Among the living, stepping out into the unordinary.

4.1 Depression, recession, low, despair, destitution, cynicism, shame of it, intolerance, indifference, violence, problematic complexity of showing emotions and knowing them and consequences of not knowing.
4.2 Medication, psychotherapy, hospitalization, help strengthening feature and the phenomenon of thinking you know.
4.3 She is fucking mad!!
4.4 revolutionizing something – the ways of making money.

Revolution, the very emotional event, the anticipated door to change and banging it, looking at it, adoring it; how involved are we and is it a political, cultural, emotional, intellectual and social necessity as it is there all the time as potential, a potent possibility, force and scare, a known unknown? It is a moment of not wanting to be controlled anymore but taking control, the question is of what. Reminding of growing up and making or trying to make a distance/difference to one’s parents and traditions but still restrained by all of those and making a life always is connected to where one comes from, and yet revolution needs to be led, guided and planned anew. Authority and structure is needed in every creative act in terms of the past, right and wrong must be chosen, what does it mean to be led by a charismatic person and who is that? It can be a sure road to destruction as character can be a mere image, a posing shell. Isn’t it the lure the vanity the idolization of someone bigger than yourself and having pure faith in an image true proof of our sensational infantile need for beauty, the outer beauty, the what we see is what we believe? My question is, is revolution immature always, a utopia which stands for us as a beautiful freeing dance-like claim for liberty which is there to be taken and be celebrated, but is too much at once to swallow, too much to own and digest, understand and know, because the structure which is profound and solid takes time and effort to construct? What happens after the party as Žižek wisely has asked and after the idol begins to look like a normal human being with flaws does revolution fade as well? Yes, when the ground work has not been done properly, revolution is a mere event in time.

Again a question as there is also such a thing as leaderless revolution which happens organically but knowingly and is liberty for us to learn, where no one is taking the credit for making the revolution and being a hero of the resistance. What happens when we are free and we are not led in an old-fashioned sense? Is there being born a new way of leadership? What is needed to know freedom and how much structure people need to feel safe, as it is understood with freedom safety is an uncertain and a luxury? Not wanting to be dictated, told what to say, do, be like and feel is an anthem of the youth, gay movement, in art, as it is something to sell and buy: be yourself, become the best you and this is how, only you should know how to be yourself: follow your urges and desires and live them. Again feminine and masculine come to show and manifest in different ways in making social change, being oneself can be found via daring to go dangerous routes, sexes may have different causes and needs, those who are less scared dare more obviously, different meanings sexes and sexualities have what comes to goals and aspirations, to have sex to procreate or to have fun or both. Those choices have important task in society and for individuals: how we form collectives and let our groups to be formed, who are invited and who are out and why in and out exist. Those are very much questions of what we are attracted to and what is allowed. To live like it is the end of the world and the paradise is now is one form of freeing oneself, finding total excitement and joy within with others. It has happened in the sixties, along with sexual revolution, hippie movement and in the seventies with gay liberation movement which consequently also had disastrous results in AIDS epidemic breaking out in the eighties in New York and San Francisco. This wild and unrestrained behaviour has been culturally significant which probably has its roots in art and music, namely rock, sex and drugs and the very oppressed and hated position of the sexual minorities. Human right of gay men was to fuck as much as possible and this they did. Thinking next is what do men and women do differently in situations of demanding rights and do women endure ill-treatment longer because they have little alternatives to choose from? Many found sexual liberation in having multiple partners whenever and talking about sex which had not happened in human history before at least not in this scale. Sexual liberation is also a class issue: who have time and chance to liberate themselves sexually? Sex is still the most flammable issue socially, the true taboo subject all over the world. Whose agenda is the most powerful, who are listened to and who are the loudest, who oppress the most, who are the oppressed and why? What is power there is the scare that free sexual expression brings, scare is decay and corruption of the youth, which scare is not unfounded, still the process of freeing is necessary in finding something worth while to live by and think about.

