Risks of escaping reality through binge-watching

Doing it wrong: Enabling the self through conscious reflection

This past weekend, I was one of 500 student activists who attended the National Students for Justice in Palestine conference at Tufts. I attended a workshop on Black Liberation, which introduced the following quotation to us: “Caring for myself is not self indulgence, it is an act of self preservation and that is an act of political warfare.”
These are the words of Audre Lorde, the renowned black, feminist and queer poet. These are words that are important for any woman, person of color or anyone else who has ever been marginalized in any capacity, to hear.
We exist in a society that marks idleness and lack of activity as laziness, acts of self-care as selfish. Marx argues that conscious labor is essential to our humanity. I propose that in addition, conscious acts of meditation and peace, as opposed to unthoughtful ones, are just as essential. Too often my breaks from work consist of scrolling through a social media feed, or going to a party I feel an underwhelming desire to go to.
In our action-oriented lives, there is too much time spent doing and not enough time spent thinking. We are always expected to define who we are and what we want to do, but not allotted enough time to really think about these things in an independent way. We tire ourselves out trying to do everything we can fit on our plate, and so we are not able to give ourselves over fully to those things and people we really care about.
The system we are a part of privileges a very specific type of person. We all know him well: the straight, white, upper class, cisgendered man. As a believer in the whole “gender/sexuality are a spectrum” thing, I’m unsure if this elusive man really exists. The important thing is, however, he exists as an ideal. Not an ideal in the way Beyoncé is an ideal because she seems perfect, but an ideal in the way that it is easiest to succeed when you are that aforementioned person. People who do not fit that ideal often feel the weight of the system working against them, consciously or not. So to care for ourselves, in a society that has, in some respects, failed to care for us, is like Lorde said. It is an act of political warfare.
Preserving ourselves, caring for ourselves, spending time thinking about ourselves—these actions, when done consciously, make us better fit to serve others. There are endless ways to actively engage in a healing process, whether it is through reconnecting with nature, taking a yoga class, going for a run, or just being alone and thinking about who we are. The important thing is that we attempt to feel some sort of renewal and introspection and resist a society that tells us we must be productive at all times.
We often partake in processes that have the potential to be healing, but unless we go in with the intention of trying to revive something within ourselves, they won’t fulfill their healing potential. As I attempt to approach life in a manner of “self-preservation,” I encourage readers to do the same. We can’t be agents of change or resistors of oppression unless we enable ourselves to be resilient, and caring for ourselves in a conscious manner is essential to that.

Doing it wrong: In defense of looting: how protesters can challenge corporate systems

