. These characters or groups are more often than not ones that have adopted a polar opposite worldview than that of Focus on the Family. The breakdown on who these characters as I've chosen to cover are, are as follows: those with a orientation outside of heteronormative standards, those seeking rights in regards to same-sex marriage, supporters of abortion, and those who are not Christian. These characters stand in direct opposition to the ideological struggle Focus on the Family is working to protect and thus serve as agents of change. Their progressive stance is an agent of evil in Focus on the Family's worldview or vantage point. From the perspective of Focus on the family these characters are the antagonists to to their protagonist cause, and the organization has created many tailor made personal accounts that work to illustrate this precept.

Focus on the family features many supposed first hand accounts of individuals who have had to deal with those falling outside of the standard sexual orientation. Many of these accounts are negative or deal with situations that have been place under a negative light. One such account of an event that has been placed in this sort of light can be found on the group's webpage.

Dalfonzo (2010) from Focus on the Family's webpage:

When the new neighbors' girl showed up at Jonathan and Amanda Witt's door asking if their 11- year-old daughter could play, Amanda thought nothing of it. Amanda called her daughter and one of her sons and sent them out to get acquainted. The kids played all morning, had lunch together at the Witts' house, then went back outside.

But Amanda's kids soon came running in with an announcement. "Her mother is a lesbian," her 7-year-old son declared.

Amanda grieved not only for the partial loss of her young children's innocence, but also for the girl who brought this unwelcome knowledge into their lives. The girl had cried when she told Amanda's children about her mother, fearing that they would no longer be allowed to play with her. […]

[…] The Witts' story illustrates the difficulty of preserving children's innocence in a culture that seems eager to destroy it. (p. 3).

In looking at this quote it is simple to tell which roles the characters have been placed to play. The mother, Amanda, represents the protagonist fighting against the corruption of her children by a destructive and antagonistic outside culture which is represented by the mother of the 11-year-old girl. If given closer consideration, it may be deduced that the fears of the 11-year-old daughter are erroneously characterized as being the fault of her mother. The alternative reading, that the eleven-year-old girl and her mother have been the repeated victims of prejudice is overlooked entirely. Not only that but the potentiality that they will become the future victims of Amanda's prejudice seems to be a suggested outcome. It seems possible that in this situation the victimized has been distorted in interpretation through Focus on the Family's lens of perception into the role of the victimizer.

Focus on the Family's ability to turn the victimized into the victimizer is born out of the groups limited ability to see outside the perspective of their world view and ideology. Those who subscribe to doctrines that mirror those of Focus on the Family truly believe the evil in this tale lie in the hands of the 11-year-old girl's mother. This kind of constricted interpretation is not one of purposeful intention; it is the product of years of indoctrination. That is not to say it is less dangerous because it is an unintentional reaction to a very learned way of perceiving things. The inability of Focus on the Family to see from a perspective outside their own admits them to see events in a limited scope, letting them then reproduce a narrative that is imbued with a kind of naivety marked by extreme ignorance. One can muse upon the various effects this kind of one-sided storytelling can produce, and from where I stand I can accurately respond to the effects it has as an individual who has been directly affected by this kind of story telling.

From personal experience I have seen the kind of alienation and misunderstanding stories like this create. My first reactions when reading Amanda's story and the thoughts she carried away from the experience are of aversion and distaste. These feelings often prove arduous to set aside and complicate any attempts to create an objective analysis of the situation. When those carrying feeling that are the antithesis of Focus on the Family's read narratives of this variety, feelings of resentment emerge. The end result leaves little room for dialogue between this organization and the many existing outside their world view. The tendencies of Focus on the Family and groups with causes similar to theirs are highly polarizing and only work to widen the gap between them and their many detractors.

Focus on the Family does not just spend their time concerning themselves with the affairs of those falling outside the sphere of the heteronormative majority. Another group the organization directs a lot of its attention towards are those of different religions.

Moreland (2010) from Focus on the Family's webpage:

Hey, I gotta question!" yelled a student from the back of the room. I was sharing the claims of Christ at a University of Massachusetts fraternity house when he interrupted me. "Yes, what is it?" I queried. "I think Jesus is great for you, but I know Buddhists and Muslims, and they're just as sincere as you are. And they think their views are true just like you do. There's no way a person can know his religion is the 'right' one, so the best thing to do is to just believe everyone's religion is true for them and not judge anyone."

Ever heard something like this? It's hard to believe you haven't. What should we make of these ideas? How should we respond? I think there is a good response to this viewpoint [. . .]

[. . .] Are there objective principles to guide one in choosing a religion? Indeed there are. I believe the following four principles should be used to guide one in choosing which religion he or she will follow and, if properly applied, I believe they will point to Christianity as the most rational choice.

It is difficult not to view this passage as a sanctimonious utterance. In this instance the character of the student is less of an antagonist and more of a person in need of rescue. In the narrative above individuals of Focus on the Family are clearly positioned to take up an archetypal role of savior of the misguided. The student is set as an example of a person who's opinions are not valid and who needs to be argued against. His views are considered to not be the rational equivalent of those of Focus on the Family. In addition Focus on the Family makes a claim that can not be backed up on a factual basis; there is no objective principle that could prove one religion to be a more sufficient choice over another. As well as choices involving religion Focus on the Family believes it has the best choices when regarding personal affairs.