It is seen as feminine to feel, to show and talk about emotions, to cry, to laugh, be insecure, admit sensing, being physically weaker, lose reason and being irrational is somehow feminine and show compassion is expected of women. Crying is a powerful outburst with tears and facial expressions. It is probably the most controlled emotional mental physical act. Please don’t cry, I would have to react to your tears. Does revolution (political) bring out the best in us, the true us (whatever the best might be)? One has to define the best qualities of humans, but is civilized, cultivated and the human self the best in us? That can be the most robotic part of us. To define ourselves comparing each other is what we do and find groups to belong to which can result to building shelters of similar minds and bodies, we are tribal whatever ism we stand for. Behaviour can be seen irrational, behaviour of those who oppose us is lunacy as opposing is dangerous, a mental disorder at worst (something that happened to the Suffragettes and feminists afterwards over and over again). To declare mental love is to share emotions as we should and to love is demand human rights for all, cost can be high as with love it often is. To some fucking a lot is the purest form of making love. Question is why we like to abstain and refrain our emotions into illness, into nothing instead of dealing with them? Because there is death lurking in going to extremes. Scared of being exposed is one part of our existence. To not being scared of judgment and abandonment is part of liberation. Expressing to the fullest is an illness-like happening and also the healthiest one, feelings are stupid but still we trust them, we go with the flow of them. We like having an order of emotions, taking them for granted. Being stuck up is more a standard and emotional is inferior a phenomenon which must be ruled by reason and us be guided because we are monitored for our behaviour and everything unordinary is to be suspected especially if you are a woman and a feminine man is not a man in macho world.

An order which many of us seem to live by is not to, a no, a ban, a prohibition of, especially what comes to others what they can be and do. Something in us that must be closed off from sight and be ruled. What do we let out and what we do not, because we are not allowed, because it is not proper and we’ll be damned, we do not dare to break the civil backbone of modern humanism, because we must behave ourselves, contain ourselves in the eyes of others to be seen as accepted and prosper? It is an interesting topic, because our refusal to be ourselves and the desire to find ourselves are in conflict, which could be called a plug there is, that is not wished to be pulled off, there is a pivot behind the door, a stepping stone, something nonverbal we must find in therapy and via personal fall-down, an unspoken inner banner which is there and one must find it, but how far is it there and can you see it. Inner banner, a flag of your own, what is it like? It is often a heard dichotomy, the confrontation between the political and personal and how do they communicate and effect. It is to say personal is political, a common phrase to use, it is also true. My choices in everything make politics not only by voting and in my choices of educating myself, but in what I consume, how I choose to live, eat, drink, travel, see, listen, wear, talk about, watch and how I express myself in anything and where. Everything comes up from making political decisions and choosing of what is safe, good, correct, profitable, good for economy, good for our nation, what is good for us to do in order to live in an organized society and profit from it and how we look. But it is common to think politics does not concern, touch, interest or they, who do politics, are not interested in people as they should, concerned or touched by lives of ordinary citizens. Emotional landscapes we inhabit, which we make, we have and how we notice them, invaded emotional spaces online and outside, which emotions are there for us to sense, why are they there for us, why do we have feelings at all if we are unable to use them, recognize them or are they to use us? Do we inhabit or know emotions at all? Emotions are as if they were rare

173

precious things we cannot afford anymore other than instant ecstatic thrills and chills called experiencing excitedly. It is good to say I am excited.  We go looking for company to avoid boredom and loneliness, not to face ourselves, not to face the everyday of someone nor mine but to enjoy and be entertained, in other words we are drugged by entertainment.

How about those sudden outbursts like revolutions, riots and revolts? Do they entertain,excite, release emotions, aggression, rage, go in circles?

