PGP Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 An interesting segment on Thom Hartmann show on RT dealing with the Christian Quiver movement, housewives and patriarchy. The segment begins at 36.00m and goes to 42.00m I am interested to get peoples take on: a. What Thom presents the issue as. b. What the guest is talking about and what the issue actually is. c. What the "average" viewer is likely to take from it.
Magnus Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 The whole thing, like all television is mental poison. When you get away from TV for a good long period of time, it's startling how bizarre and manipulative it is, as a form of discourse. The point of this little Parable of the Awakened Former Housewife is aimed at electoral politics. The segment was designed to undermine the popular appeal (among suburban swing voters) of the Christian Right, by portraying them as darkly conspiratorial and creepy. That group is being targeted because they represent an opposition voting bloc to urban Progressives (i.e., socialists), who control the television industry. It's the same agenda as the previous segment on "the environment," only there it was written to portray the Labor/Green wing of the socialist voting bloc as feel-good, happy, benevolent do-gooders. It's garden-variety propaganda disguised as a news show, which is what TV is all about. 1
dsayers Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Did you mean oppression in the title? Oppression is conscious, external imposition. Suppression is conscious, internal imposition. Repressing is unconscious, internal imposition. At least as I understand it. Magnus is right. I've heard people praise Fox news because the media tends to be left wing, but this doesn't mean Fox isn't also pushing their agenda. I remember a time when I thought RT was a breath of fresh air. Eventually, I was able to see that they're pushing their agenda to. "Truth" is easy enough to arrive at. I didn't watch the video, but are they acknowledging methodology or just inflicting conclusions with no consideration that methodology matters?
PatrickC Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Difficult to really understand what either of them are attempting to discuss, as they talk in abstractions, based on anecdotes she barely describes. I'd say Magnus comes close to it, at least with Thom's position, in that the narrative hints directly with patriarchy and male abuse. Topics that are meant ridicule an opposing demographic, in this case the Christian Right.
PGP Posted September 23, 2014 Author Posted September 23, 2014 Did you mean oppression in the title? Oppression is conscious, external imposition. Suppression is conscious, internal imposition. Repressing is unconscious, internal imposition. At least as I understand it. Magnus is right. I've heard people praise Fox news because the media tends to be left wing, but this doesn't mean Fox isn't also pushing their agenda. I remember a time when I thought RT was a breath of fresh air. Eventually, I was able to see that they're pushing their agenda to. "Truth" is easy enough to arrive at. I didn't watch the video, but are they acknowledging methodology or just inflicting conclusions with no consideration that methodology matters? Yes, oppression would be the correct word to use in this instance. I do not think there was any methodology used in terms of seeking truth. The main methodology I can see is using clever word-play to link wives (across the board) staying home to look after children with absolute misery. It starts with him saying : "everything you know is wrong" about this issue. ie implication that if you think wives or I suppose husbands exclusively looking after the children as an occupation is worthy, you are wrong, I'll now show you what it is really like: cue horror story. And by the way, even if you chose it for yourself and your children, you're still a victim of the patriarchy. Difficult to really understand what either of them are attempting to discuss, as they talk in abstractions, based on anecdotes she barely describes. I'd say Magnus comes close to it, at least with Thom's position, in that the narrative hints directly with patriarchy and male abuse. Topics that are meant ridicule an opposing demographic, in this case the Christian Right. I must admit, I did not interpret it this way, although it is probably closer to the mark than how I interpreted it. I watch him as I like to see what I consider the completely opposing view and their "rationale". To add to what I said above, the issue was not dealt with exclusively as an attack on Christianity or some narrow extreme interpretation. His statement of "everything you know is wrong" related to wives looking after children in the home while the father works. He emphasises patriarchy and control. What then is the difference between a secular wife or husband staying home to look after the children in terms of outcome and this ladies story? Thom does not indicate that there is any. If you choose to stay at home and perform these duties (as the lady said, many of the wives pushed this agenda), you are being "oppressed" and the results for mother and child are negative. This is the message I thought the "average" viewer would get from the piece.
Recommended Posts