Focus on the Family is a vocal opponent of abortion. Its aversion towards the practice stems from its religious background and belief that life begins at conception.

Anonymous (2010) from Focus on the Family's webpage:

[…] I had my life together. However, I was in a sexual relationship that had crushed my faith. The decline was slow, but culminated in a date rape that left me feeling chained to a man I hated . […] And then it happened. I was pregnant.

The evening that I confirmed my pregnancy, my boyfriend was interviewing at a church for a youth pastor position. He knew that I was at home taking a pregnancy test. When he stopped by my house, all he could do was tell me about the interview. I knew then, looking at this man I despised, that I would not keep the baby. I felt that there was absolutely no question of what to do — which even now surprises me. We fought, cried, talked, etc. about what to do. But I knew. knew, too. This could not happen. […]

[…] The doctor was sitting with his feet on a desk, reading the paper and laughing. We went into a little room with Frankenstein-like equipment. I had never even been to a gynecologist before. After a prick, and noise, and a lot of fear, it was over. Fairly quick, fairly painless. In the recovery room, I saw a mother holding her daughter's hand, and I felt a pitiful connection with the four other women on cots. Leaving the building, I felt overwhelming relief. My nausea was gone almost immediately after the baby was taken. The first thing I wanted to do was eat.

The following weeks and months brought a myriad of emotions. My relief quickly turned to grief. I felt a debilitating isolation because no one knew what had happened but he and I. Life went on. I continued to work. Didn't miss a day. But I began to slip. […]

My relationship ended. Thankfully, I was more hopeful for the future. But the damage was done. I became promiscuous, drank and experimented with lesbianism. […]

Now, almost 10 years later, I still struggle with the consequences of my actions. I have lost a child. Weeping, I see my niece who is two months younger than my child. Sadly, I chose to turn away from God, and the choices I made will always be part of my life. […]

Thankfully, His faithfulness isn't dependent on mine. God's spirit has returned to my life now. Finally, I have found some measure of healing. Looking back, I believe that all of my previously understood arguments against abortion fell short because I didn't understand what God says: that every life is sacred — even a broken one.

This narration explicitly lays down a principle of Focus on the Family's doctrine, that principle being that abortion is a sin. As glimpsed from this story it can be deduced that the organization believes no extenuating circumstances exist that could negate this fact. The protagonist of the above story is faced with several realities. She is the victim of rape and burdened by a sense of guilt that binds her to the perpetrator. To exasperate this situation she is pregnant with the child of the man who raped her. In light of these facts, her final conclusion is that life is sacred. While espousing this belief she proceeds to refer to the life of which she feels burdened by as broken. When considering this, it is worrisome to see the protagonist's final conclusion. How is she supposed to raise a child if her perceptions are that she would be dealing with a damaged life?

The narratives of Focus on he Family give us a different way to perceive and interpret the organization's world view. It gives us insight we would not otherwise be able to gleam from news articles, interviews and other mediums. These stories allow us to walk away with a clearer look into Focus on the family's intentions, as well as the potential effects their actions elicit from the outside world. Knowing these facets admit us to gain a greater understanding into the mindsets and actions of this group, thereby equipping those who would wish to argue a point against them with greater ammunition to do so.

Foss, Sonja K., and Sonja K. Foss. Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice. Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2009. Print.

Dalfonzo, Gina R. "Innocence Lost - Focus on the Family." Focus on the Family: Helping Families Thrive. Web. 15 Dec. 2010. <http://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/protecting_

your_family/combatting_cultural_influences/innocence_lost.aspx>.

Moreland, J. P. "Choosin' My Religion - Focus on the Family." Focus on the Family: Helping Families Thrive. Web. 15 Dec. 2010. <http://www.focusonthefamily.com/faith/christian_worldview/why

_is_a_christian_worldview_important/choosin_my_religion.aspx>.

Anonymous. "Life Is Sacred - Focus on the Family." Focus on the Family: Helping Families Thrive. Web. 15 Dec. 2010. <http://www.focusonthefamily.com/lifechallenges/love_and_sex/abortion/

life_is_sacred.aspx>.

Reflections on Falling Down a Flight of Stairs.

Apparently I had charcoal dust from UTD’s art department on the bottom of my shoes. At least that’s what it looked like. The stairs in the Johnson building are coated in this slick plastic, for God knows what reason. I somehow got away with just a bruised leg and a very painful bump on the back of my head. The bump being caused by a pleasant slam of my head into one of the steps. I’ve suddenly realized how great being alive is — and how much I hate stairs, though I hold no animosity towards escalators.

Lions, Tigers, and Body Scanners?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNFY-s_vLVA
I am a little bit perplexed by all these protests concerning body scanners. I am aware of the concerns, but I don't feel walking through one of these things is equivalent to stripping nude in front of airport personnel. And if people are concerned about an invasion of privacy, I wonder how many of them have ever stopped to consider the number of cameras out there that have already invaded their privacy. Oh, let me count the ways: cell phone cameras, shop cameras, roof top cameras, taxi cab cameras, random peeping toms, and etc. Your privacy is constantly being invaded; you're probably just blissfully unaware of it because of how "unintrusive" it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDyo_OQFdAc
Oh, the implications.