Speed of change, speed of time, there is time capsule in change, in every moment. Waiting it to happen, saying change is what we want, but what does it mean? Phrasing what it is one wants to change or do we have capabilities to do what needs to be done and changed? Framing to tell we have no other alternative but change. It is settling, something is going to happen soon and alarming at the same time, exciting, maybe an effort and time to find crystalized truth, meaning and explanation of what happens, what might happen and why. Timing, what happens with timing, in time, in waiting, in lining up, in hurry, in speed which media and civilization bring in to our lives. Speed of pictures, speed of events, speed of a runner, speed of a shutter. Speeding, measuring, comparing, working, staying put and there it is, change. It is all the time.

4.2 Medication, psychotherapy, hospitalization, help strengthening feature and the phenomenon of thinking you know.

How does it happen, change? According to some laws of life? Yes. Mentally, physically and socially could the reasons leading to depression, getting ill and having economical downfall be similar, they are inevitable for us to grow as humans and communities. Societies have psyches, bodies, illnesses, life and death, cycles. Situations and capabilities of making the dealing of money and wealth, social and economic sectors function poorly, one-sided staring of financial well­being of one’s own and what one gets make us blinded. Failing to fulfil political promises make voters anxious and feeling low. We look at the pictures of the wealthy, how they live and want the same at any cost. Telling repeatedly good times are not ahead of us unless we make these cuts, but in the same page economic growth is a demand and cry. Depression is a situation with lack of trust on anything anymore. To feel depressed is very understandable in this picture: we can’t all be enormously wealthy and happiness is what we seek via wealth and physical appearance. Complete lack of hope for things to change for better as we measure success with what one has, what one possesses, how one looks. Depressed society begins to eat itself instead of flourishing, because it is scared and paralyzed for not growing exponentially all the time. How could amount of depression in society be measured and through measuring healed? How we change the whirlwind of illusions that drive us mad? It is to be measured how we fall sick and to be acknowledged is what we desire the most. In order to heal a hopeless situation we do desperate things, but every particle and unit must work for the same cause, the cause is what at the moment? How depression moves socially can be evaluated, as can birth mechanisms of a downfall be predicted. Other than speculating the patterns that occur and listening to people’s stories we like to assume most. Other than listening to those who know we like to see everything in monetary value and loss. There are pretty clear ways how depression happens, what it does, what it is like. Reasons to fall, reasons of getting ill. There is something fundamentally wrong that has happened, a deep cut where a soul has fallen. Wrong happens when all are not listened to, taken into consideration, taken care of,

174

talked to, touched, acknowledged, needed, aren’t given what they need: what do we need can be understood via destruction and loss. People need to be needed, our fundamental reason for lot of despair, to have meaning in life for many come via others, if life feels meaningless and if it looks like there aren’t means to change much in circumstances, there is a dead-end feeling, bottomless sentiments, darkness. Uselessness and hate make depression. In order something to fall and fail, it is like we are expecting it to happen. There is lack of kindness and compassion there. Mistake is to think people are like machines, miscalculation is to look for financial winnings only which refer to us as intellect and proper. There is an inability to slow down, unwillingness to settle for less. For things to fail there is wisdom lacking in seeing how parts function together, how we function together, how we should function and what is sharing. Our systems in which we live are working for wrong reasons altogether if economic growth is why we work, live for and why anything is done in the first place and we are loved for how we look like and what we have. Reasons for mental disorder as depression vary, reasons that lead us feeling low, make us feel inadequate, not enough, not loved, unfit and so forth. Emotional hygiene supports possibility of depression to emerge. In this empirical, personal and emotional perspective depression is very much a social disease, since we are social beings, needy of being loved. Animals get depressed for same reasons, for neglet and having lost the contact to their purpose and natural environment. They also need something else than to eat and stay physically alive. Emotional life of animals is easily discarded as unimportant, but they do feel pain. Some people are more sensitive than others, and some get ill easier, like those who do not handle the load they given and are supposed to carry. Some of us get depressed, because they are melancholic by nature. We like to emphasize individuality, but the most difficult task is looking, we do not see the individual, a person but expect what one are supposed to be like. We cherish mass unity and movement in one direction often on surface level, in the face of complexity of life it feels insane and unjust. Is that why we like to simplify ourselves? To fit in is what one should be doing, not understanding the massiveness of this multitude we are, not understanding ourselves.

