Susan Bordo Article

JONASON, P. K., KRCMAR, M., & SOHN, S. (2009). MALE BODY IMAGE: THE ROLE OF MUSCLE MAGAZINE EXPOSURE, BODY MASS INDEX, AND SOCIAL COMPARISON IN MEN'S BODY SATISFACTION. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 37(5), 627-629. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

This source could be used to support Susan Bordo's argument in "Beauty Re-discovers the Male Body" because it gives readers an idea of how men view their body. And if we , as the readers/viewers (specifically women) , have an idea of how men view their bodies, that could explain why men haven't shown off their bodies in the fashion/advertising as long as women have. Bordo explains in her article that "men and women are socially sanctioned to deal with the gaze of the Other in different ways" (Bordo 192). According to the article, men and women do have different reasons for showing off their bodies; women show off their body if they like the way it looks and men show themselves off if they have a lower BMI. If she used this article I looked up, she could explain that men are more likely to show off their bodies if they have lower BMI's, not just of how their bodies look. Since BMI ranges affect men's overall outlook of their bodies, Bordo could use this to support her claim that "men are not supposed to enjoy being surveyed period" and if they are unhappy with their BMI range, this could explain why.

David Foster Wallace's Address to Kenyon College

I really enjoyed this article because Wallace's definition of education really hit the nail on the head. Is education really about gathering a wide array of knowledge we can apply later on in life or is it recognizing and being  aware of the events surrounding us in our everyday life?? After reading the Freire article, I firmly believed that education was all about learning as much as one can in order to use that information one day in the future. But, according to Wallace, that is not necessarily the case. Education is about observing your surroundings, caring for others, and not reaching hasty conclusions. Wallace's grocery store example is something everyone can relate to. There isn't one time is our lives that we haven't reached faulty conclusions or judged people looking at the whole picture. One perfect example was over the summer, I started waiting tables at a local restaurant in my home town. This couple and their kid came into the restaurant and the hostess told me they were my table. As per usual, I peeked across the other booths to get a better look at the couple before I went over to greet them. Let's just say I wasn't impressed with what I saw. The mother was already yelling at the kid because he was climbing on top of the table. I was like shit... this is going to be painful. After a few minutes I finally went over and greeted them. The mother couldn't have been ruder to me and the father completely ignored me when I asked for their drink orders. After I brought back their drinks, it was like pulling teeth to get them to order... After I finally put their order in, I went over to manager to express my frustration with the couple and their child... My manager looked over at the table and he proceeded to tell me that the couple live in town and they come into the restaurant all of the time. Then he told me they just lost their daughter to cancer and they were in debt from all of her medical bills... I felt horrible, here I was thinking the mother was a total bitch and their kid was out of control, when they just lost a child! I mean how was I supposed to know this had just happened to them?  This is way Wallace's article really spoke to me because makes me realize that no matter how much schooling I receive, true education is simple awareness of the world around us and caring for others, not just ourselves.

Well now that you mention standardized tests...

Jake- I agree that the institution is to blame and I hope I didn't upset you when I said teachers were at fault. I think all who believe in the "banking" method including teachers, students, advisors, etc are to blame...
It's interesting that you bring up the concept of standardized testing because it was a huge problem at my high school. I actually had a teacher who told us that we were only to learn information that would be on the FCAT... at the time I was like awesome less work for me.. but now I am like wow that teacher kind of screwed us over... Is the overall goal to teach to the test OR to teach to prepare for the test AND teach other information as well that can expand knowledge and stimulate critical thinking... Some claim that the FCAT does just that, but I haven't applied anything i've learned on the FCAT in my college level courses or even in my everyday life...

I would have commented on my original post but for some reason it is not working...

The Banking Concept of Education

.

This piece is definitely one of those pieces one has to re-read to completely understand it. I know I did and after read it again; I picked up on some key points Freire makes about the "banking concept of education" that I didn't see when I read it for the first time. Freire mentions that with the "banking" method, us as students, are in possession of a consciousness, but we are not conscious as humans because we are not digesting what we are "storing" in our brains. Students are only considered successful academically when they can regurgitate all of the facts they've shoved in their brain, without ever applying the facts they've received to the real world. But, according to Freire, the students aren't at fault for this "banking" of information; the blame is placed upon the teachers. The supposed reason why teachers make their students memorize material is so they can feel superior to their students. Education means power and by suppressing their students by withholding educational information, teachers are in fact superior. Honestly, I think both the student and the teacher are at fault for this "banking" of information. If a student just chooses to memorize facts for their exam instead of taking time to actually learn how things work and how they can be applied to the real world; that's the student's problem, not the teachers. If this student only memorized everything from his or her class and didn't understand its overall meaning and they still passed the class, then good for them, it's their loss that they won't be able to apply what they learned later on. On the other hand, if a teacher just shoves a bunch of information into his or her student’s brains without elaborating or going into detail, then why the heck are they even teaching?? Teachers should interact with their students to receive feedback and pick at their brains to see what they know and vice versa… I didn’t come to the University of Florida for some big time professor with a PhD to make me memorize a crap load of facts just so I would pass the class and they would look good to their advisors because everyone did so well in their class. Actually teach and interact with us as your students so we can apply these facts to the real world and possibly use what we learned to help us excel in upper division classes… The bottom line is.. Teachers who are all about the “banking” method, get off you’re a$$ and actually teach your students something…