Culture Jam

There are organizations that presume to have the best interests of others in mind or that claim to have privileged knowledge pertaining to what is in everyone's best interest. Any organization or group that allows itself this kind of absolute certainty should be placed under a lens scrutiny and closely assessed. It would be prudent to examine any group claiming to have concocted a one size fits all formula to living life with suspicion and doubt. The organization Focus on the Family is a tax exempt evangelical Christian organization that asserts itself as having attained the ideal equation for the perfect family. In addition to this their mission statement “nurturing and defending the God-ordained institution of the family and promoting biblical truths worldwide.” (Focus on the Family), offers further illumination into their incentives. As a method geared towards gaining some personal insight into and to educe the many possible facets of Focus on the Family's motivations, I détourned their logo. In doing this I hoped to shed light upon what I feel is and has been the organization's greatest negative impact upon families across the United States as well as the effects of their endeavors in counties halfway across the globe.

When looking at Focus on the Family's motto which is “helping families thrive”, one might assume positive things concerning their agenda. They are here to help, to do what they can to assist families in need and families in general. But when the time is taken to further investigate their actions, impact, and behavior towards different groups; a few questions come to mind. If they are here to help families, why do they exclude certain families and family members based upon the following criteria: sexual orientation, appearance, parenting choices, religious background, and personal decisions? As well, why does Focus on the Family frequently act antagonistic towards individuals they have chosen to exclude? If they are not acting antagonistic towards a group or persons, then Focus on the Family spends much of its effort attempting to alter the behavior of the excluded until those persons or groups better reflect their standards. Observing these mixed signals is enough to make one wonder what their actual intentions are. Do they mean to harm, to help, subjugate, or change people for the better?

When scrutinizing these perceptibly contradictory possibilities, it is important to remember that family is dependent upon acceptance, communication, respect for each other, as well as an understanding and dynamic not often observed outside of family. If an organization like Focus on the Family actively works to exclude or forcibly alter specific members of a family and by alter I mean change the character of who those members are, its efforts are indirectly or perhaps directly breaking down the basic structure of some families. It becomes difficult to decipher the intentions of a group that seems to hold so many contradictory aspirations, and if we examine it further, the irony of this obfuscated situation is that the lack of clarity in it appears to be an intentional construction. If the intentions presented by Focus on the Family contradict with the real-life actions they take and the ultimate consequences of those actions, then a different question must be asked. What motivates an organization like Focus on the Family to persistently behave in this way when the observable effects of their endeavors contradict their supposed cause of “helping families thrive”?

My détournement centered on Focus on the Family's long standing cause to alienate and discriminate against individuals who do not fit the mold for what they consider acceptable. For my culture jam I concentrated my efforts towards online groups holding anti-homosexual sentiments. The globally targeted agendas of these organizations mirror those of Focus on the Family. The efforts of these groups have proven to be damaging to individuals who have not willfully made life choices that merit them becoming the targets of such zealous animosity. The motivations directing these organizations appear to be propelled by intolerance and geared towards the estrangement of individuals deemed to be either unacceptable or undesirable from society. Focus on the Family's attempts as well as the attempts of these groups to legislate and proliferate their ideological stand point across the globe have produced detrimental consequences for many.

The emotionally damaging and erroneous ventures of Focus on the Family in pursuits like homosexual conversion therapy and lobbying against an anti-bullying bill simply because it mentioned (in brief) bullying that targeted homosexual students. Efforts of this sort can alienate individuals growing up and may often create very real and very negative impacts on people's lives.
In a news report (2010) by Goldman:
The Colorado-based organization says the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network has targeted thousands of school districts nationwide with literature. "Schools are only allowed to provide one message about homosexuality; that it's normal and should be embraced," Focus on the Family said of the gay group's message. (p. 2).
As seen above, Focus on the Family and its members show a marked degree of intolerance and inability to recognize their own antipathy towards those outside their ideology and worldview. The organization refuses to recognize the importance of noting of any differences that might potentially make young individuals more likely to become the victims of bullying. Focus on the Family shows an amazing amount of interest in preventing education that does not fit to their standards but has little problem providing education or more appropriately reeducation tailored to their needs.

If they are not commenting on how inappropriate mention of orientation outside of hetero-normative standards is, then they are busy reeducating those who fall outside of hetero-normative standards. In an interview (2008) by Draper, “Focus says the conferences started a national conversation on the origins of homosexuality and have nurtured thousands of troubled families and helped hundreds of former gays and lesbians 'escape the lifestyle.'” (p. 1). The emotional harm inherent in telling another that they are not alright as they are and that they can be changed is difficult to measure. Regardless of this, there is no denying that this kind of approach has destroyed families. This organization is unable to or unwilling to examine the impact of their behavior. The extent of Focus on the Family's desire to standardize this type of intolerance is far reaching.