Medical evaluation process of who is ill and who is not has evolved in twenty years. For example, homosexuality is no longer an illness in Finland. There is no illness nor cure for that matter to cure sexuality of someone. But it takes a lot of effort to make it sink into public consciousness that gay/transgender or any other gender is not a choice one makes or a state of mind someone falls into. To fight prejudices, we need legislation and work done for minds to change. Prejudices stick hard, almost unbelievably tough, as an artist I know. To know personally gay people, mentally ill, poor, rich, people of different ethnic backgrounds, different classes, people who think differently, look different, act different etc. is essential in making world more tolerant, therefore ghettos, bubbles, isolation, divisions keep prejudices alive. For not people to marginalize in an unsatisfactory way left in loneliness, they have to do something about prejudices themselves. It is scary to meet

175

people who hate you because you are gay, as it is scary if they hate you for being a woman and an artist. How would that kind of meeting happen and what would happen? A hate crime or a public hugging? Prejudices function strangely in an imagined world of abstractions, simplistically focusing on weaknesses. Working on comparison between those who think are strong to evaluate those who seem weak. Weakness is intolerable still, weaknesses are easy to spot and strengths are there to be grasped if you are willing to join certain group. Groups of those who think are mighty and strengthen their existence as community. Comparison and division, separation, isolation is familiar behavioral pattern to make hierarchy. It is a lonely spot to think, be and act differently, but what can you do but be fearless. What kind of option it is to go with the mass?

Who can be cured and who not, what it is to be cured and be normal, what the norms are, how to know what actually is the wrong there to begin with? Are there hopeless cases? How to face someone who is mentally ill? Should I be scared? Mental illnesses are problematic in many ways, difficult to treat, to diagnose, difficult to live with. How can we tell when society is mentally ill? We like to call each other crazy quite often without it being hugely stigmatizing, but to talk about someone in that manner behind someone’s back ”there is this crazy person” makes it a bit different. Then it becomes stigma. Need to give stigma to someone has not disappeared. It is everyday fascism. Someone is crazy, the one is dangerous, a threat and must be avoided, locked up, isolated, spat at or felt sorry for. It is true mental illnesses increase violent behavior especially against the ill her/himself, suicidal tendencies, self-­ loath and hateful thoughts get the best of. It is a painful experience to be depressed. Stress and constant facing of ill in life make possibility of mental illness bursting higher than for those who live in secure environment with loving people around or people who have been loved much face mental illness against all odds. How random it all is… Levels of stress in life and how one tolerates stress and randomness, dealing with setbacks indicates clearly how one is doing mentally. Where does the border of ill and being healthy go? Merely being an artist is sick for some. If there is a group of bullies and one person who is bullied, who is the sick one? What kind of behavior is seen as sick and what not can also be culturally bound. Illness breaks the atmosphere of normal every day. We see ill so much it is maybe normal and underestimated like a minor injury or cut in hand. Atmosphere of there is nothing wrong is a bit strange, of something exact, sterile and cleaned out of sight and hidden.

