Monthly Archives: February 2022

RCL2

Date
Posted by
Comments2

I do not believe that film and/or television producers have an obligation to present diversity in the casts of films and programs, but I do believe that it should be highly encouraged. In order to answer this question, you have to understand what the word obligation means. According to Oxford Dictionary, obligation is “an act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment”. Morally, I believe an individual should want to recognize and showcase diversity as much as possible, considering today’s climate and how underrepresented some communities are in all aspects of life. On the other side of the definition, it is not illegal to prevent the display of diversity in the media.

I believe that the way some ethnicities, socioeconomic classes, and sexual identities are represented in the media make a mockery of real life situations. A lot of shows try to put out an “inclusive” project, and do it in a very foolish and sometimes backhanded way. There are also many TV streaming services that are increasing the amount of inclusivity in their media and content, but there are still some underrepresented groups left out. For example, an article by Yahoo Finance highlights how Netflix is progressing in diversity and inclusion, yet Latinos, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and disabled individuals are still minimally recognized in projects.

A lack of diversity in the media can lead to many detrimental effects including a decrease in self-confidence, outreach, and power in social and political settings. If all one is exposed to is people who look nothing like them, this can force someone to re-evaluate their own identities, and question why people who resemble them are not being exhibited. Imagine if you were alienated because of something you cannot change, regardless if it is genetic or a plain belief. You would begin to question the validity of your own existence and thoughts, you would feel hindered, unvalued, and under appreciated. This is one of the main reasons why it is especially important to showcase diversity, even though it is not an obligation. Two possible discussion prompts could be:

  1. What is “obligation”, and how does it apply in terms of the media?
  2. How can we persuade those who do not represent different populations in their content to begin to do so?

I believe that if we can generate meaningful discussion around these two topics, we will have a better understanding on the topic at hand and its significance in today’s world.

My two articles:

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/inclusive-netflix-shows-movies-now-140046992.html

Why diversity in media matters

RCL1

Date
Posted by
Comments3

This tweet above discusses one of my favorite shows right now: Euphoria. The lady above tweeted her personal opinion on the overall purpose of the show, and the comment section is full of opposing and similar ideas and beliefs. I believe that the comment thread is fairly deliberative. I say so because there are reasonably distributed speaking opportunities since it is on a social media platform, there is a mutual comprehension about the opinion at hand, the author of the tweet and other repliers to the tweet are open to and consider the different ideas/experiences of others, and there was mutual respect among the commentators.

There were some people in the comment section who agreed and disagreed that Euphoria is somewhat similar and/or different to their personal lives. Many of the comments came from people of all ages, different backgrounds, and different lifestyles, and the majority agree that Euphoria is a drag on real life experiences. Most high school students are not doing crazy psychedelic drugs and putting themselves in life-threatening experiences. Many of the people who commented and said their life was actually more like the lives of characters in Euphoria had mutual support from complete strangers on the internet. Many people also provide other outlooks on the show of Euphoria and what its overall purpose/message is.

In terms of furthering understanding, I find the discussion very useful. Though this discussion is mainly opinion-based, many people understand and respect the take Katherine had on the show, and there were people who replied to her tweet that helped others understanding what Katherine meant by her message. I do believe that the comment thread is close to a deliberation. This deliberation is not as fact based as the ones we will do are, but it is clear to see that this thread follows the social aspects of a good deliberation.

CI3: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study

Date
Posted by
Comments1
CI3: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study

The Tuskegee Study was funded in 1929 by the Julius Oswald Foundation in order to observe and determine the natural course of untreated, latent syphilis in black men. The experiment took place in the city of Tuskegee since that city had the highest syphilis rate in the 6 counties studied. The two main conductors of this study were Dr. Taliaferro Clark and Raymond A. Vonderlehr. The experiment was eventually launched in 1932, initiated by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and included 400 syphilitic men and 200 uninfected men, which represented the control group in the experiment. The study had a lot of racial influences, rather than it being an ethical and science-based study. Darwinism had a heavy influence on the structure of and unethical behaviors that occurred in the medical field, which eventually swayed the operation of this study. Physicians believed that lust, immorality, unstable families, and reversion to barbaric tendencies made black people especially prone to venereal diseases such as syphilis. High syphilis rates were also linked to insanity and crime. Doctors at the time were set on the idea that better medical care for black people could not alter the “evolutionary scheme” they are a part of.

The experiment occurred during a time where major publications advocated for treatment, no matter the stage of sickness. Studies also showed that untreated syphilis could lead to  health complications such as cardiovascular disease, insanity, and premature death. In the year the study was conducted, the USPHS sponsored and published a paper by 7 syphilis experts whom advocated for the treatment of syphilis, but they also had unethical roles in this study. The main conductors of this study promised syphilis treatment to the infected persons if they did become test subjects, but Dr. Clark found it only valuable to observe the consequences of untreated syphilis. The subjects were given mercurial ointment and inadequate doses of neoarsphenamine, which were both non-effective. Conductors were able to get away with these false treatments for so long due to the lack of knowledge Negros had at this time.