The best example relating to the scope and impact of organizations such as this would have to be the situation in Uganda, where their impact is readily apparent. To be precise, the influence of such groups is easily seen in Uganda's anti-homosexual bill where people are threatened by the potentiality of receiving penalties as high as the death sentence for homosexual acts.
In an article (2010) by Gettleman:
“Now we really have to go undercover,” said Stosh Mugisha, a gay rights activist who said she was pinned down in a guava orchard and raped by a farmhand who wanted to cure her of her attraction to girls. She said that she was impregnated and infected with H.I.V., but that her grandmother’s reaction was simply, “ ‘You are too stubborn.’ ” (p. 3).
These are likely not the intended effects of these organizations, but their actions abroad have exasperated their occurrence. All these factors influenced how I approached my détournement.

When détourning Focus on the Family's logo, I had a specific purpose in how I reinterpreted the symbolism of the image. I manipulated the logo to elicit feelings of shame from the people viewing it. To do this I took the language and symbolism of the image subverted it and set it against its authors. I converted the message of familial bonding by turning that message inside out; specifically, I reappropriated the imagery by changing it into that which expressed a sense of loss. The logo as presented by Focus on the Family features a child whose hands are being held by two supportive parent figures. The gender of the parents, respectively, as male and female is seemingly implied by the proportional size differences of the hands located on either side of the child. The image is meant to evoke feelings of joy, personal satisfaction and contentedness. I used the iconography of Focus on the Family and warped it to evoke feelings diametrically opposite of the ones it was meant to provoke. I achieved this by taking the image and altering the placement of the hands until they were no longer holding the arms of the child. Through this manipulation I created a sense of abandonment instead of the feelings of support and bonding the logo was meant to present. To further the effect I placed fire surrounding the icon of the child as supplementation, adding connotations of abandonment as well as symbolic implications of the ideological concept of Hell.

After I had détourned the organization's logo I utilized it on a few Facebook pages and online forums. These pages included: Reinstate Proposition 8, Protect Marriage, and Million Against Same-Sex Marriage. My goal in my détournement was to induce strong feelings of shame and self-doubt. While I believe I was effective in visually creating an image meant to induce those feelings, the results produced by placing my détournement in the view of those supportive and receptive of Focus on the Family were frequently those of animosity and derision. The image was typically removed not long after I had posted it. The final outcome always resulted in my banning from these groups.

I believe these reactions were not evidence against the effectiveness of my détournement, but instead evidence  proving its effectiveness. The typical  response produced by those met with a perspective that does not mesh with their accepted standard of reality is denial of its validity and refusal to examine it objectively. While I had hoped to see at least one thoughtful response, I regret to say that I received none. Regardless, this did offer some insight into the intolerance present in and antipathy of individuals who subscribe to the doctrines espoused by Focus on the Family.


Draper, Electa. "Focus on the Family Focuses on Homosexuals - The Denver Post." Home - The Denver Post. Web. 12 Oct. 2010. <http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_10788844>.

Focus on the Family: Helping Families Thrive. Web. 13 Oct. 2010. <http://www.focusonthefamily.com/>.

Gettleman, Jeffrey. "Americans’ Role Seen in Uganda Anti-Gay Push." New York Times. 3 Jan. 2010. Web. 5 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html>.

Goldman, Russell. "School Anti-Bullying Programs Push Gay Agenda, Christian Group Focus on the Family Says - ABC News." ABCNews.com - ABCNews.com: Breaking News, Politics, World News, Good Morning America, Exclusive Interviews - ABC News. Web. 13 Oct. 2010. <http://abcnews.go.com/US/school-anti-bullying-programs-push-gay-agenda-christian/story? id=11527833&page=1>.

In Search of the Dallas Art Community or Where's the Door?

Working on it

This Whole Wiki Leaks "Fiasco"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxPB9yy7IJ4
I find no small amount of personal confusion in how the United States intends to go about prosecuting a man that is not a citizen of the United States for doing something that is a protected right in the United States. This is no trifle. A large degree of hypocrisy is on display here. If there were greater degrees of transparency in governments (as well as any human interaction for that matter) across the globe, I can only imagine the improvement the state of human affairs would endure.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/12/14/tsr.moore.defends.assange.cnn?hpt=T2

The "Pro Family" Movement in Uganda

http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-los-angeles/scott-lively-his-gay-nazi-theory-on-the-daily-show#
I really just want to laugh at this person.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08HpzqZAQ_g
"Homosexualized" - did he just say that?  Anyway, that's beside the point. Look at the effect people like this have had on Uganda. He's dangerous as a human being when he says the things he does; the second video is evidence enough of this.

My role in a group project

I found this particular project interesting since it is an idea that is actually plausible. For it we had to propose and formulate a possible appeal to a nonprofit organization for an endeavor working toward the advancement of the arts. I'm actually considering this-

Group Project: Visual Coordinator

For my role in this group I had to come up with a viable idea for the foundation of the visual aspect of the project. Not only that, for the proposition I put myself in the shoes of an artist that would benefit from the exposure the project would create for digital artists. With the input of the group I proposed a method that I felt was most viable for the delivery of this type of visual art to a large audience while it still being cost effective and easily transportable. This method involved projecting images of digital artwork onto buildings at a large scale using a digital projector. For the slides used in the group proposition I provided pieces of my artwork that would be used in the project. My artwork set the basis for the visual style other artists would work towards when considered for representation in the project. (a style oriented around surrealism and duality) I created one piece of artwork with the intent that it would be included in the final group presentation. I also provided feedback on questions asked by the group on the importance of this type of visual art and how we as a whole could best convey and explain this. The last important role I played was in providing a viable venue for the display of such artwork. I chose Deep Ellum for its art community, for the large number of abandoned buildings in the area, and due to Dallas' efforts to revitalize the area through art.