176

Can there be such a state on social level as balance or is there always a factor of wrongness, a crack? Better yet must there be some kind of imbalance and sense of danger for us to find happiness? Which danger and wrong we need to reach out to feel alive. Secure steady life is an ideal for many, but there are contradictions that fail me, such as unhappiness and amount of depression. We want to avoid being scared and situations of not knowing what will happen next. To go further, to reach something unknown is to test one’s limits, what can one do, where do one’s limits go. Wouldn’t we all like to know. Unknown can be found pretty close, you don’t have to travel to space to find the unknown and scary. There is still much to study within humans and animals since we do not know all, we are not complete. We just like to assume we do know and are perfect. Human psyche and emotional side is much an unknown and avoided topic in general. One reason why we are scared of the tricky mind of ours is we find something out of the normal. To be mentally ill gives opportunity to test our limits what can a person tolerate and what it is to survive situation of no control. This is what bullies do, test us. Dangers like whether one comes back from psychosis, whether one sees light of day feeling good and light in front instead of pain and hell. How long will it take for one to mentally break is a sadistic game. Meeting someone behaving disoriented and irrationally or beginning to behave like that yourself how do you react? It is one thing we are afraid; the irrational and what mind can do to us. To say we do not understand it, the unknown subconscious, the irrational, is a good place to start. Reason why artists are seen as a bit scary, out of the ordinary and abnormal is we test the limits of ours. What to talk with someone like that who possibly tests you? Why not talk with someone like that and test him or her instead. There is the concept of normal again to face, idea of me structured and what me should be, normal needs a clarification since it is one term very much used and controlling what we do and how we do, how we react and what we should tolerate. I have an idea of normal, but it is not what I should be. It is outside the norm, normality and I conflict with it constantly. Why should there be normal? Am I irrational, the idea of me? There are things that are normal for me to do daily: brushing my teeth twice a day, going to bed and sleep the night, dream. Normal people drive their cars.

Setting the normal, deciding what is strangeness, that is difficult to face and understand, accept, have a qwerty battle in our everyday, between us, there is constant conflict which makes us interesting. We go through thinking what we do is normal and acceptable and try to find ways to preferably stay in that frame of normal and acceptable and feel shame if we don’t. In this picture art is very much welcomed as mixing the pack and moving barriers of thinking patterns and ways of seeing. Therefore, artists are seen as dangerous hazardous and suspicious individuals. At best they like to think for themselves and do as they please, at least some of them, since art scene is a very much regulated and appropriated by rules of proper as it is a business and market where appearances matter as does wealth. Insanity is much of a taboo, but fully with us as we daily face it, like it or not, acknowledge it or not, see it or not. We define insanity outside of ourselves, what is mad for us, what is a crazy

177

thing to do equals to something you would not do and you disapprove. Insanity entails danger in any social scene, art is no exception. Danger of losing face, one’s reputation. As it seems prejudices go stronger the smaller and isolated the group is. Contemporary art scene has isolated itself very effectively. To say artists are like that, has been common enough for me to hear in the arts and outside of it. One problematic issue being the ideas of inside and outside of it. What are they like exactly? There is a stereotype of an artist which creates partly the whole scene of arts. The assumption of a person who makes art, assumption of the art scene that it is arrogant and distant, fine, too fine to understand and get involved with. To make art is still thought to be almost an occult and due to divine inspiration, you can pull out from craziness but don’t be crazy. It is bad for business. Stories of golden ages in art stay alive and are in focus. Strict divisions of good and bad, low and high, which are dictated by taste, knowledge of the arts, expertise and social status given with confidence regulate the arts. How does that got to do with illness of mental kind is probably about the divine inspiration? All this we can observe in the light of classes and social status, habitus, meaning one who is seen adequate to create art and leading to how that person creating art is treated. What motivates a person to create, what does s/he create, how are creations of hers/his put-on display and will they be put on display and seen. What is it to put on display and to be on display? What are we displaying? Average Joe is one term used to describe the normal on social level. It gives hint that Average Joe is not the most open-minded person there is and what about art, open-mindedness must obviously be dug out as it is lost. Normality is horror for those who are repulsed by banality. In the frame of social changes arts have been strongly involved and horror is there in important role, irrationality breaking the codes of proper. It is an art to make society and minds change when they rather stayed the same liking complacency and safety. Whether on the side of those who have power to establish and strengthen power of one’s own. Is it art, not to want change, it is bizarrely common in the art scene not wanting change, talking about progress is again on the surface of things without structures changing at all because it is lucrative. Arts reflect perfectly the whole of society. Then there are those who need to be heard for the sake of everybody, those in the marginal, for liberation’s sake. They do what they can to disturb the power elite: protesting, singing, satireing, provoking, to test the limits of society and power people by scandalous art, provoking the tender spots, making nonsense and unmeasureable craziness, the unexpected shock is very much needed to make change.