Society divides protesters into a binary of good and bad. Good protesters are peaceful, nonviolent and non-threatening. Bad protestors are aggressive, threatening and rule-breaking.
Since the Civil Rights era, the dominating rhetoric has privileged peaceful protests. The only reason that legislation in support of Civil Rights was passed was supposedly because the movement was largely nonviolent. Yet let us not forget that the champion of nonviolence within the Civil Rights movement, Martin Luther King Jr., was killed by the same system of oppression that claims to respect nonviolence.
Good protestors do not loot—only thugs loot. This is the message fed to us by the white supremacist media, government and police force.
On Black Friday, I attended a peaceful protest in honor of Michael Brown in front of the Macy’s in Herald Square, the largest department store in the United States. The protest called on people to boycott Black Friday in an effort to not exercise spending power in favor of corporations that profit off of marginalized communities around the world.
The protest was not that large; there were at most a couple hundred people. Yet there were several dozen NYPD officers, all armed. And once protestors started walking into the Macy’s, almost every single officer followed, because although the police claim to protect and serve all people, including protesters, they clearly serve sources of power, including corporations.
Marginalized people constantly have to defend themselves as peaceful in a culture that has violently created a system of domination that works against them. We may voice our grievances, but to take action—even with something as simple as a boycott or as intense as looting—is to go too far. Corporations may exploit us, and that is legal and alright, but the people may not exploit corporations.
I don’t consider myself an explicit supporter of looting, but I am wary to criticize it. Companies like Walmart and Target are known to exploit workers here and abroad; top executives profit while factory and store workers barely scrape by. To loot companies like these is one method of civil disobedience against this system of exploitation.
Furthermore, why shouldn’t impoverished communities take advantage of an opportunity to acquire free things? Private property only benefits those in power, so what is the point of abiding by rules that do not benefit us?
We live in a country where corporations own everything, and marginalized communities hardly own anything. It is no coincidence that the media vehemently opposes looting when they profit off of the same system these corporations do. It is no surprise that the police and government protect corporations when they are generously funded by them.
Not only does looting actively resist a system of capitalist repression, it is also a method of gaining attention and pushing those in power to listen. If you are a person of color, you don’t have a dominant voice, so if looting is what gets those in power to listen, so be it.
The media tries to portray looting as a violent, chaotic, selfish and apolitical act when it really is none of these things. It would be easier to not take a risk, to stay docile, to go by the terms of the dominant few. To loot is an act of aggression against the system of oppression that was founded on the domination of people of color.
I support those who loot because I value human life over the life of a corporation, over the sale of a manufactured object, and I have no interest in preserving the racist system that thrives off of capitalism.

Doing it wrong

Risks of escaping reality through binge-watching

This piece represents the opinion of the author:

November 13, 2014

A couple of weeks ago Netflix released the entire series of “Gilmore Girls”—a crowd-pleasing, Bechdel -test-passing dramedy infamous for its quick witticisms. The release was undoubtedly one of my (many) favorite moments in Netflix history.

I am definitely not alone—at least half of the many people I’ve mentioned “Gilmore Girls” to recently have also confessed to binge watching it now that it is available to them.

There is something about this show that makes binging on it particularly concerning to me. The two protagonists, Lorelai and Rory, along with many of the supporting cast—even the seemingly malicious ones like Paris—are all relatable and heartwarming people. I do not doubt that people like them exist; in fact, I strive to surround myself with such good-natured people. Yet I am generally aware that not everyone is harmless and quirky.

The entire town of Stars Hollow—the setting for “Gilmore Girls”—is completely unimaginable to me. Perhaps I am too much of a jaded New Yorker, but the existence of a simultaneously working class and cutesy neighborhood seems like a stretch.

Stars Hollow is a place, where all of the people are loveable and funny, the most dangerous person is a rebellious teenager, and everyone gets your obscure Velvet Underground and David Lynch references, so why is it’s depiction so addicting?

Aside from the picturesque snow scenes, even the tones of the show are warm. A theme song by Carole King lulls us into this sweet town and the music in between scenes is calm and friendly, too.

So what does it say when students, as busy as we are, make time to binge on a show that depicts an ideal reality? “Gilmore Girls” is by no means thrilling—everything moves as slowly as one would expect in a small town.

As much as I appreciate the quick dialogue, I expect it to be alienating to some people who don’t get the weirdly specific and often outdated references. Yet I haven’t met one person who had any strong feelings against the show. Hell, as much as I critique it, you can bet I’m looking forward to an episode as soon as I finish writing this.

There are surely more risky escape mechanisms than “Gilmore Girls”—our parents should be thankful we aren’t doing bath salts or anything, right? However, that doesn’t change the idea that when we watch this show set in an ideal world we are escaping from a not so ideal one. That is perhaps why binging on it can feel so de-stressing.

It isn’t constructive to escape, and not everyone has the privilege to do it with the quick act of watching a TV show. I don’t reserve the right to tell anyone whether they should escape for a little bit. But I will say that perhaps it might be constructive to confront those things that we wish to escape, without the aid of Netflix. Perhaps there will be no need to escape into a falsely idealistic world if we concentrate more on crafting a real one.

Comments are permanently closed.