Culture Jam Image

I altered this image to elicit feelings of shame from the people viewing it. To do this I took the language and symbolism of the image and turned it against its authors. I reinterpreted the message of familial bonding by turning that message inside out; specifically, I converted the image into one that expressed a sense of abandonment. 

After the image was created I utilized it on a number of conservative forums, Evangelical Christian groups, and groups opposed to same-sex marriage found on Facebook. The typical response I received was one of derision, and the image was typically removed. Most often the final outcome was that I was banned from these groups.

Artifact Choice

The artifact I have chosen to cover is Focus on the Family. Focus on the Family is an Evangelical Christian group based in Colorado that brandishes and promotes their own particular form of family values. Not only does this group incorporate fundamentalist doctrine as the standard by which all Christians should follow, they also view that standard to be the only proper standard nationally and internationally. Their logo features what appears to be a mother and father affectionately holding their child by the hands. The main issues this group holds strong vocal and negative views on are pornography, gambling, drug use, homosexuality, abortion and sex outside of marriage. Two ideological standpoints the group is in favor of are school prayer and corporal punishment. Because it is a tax exempt entity, it is not allowed to hold favor towards any political candidate. However, Focus on the Family does discuss politics on it's radio station, and its sister group Focus on the Family Action has less restrictions on the politics it is allowed to discuss.

In the current culture Focus on the Family is well know for promoting what many consider to be traditional American family values. They promote an ideal that many can be conceptualized as what the wholesome American family would equate to in the 1950s. Anything outside this vantage point is deemed offensive, dangerous, and bad for humanity as a whole. They have commonly taken real and honest academic research, and then distorted it to support their agenda. One particularly controversial methodology the group utilizes in the struggle to meet their ideal standard for society is gay conversion therapy. This type of “therapy” takes what it perceives as aberrant behavior and attempts to subvert it to what Focus on the Family believes to be normal, healthy behavior. In addition to this, focus on the family strongly opposes same-sex marriage and labels same-sex parents as unfit parents while viewing gay marriage as an attempt to deteriorate, undermine, and pervert acceptable social standards.

I have chosen this as my artifact because I find Focus on the Families methods to be damaging to individuals as well as hostile to groups they view as different. They promote bigotry through their apparent lack of understanding of those that do not share their standards on what constitutes a normal and healthy family. Not only do groups like this work towards complicating the lives of adults who are forced to make difficult decisions regarding matters (matters such as sexuality, abortion, and raising their own children) difficult, but it weighs heavy on young individuals who do not fit in to the stereotype of the “normal” or “average” American child. In fact, groups like this condone the notion that those who do not fit their standard mold of normal should be ostracized or forcibly compelled to change until they reflect what they deem acceptable. No group has the right to decide on matters outside of their following or to impose their standards, beliefs, practices, and ideology on the young.

Animal Communication Vs. Human Communication

There are a few basic properties of human language that can readily be recognized on a universal scale; these properties become apparent when we examine the purpose of language. Human language is used to externally communicate internal thoughts and ideas about our surroundings, our mood, our conscious perceptions, information about the past, information about the present, and information about the future. When we look at the rest of the animal kingdom's methods of communication, we see striking similarities but also apparent and perhaps presumed deficiencies when compared to the complexity of human communication. Within the human language there are certain intricacies that no other animal seems to be competently capable of naturally. For instance, the grammatically complex structure of the human language does not occur with in any other animal. But when we observe animal communication on its basic levels, we find that there are many similarities in the purpose for its existence when compared to human communication. For example, Vervet Monkeys use a series of alarm call to alert each other of the presence of danger. The use of these alarm calls serves as rudimentary evidence of forethought or knowledge regarding the future. Foresight is something very apparent in human communication, but it is also something difficult to identify in the rest of the animal kingdom. Within Chimpanzees there is a basic yet perceivable instance of cultural transmission. Based upon geographical location and habitat, chimpanzees show different preferences for the construction of tools, behaviors, and interaction. Cultural transmission of knowledge and preferences can be seen across the globe in humans but appears to be rare in animals. Another example of this is observable in certain bird species who have different dialects determined by geographical range. Birds who are displaced from areas where their dialect is not common are often met with hostility. While not an exact reflection of this, it might be said that humans are also prone to dialect bias in a similar way. Body language plays a major role in human communication as well as in the animal kingdom. A few instances of non verbal communications in humans can be listed as the following: hand signals, signs of aggression, signs of fear, emotions, and eye contact. When compared to animals, there are similarities and differences in these types of nonverbal communication. Unlike humans, eye contact is very often only used to convey aggression in the animal kingdoms; animals in which this is very commonly the case include: cats, dogs, and chimpanzees. When humans are placed in states of fear, recoiling and hunching down are typical reactions, and in animals this is often the typical response as well. Humans and animals parallel each other in a lot of the basics modes of communication. In rare circumstances humans and animals manage to parallel on the more complex levels. While this might not exactly prove to be the case as research on the subject expands, we appear to show complexities in the areas of language based communication that no other animal can match up to.