Personal ideas deemed appropriate or not. How an individual can be original and powerful in the same time? What is personality and how restricted it is? Am I assumed to be of certain kind? Isn’t it so we, even if not religious, are bound to religious traditions and doctrines, like self-evidently falling into them, with them, colliding and struggling. There is beauty, wisdom, truth, guidance, hope, but also very slow tendency to seek change within religions. We know them since they are taught to us and lived by throughout the year. There is no escape. Religion is here and there like a living thing.

178

Our Finnish society for instance lies on Christian values, festivities, terminology, history and names even though we are a secular state. Schooling system is built on Lutheran/Protestant schooling system which system made by church was in use before in history, meaning preachers were the educators of people up to the beginning of 1900’s. Even though church schools were separated from state schools at the end of 1800’s influence of church is immense. To teach religion at school still meant in 1980’s and 90’s serious deep studying of Christianity. This is slowly changing, very slowly or not at all? The compulsory part of studying faith is odd but it is to know our culture. How many of those schooled really have had faith in their hearts since to have faith and say it out loud has been seen publicly as weakness. Here it is a private matter but all over, weird. Believer is stereotyped often as Holy Roller and a zealot trying to convert those who have doubt, different opinions and society wanted to be stuck obeying religious leaders is what it seems to be oddly enough. There are strong bias what comes to believing in God or not and to which God to believe in, not that there are many options offered. Essential questions in life for everyone. Do I believe that there is someone or something guiding us, making us, judging and watching? Being part of Lutheran faith by birth, schooling and living in a Lutheran/Protestant/secular country is somewhat a norm and everyday unquestionable practice here, a bedrock. Loud objections aren’t that common, but you can choose to believe or not and still it is compulsory to live by it. Religion raises its head when LGBTQ+ rights or are women fit to be priests (still) are talked about and church personnel and politicians with true belief have objections. Right to abortion is still in debate. Killing of fetuses cannot be tolerated and men need to have a say how women deal with their bodies. Religion is a serious business, how about war? Kids understand what is being said and they listen obediently as studying God’s word begins quite early. For children God is mysteriously intriguing, frightening and puzzling, all the same we are brainwashed into believing at school. We have a silent agreement and illusion of freedom in seemingly secular state which is not that free and tolerant. Yet comes the question what can I as a person do to be free? Hypocrisy is a safety net, a mask to look better than you actually are. It is denial of facts, to do otherwise than you tell you do. What should be done, would be good to do and you are told to do and what really happens: are you part of the world and how much what you say weighs. It is more again a normality than obscurity to act hypocritically. We live staged lives. It is telling there is much fear to let you be yourself, to admit your true opinions, your true face, to disagree. Fear of loss is great.

4.3 She is fucking mad!!

I wanted to disturb, I wanted to be annoying. I was hoping someone would understand why. Yes, I had a little hope for being understood, just a little, but the thing that I think about hoping, the most important thing

179

is what you do yourself, how do you understand what you are doing. And why you do what you do. Why do I think by disturbing I could make my statement or make something positive happen?

I whistled through a shopping mall. Invented my whistling tunes while I walked. Everybody watched surprised, some annoyed. I would have glanced someone whistling loudly in the shop. I think I was loud, yeah. I also whistled biking home from the city. That was hard work. I had to stop to take a breath.