The study was supposed to initially last for 6 months, but it lasted for about 40 years. Besides the false promises of treatment, USPHS promised to cover burial expenses once certain men decided to leave the study after they realized the “treatments” were not working. Since funerals were important to blacks who inhabited rural areas, many decided to continue and they were given $50 up front to gain the “trust” of these organizations and doctors. Throughout the course of this study, penicillin was discovered as a treatment for syphilis, yet it was not administered to any subject. To add to the numerous unethical behaviors, those who were not infected that eventually became effected were transferred to the experimental group, which is an inept violation of standard research procedure. Latent syphilis cases were increasing, more deaths were occurring due to untreated syphilis, and the USPHS began to influence the “no treatment” policy on infected drafts in the army. To end on a lighter note, by 1952, 30% of test subjects received some penicillin, but it was through their own actions.

The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare ended the study after it continuously appeared in the national press in 1972. This same year, the department formed the Tuskegee Syphilis Study Ad Hoc Advisory Panel on August 28. This panel focused on the justification of the study and if penicillin should have been provided when first available. The panel consisted on 9 members, 5 of which are black. The final report they developed is questionable because it failed to incorporate many issues caused by USPHS. The members of the panel were afraid to be viewed as a critique on human experimentation, which may be why the information included in the report was limited.

All in all, this experiment was never meant to observe and determine the natural course of untreated, latent syphilis in black men; it was used as a tool to undermine the African American race. Doctors, physicians, government officials, and more (both black and white) worked together to “accomplish what man cannot do”. Blacks, sex, and disease were the main focus of why black people were the way they were in the early 20th century. This is a prominent example of why minorities, especially black people, unfortunately do not trust the medical system.

PAS3: Death Row Granny

Date
Posted by
Comments1
PAS3: Death Row Granny

 Trigger Warning: Death, Fatal Car Accidents

Margie Velma Bullard Barfield was born on October 29, 1932. She was born in South Carolina to a pretty poor family. Her father, Murphy was a cotton and tobacco farmer and it is reported that he was physically abusive towards Margie and her siblings. Margie’s mother, Lillian, never intervened during acts of physical abuse. Margie was never aware that her family was poor until she attended school. She would realize that she wore the same clothes and her clothes were always stained and dirty, but the same did not go for her peers. Her classmates constantly reminded her that she was poor by bullying and tormenting her day in and day out. Margie decided to steal money so she could purchase herself new clothes, her father eventually found out and her father beat her pretty badly because of it.

In high school, Margie began to date a man named Thomas and they decided to drop out of school and get married at age 17. In 1951, the couple had their first son named Ronald Burke. 3 years later they had another child in September named Kim. Margie had to eventually get a hysterectomy in 1964 due to related complications and it lead to severe back pain and depression. She was prescribed pain killers for her pain which later led to dug abuse. A year later, Thomas got into a car accident which left him with a bad concussion (eventually leading to severe migraines) and he turned to alcohol and medication. This led to fights between the two lovers. In April of 1969, Margie left the home with her kids, but the day she left, a room in the house where Thomas was randomly caught fire and since Thomas was passed out drunk when it occurred, so he sadly passed.

A few months after his death, Margie moves back into the home and the house catches fire again. Margie and her children had to go back to living with Margie’s mother until they found new housing. About a year after her ex-husband’s death, she began dating Jenning Barfield. Since Margie was still abusing her medication, her new relationship was filled with arguing, so they eventually attempted to file for divorce. In 1971, Jenning died due to heart complications. Shortly after this occurrence, she received news that her father was diagnosed with lung cancer and shortly after this, the house she shared with Jenning caught fire yet. She had to move back with her parents and a week later, her father passed. In 1974, Velma began to date another man but a few months later he died in a fatal car accident. In December of 1974, Margie’s mom dies due to stomach complications. As you can see there is a lot of trauma and emotional distress on Margie during these years of her life.

Margie was arrested for writing checks in Jenning’s name and during her arrest, she had a mental breakdown. She had to go to a mental hospital before serving a four month jail sentence. In 1976, Margie became a home health nurse for an elderly couple. In January of 1977, the husband passed and a month later, his wife passed as well and it was due to a strange stomach virus. Margie was re-assigned to another elderly couple. In June of 1977, John (the husband) went to the hospital for severe stomach pains and it was diagnosed as a severe stomach virus. Not long after, he died.

Margie began to date another guy named Stewart and she moved in with him in 1977. Stewart found out that Margie was forging checks in his name which led to an argument between the two. They attended a church service together later that night where Stewart complains of stomach pains and nausea. Stewart eventually passed in the hospital. A tip from “Margie’s sister” comes in to police and they say that Margie killed Stewart in the same way she killed their mother. Stewart’s family got an autopsy which led to them finding a lethal amount of arsenic in his system. The police question Margie and she eventually confesses after her son asked if she did it; she felt as though she could not lie to him. Margie says she did not want to kill him, just make him sick by putting it in his drink. They place her in the psychiatric ward of the prison when she was arrested.

On November 23, 1978, Margie’s trial begins in North Carolina and during the trial she admits to not only killing Stewart, but to killing her mother and the people she was taking care of as a home health aid nurse. She was found guilty of murder and given the death penalty. Margie wrote letters to the families of each of her victims on November 1, 1984, a day before her execution date. She apologized for her actions and asked for forgiveness. Her last meal was a bag of cheese doodles and two bottled of Coca-Cola and she was executed by lethal injection on November 2, 1984. She was 52 and was the first woman in the U.S. to be executed since 1962. The families refused to accept Margie’s letters/apologies and she requested to be buried near her first husband, Thomas Burke.