Dugatkin, Lee Alan. Principles of Animal Behavior. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 2009. Print.

Redonkulous

The person in the above image is me. This image represent the rather ambivalent feelings I have towards gender standards. Although I adamantly believe most gender standards have been made up, I was raised from the perspective of the antagonistic text found in the above image. Despite my fervent feelings towards the lacking relevance of gender standards, I suspect my upbringing has had a residual effect on my life.

Dreamworlds in Incongruity

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6LHg_OFFRY
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBTu7cQ_R34&feature=related
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elrenG9bP-k&feature=related
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KZty9LeAxE&feature=related
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHJrbaTTpvI&feature=related
Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXPXeJtuxBc&feature=fvw
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn7Yu4jzWZM&feature=related


The film Dreamworlds III takes images presented to us in the symbol injected world of the music video and then uses incongruity as a method directed at changing our personal understanding of the imagery employed in music videos. To achieve this the filmmaker introduces the concept of the dream world as a tool to draw a direct emotional and logical connection between the viewer and the alternative reading the filmmaker hopes to portray. This alternative reading focuses on the uses of sexuality and objectification of women in music videos, and the potential socially destructive repercussions as well as the possible occurrences of violence this imagery may be indirectly responsible for.


The first apparent mechanism employed to convey an alternative interpretation of the over-sexualized images presented in music videos is by juxtaposition; via this method the director places the images found in music videos besides real-life images of sexual violence enacted against women. Once the filmmaker has done this, he points out the stark similarities to be found in the images on our T.V. screens and acts of real-life violence. It is apparent why this method is very effective. When what we view as a form of entertainment lines up so congruently with actual acts of violence, it is incongruent to our initial interpretations of the images and as the images were presented (as entertainment) to us. The second observable mechanism the filmmaker utilizes involves focusing in on scenes that reduce women to mere body parts. In doing this the director forces us into a situation where finding an alternative interpretation is difficult to achieve. When individuals are reduced to mere body parts and secondary sex characteristics, objectification becomes immediately apparent and remains as the only viable interpretation. The third mechanism can be found in the removal of the context in which the images initially existed. By removing the context surrounding the images, we are left with a hyper-sexualized display that gives way to no alternate explanation.


All of these mechanisms are summed up into the idea of the dream world, which in itself serves as a painful contradiction. It is not presented as a dream world of the viewer's invention, but one created by those presenting the images to us. With this reinterpretation of the images, the label dream world proves to be even more paradoxical.

Art Student

In terms of my personal aesthetic development and what I have put into those endeavors, when I evaluate a piece of artwork or create art, I do my best to initially disregard the rules I've been taught. I do not do this because I feel there's no merit in that process of evaluation but simply because I feel strongly that it clouds my better judgment. The first thing I take notice of when I see, hear, or read anything are the thoughts and feelings it evokes. I find that, although invaluable, the tools most students have been equipped with often inadvertently distance those students from their own emotions and interpretations. In this way, it manages to deconstruct the purpose of art entirely.



People keep turning into cartoon characters. Where's my eraser?

I mean absolutely no offense to anyone who has done this. I understand people are only trying to help, but I have a problem with the concept behind it. I know I'd get the warm fuzzies if I did things of this sort, and I won't say that I have never done anything like this before.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/cartoons-from-80s-facebook-profile_n_791526.html

The title of this blog is my Facebook status update. I don't understand how people believe this is going to help in a fight against child abuse. In this instance it is more of a "fight" rather than an actual contribution to the cause of child abuse prevention. Child abuse is an issue everyone should already be aware of. Actions as simple as this might temporarily bring people to a heightened state of awareness via the momentary confusion it causes and the inevitable question it will illicit from the confused. That question being, "Why has everyone turned to toons?" But this heightened state of awareness is temporary and probably will do very little to effect the situation. The only reasons I perceive for why anyone would want to participate in this are the following: it is fun, it requires little effort, and it gives the participants the warm fuzzies. When I say warm fuzzies, I mean it allows people to feel as if they contributed to a good cause. Best bet to fighting child abuse? Try posting the link at the bottom of this blog, convince others to read it, and suggest they follow your example. It's not fun, it requires effort, and I doubt anyone will actually do it. But regardless of what anyone else does, you should still try.

http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/signs.cfm

The Old Gives Way to the New

Traditional media in its own way has worked to dissipate the public sphere. Instead of  people voicing their personal views and opinions amongst each other, some turned to the omnipresence of traditional media in search for figure heads who voiced opinions that could easily be latched onto. In this media saturated environment people were no longer required to look to each other to confirm their beliefs and opinions on issues; they could simply turn on the TV to get all the information they required and to hear viewpoints they considered to be the most agreeable. While as a whole this may have diminished the public sphere, it still did not entirely eliminate the need individuals had to occasionally turn to one another for an outlet for their concerns.

With the advent of the Internet, however, something completely different happened. People were given a way to browse for information and search for forums in which they could easily discuss and voice opinions amongst each other. Not only was it made simple to find opinions to identify with, but opinions of a dissenting nature were also easy to find in the same places. In the environment provided by the Web a means of interaction was offered to the viewer. With an open forum such as the Internet greater levels of freedom were introduced not present with traditional media. People were no longer constricted and denigrated to a state of lesser importance. The Internet offered liberation in the form of interactivity; allowing us to communicate our thoughts and ideas to a mass audience instantaneously. 

"Infinite" Light Tunnel

I made this for a 3D design class. The subject was repetition of an object to create a pattern or design. I built the frame from a single piece of wood, which I then cut into four different pieces. I created a backing for it by going to Hobby Lobby and butchering the back of a cheap picture frame that I purchased. I also made certain the frame had the hangers required to hang it from the wall. I bought a string of alternating LEDs from target. I bent the length of the lights in the middle and taped them together. I installed them into the frame using a hot glue gun. I cut the wire leading to the 6 volt battery box that the lights came with to power them, then soldered that wire to a 6 volt DC wall outlet plug, hot glued the soldering points, and taped it all with electrical tape. I ran the wire from the lights to the outlet through a hole I created at the bottom of the frame. I took it to a glass shop; they installed the mirror onto the front of the backing and the one way mirror onto the top of the frame.

Analyzing Art of My Own

This is my artwork. I had to write in the 3rd person for class, and I felt pretty awkward doing that.

The artwork is titled A Fleeting Grasp. The color palette of the work is almost monochromatic with the exception of the hues red, orange, and yellow. The width at which the image is presented is considerably less than the height, and when the photo is closely examined, it appears as if it could very likely be placed at any angle from this position while still looking appropriate. The main elements of the picture are two mirror images of a hand, an orb, and a long, otherworldly rectangular column that appears to be a window or portal of some form. This rectangular portal contains much of the image's hue shifts from red, to orange, to yellow. Also, within this rectangular area are a series of diagonal lines running the expanse of the rectangle's height. The orb in the image is positioned a distance considerably closer to one of the hands than the other. This placement of the orb and the gesture of the hands give a feeling of tension and semi-resolution depending on which of the hands the viewer is focused upon. The orb also seems to be made of glass, and the background as seen through it is flipped and distorted. The whole piece is high contrast with very stark transitions between dark and light throughout. It is this contrast that gives the picture its monochromatic feel. The image is its darkest near the mid point and at its lightest (from top to bottom) at the opposing extremes. If the picture is carefully examined, one can observe that space is warped at a point unspecified near the center making what is seen in the photo, something that is impossible naturally. There is a whole balance created by the contrast of the elements in the picture. The upper half of the image is simply a reflection of the lower half with the exception of the orb. The other objects in the image serve as a backdrop that present a vaguely familiar or distinguishable environment. 

The image appears to take place in an unspecified time, and the setting around the individual elements is vaguely familiar; that is, it looks as if it were set in a room. Placing the time of the piece would prove to be fairly difficult. The artwork is within the realm of surrealism. This assessment falls in line with the nature of the imagery presented in the photo as well as the artist's influence's, which include: Jerry Uelsmann, Remedios Varo, and Dora Maar. The imagery the artist employs represents an apparent struggle between two opposing abstract ideas. This can be perceived in the palpable desire for either of the two hands within the image to grasp upon the glass orb which is floating at varying (depending upon which hand your are looking at) distances from the hands. While there is clear intent, it is left up to the viewer to provide individual interpretation. Various meanings could be derived from the images by context of the struggle of the hands or even the title of the artwork. The artist very often links his artwork with quotes or references to other works by use of the title. This is done to direct viewer interpretation towards a specific end while trying to avoid confining the viewer's interpretation towards that end. The artist was raised Roman Catholic, but has expressed opinions and views that are diametrically opposed to that upbringing. He is someone who has labeled himself as an unquestioning agnostic atheist. The artist has voiced an affinity for the literary works of William Blake, Christopher Hitchens, Alan Watts, Robert Browning, Hervey Cleckley, John Milton, and Philip K. Dick. Other pieces of art by him include: New Christian Literature , And the World Outside Crept into My Life , Gutter Heart Twins, In the Forest for the Trees, and A Life in My Own.

The work I've spent a great deal discussing in this paper is of my own creation. I would rather not ruin anything by deconstructing it. I feel that would be a detriment to the creative process of observation. People put a great deal of themselves into the art they see, hear, and read. But – since I need to fill this page, I will do so. I feel like I've done enough damage as it is, and the point of the paper is to interpret. So, although I am the creator, this is simply my interpretation and explanation of a process, not an explanation of the artwork. It'd be impossible to do that since most of what I come up with happens spontaneously and without clear intent. I give my work meaning after it is completed. The piece is titled A Fleeting Grasp for a few reasons. It originates from a Robert Browning quote, “One's reach should exceed one's grasp else what's heaven for?” My interpretation of that quote is that men often strive to go after things they do not fully understand or what they could not possible hope to obtain. I have tried to represent this concept photographically with the help of some digital manipulation. One example of this, that I expect often goes unnoticed, is the warping of space into a lemniscate, meant to suggest infinity. This warp happens at the midpoint of the image. I have done my best to make a visual translation of written words. The artwork is literally and simply words turned to pictures. I've found that I think best when concepts are represented by images and that has become an extension of how I work. I am just a visual sort of person. I still would like to point out the following. In the creation process, I operated very much unaware of what I was trying to get at, but in the end, I got there anyway. 

Ghost in the Shell: Gender Subversion Subverted

When imagining the potential subversion of gender roles possible with the advent of certain technologies, the question might come to mind how existing technologies have presently supplemented the desire to extinguish or reconstruct the ever-present and dominating nature of gender roles. Cybernetics is presented in the anime Ghost in the Shell as one of the technologies capable of subverting our understanding of gender identity and the present reality of gender roles. In this endeavor, Ghost in the Shell makes an admirable attempt to do so. In understanding why Ghost in the shell fails at this, it is important to examine the tools employed in its narrative and the current state of technology in deconstructing gender roles. Ghost in the Shell fails to convey a message of positive progressive change for the same reason new emerging technologies have failed to create that change. The failure to escape gender roles can be seen in the human desire to work within gender specific contexts. While it may seem like this proposition infers gender can not be discussed, (It does not.) this proposition instead proposes finding a route of ideological exodus within gendered contexts. This ideological exodus is often where attempts at subverting and reconstructing gender roles often fail. Ghost in the Shell's main blunder in doing this does not emerge in it's hyper idealized representations of the masculine and feminine forms; as well, not even in its over employed representation of nudity of the feminine form. Ghost in the Shell and present technology fail to subvert what are our base preexisting notions and biological perceptions of Gender.

At its best, Ghost in the Shell works to change gender standards, but fails to change gender concepts. It attacks the most base notions of the female gender as vulnerable by use of the main protagonist and the supporting characters. The Major is represented as an organic lifeform encapsulated in a cybernetic body. The Major's gender is identified as female only through the external nature of the cybernetic body her (I will assume for the purposes of this paper.) mind inhabits. Still, there are no actual discussions of the Major's initial biological gender throughout the film; she could have been biologically male before cybernetic augmentation. If this is the case, however, it does not negate my argument. The film firmly establishes the major's gender role as female specific during her merger with The Puppet Master. (A character whose gender is also semi-ambiguous.) Even though the process undergone is a merger of identities to form a new and independent mind, the Major is described as the “bearer” of The Puppet Master's child within the film. This does a great deal to reverse the films attempts to deconstruct gender roles. If it were truly a genderless formation of life, it would not be refereed to in gendered terms.

The film failed to achieve the ideological exodus required to reconstruct the nature of gender roles. The lines dividing gender were obfuscated through the uses of the film's narrative, but not redefined. This is not entirely the film's fault. To subvert or deconstruct the nature of gender, you have to escape fundamental biological desires and current perceptual understandings of what it means to be human [that have been] taught to us since birth. Like the film, technology often supplies us with a route to subvert gender roles, but technology is often only used to simply obscure and at the same time reinforce existing gender roles.

And now my head hurts.

#1 Electric Crucifixion

#2 New Christian Literature

#3 A Fleeting Grasp

These images are in threes, for me they're a step by step representation of a loss in faith (this might offend some, oh well) and a growing sense of rationality.

part of a story I never finished

It was morning and the sunlight was thin in the air and carried in the mist across the street to a vacant lot where shopping carts lie in various states of disarray. They had seemingly been wheeled to this spot from the supermarket 150 yards away and left to mingle there amongst each other. A man on the other side of the street sat on a bench reading the paper while in the street cars lined up at the light waiting for it to turn green. As the light changed freeing the cars to move along on their unknown yet predetermined route, a woman nearby walked her dog on the sidewalk. Further down the street a group of children stood and waited diligently for the bus to arrive except for one child who displaced himself a considerable distance away from the rest of the children. He fumbled with his jacket and stared at the ground as if the weight of the world were forcing his gaze. He was so intent in this that he barely realized when the bus had arrived despite its loud stopping hiss and the even louder opening of its doors.

The Conditions of Religion

Religion often asks that its adherent give up a piece of their personal identity in favor of a prescribed construct of what that religion has deemed acceptable. If not this, at the very least, then the followers of religion determine what acceptance they will grant or deny based upon personal interpretations of their religious texts. I believe this may be a simplification, but it is how I've come to see things. When given a choice, people often seek out a place that serves as a bolster for existing beliefs and to find a sense of community with like-minded individuals. For the people that choose the communities they're a part of, it serves as a comfort zone. For those who are born into it, it can either serves as a source of comfort or a place of increasing alienation.

Between the ages of six and seven I witnessed my mother reading from a blue book with an image of a rosary on it. (It was a prayer book.) I had no idea what was special about the book at the time; I was simply aware that it was only one of my mothers two pieces of preferred literature. My mother's other read of choice? The Enquirer. Had I known the depths of it then. For me, the conditions of religion were the loss of my youth by my attempts to survive the dogma of a person that I should love more than I do now.