Censorship is a way to do the world and stomp it to stay the same. It is a common practice of everyday on personal and public level. We do it to ourselves and to others by looks, talk of all kinds of subtle and not so subtle ways of letting know what is good to do. It is a mind control, behavior control, strategy control and multilevel control of society. Reasons for control often are not letting upset and hate show, fear, any kind of sensation, sexuality, personality, difference show in order to maintain discipline, order, conformity, hegemony, to maintain power or just to oppress to maintain power position. It is a forceful tool to be able to censor and make it a mental behavioral state and automation as well. People who censor themselves in fear are easy to control. Forces of those who wish things to stay the same. And what things are those and who are the forces who have such a wish? State of eternal growth, state of holy image, state of pedestals. To push the envelope is to say of searching for new expression. Expression defined by the one who is expressing, artist who lives expresses, everyone has expression of their own. Who sells the expressed, what is new in this picture of making money, of expressing to be a product? Nothing. Do artists express to make money? And what is valid expression, and what is art. When does expression become art? It is expecting the unknown to be found, expecting originality to be found, expecting the unknown to exist and we be prepared for it. It is a state of trust to express. Then make it a vendible product in a certain frame.

Music world is an interesting scene when talking about censoring, finding originality and freedom of expression. Pop artists pushing some envelope of theirs and possible the establishment’s as far as the record companies allow them to push. To push the envelope against those who actually have power can for a recording artist be suicidal end of a career kind of scenario. Someone has put something in the way to be pushed and one has to push hard to be seen and make change. Usually it is artists themselves who have boundaries to be changed. That is not a surprise in a world of wanting

180

to make it. Controversies, scandals, provocations are marketable items nowadays like ever. Controversy is to rub your ass against male crotch and stick your tongue out, show nipple, have huge body parts, revaling clothing. Huge is only the amount of press. To use sex appeal in making money is not news, but it continuously is. It as such is not incredibly pushing the envelope what comes to originality. To actually stop obeying pop cultural idiosyncrasies would be. It is interesting to analyze cultural scenes since there are people who seriously have power over what we see and use as culture and as art. The power of expertise is a given status. It is a world of relations, golden handshakes, hearsay and again talk over what is proper and good at the same time, but it is a business. The amount of money is huge which circulates in movies, music and in any art,  which platforms function as product manufacturing businesses. What kind of revolution would be desired here? These industries talk about being revolutionary, progressive, artists being revolutionaries, as well art forming itself is a revolutionary act.

4.4.revolutionizing something – the ways of making money.
At war. Revolution is lucrative business. in art. very much so.
Danger of it, danger in living, danger of getting killed, tortured, humiliated, abandoned or injured, of I don’t know what some people like to defy it, death, what else, loneliness. Can we defy life? The uncomfortable effort of pushing against all odds, all minds, that are against difference and progress, the unbearable situation of finding strength when there is none left.

It is to change methods of interaction, patterns of thinking and gaining wealth and therefore revolution to actually making it would mean a complete altering of way of thinking. (Skeptical thought cannot be avoided.) To change how we gain, what we want to gain, if we gain and what there is to gain. Are we doing things to have it all? Despair is one bottom of the end and it is happening right now. Governments are desperate, so are people. Desperate people do anything they can to survive. State of ready to be insane, do hurtful irrational acts, ease the pain to hurt someone else, to get whatever there is to get is the tone of today. To make a change to one’s situation by learning to be wiser and more selfless is the wisdom everyone should personally follow. Revolution is not a sane situation. It is chaos and disorder, why would we need that. We, citizens of Earth obviously are not in enough desperate situation, destruction continues. I claim that what is interesting and temptingly revolutionizing anything is still the happening, despite my skepticism, event itself, unity and effort to maintain the thrill of complete turnover and it is making its way. Radicalism and outlaw qualities appeal but so does better future. What is forbidden allures, to be

181

against all what is set, letting aggression rule is an easy way. Revolution is an expression and learning how to be wise with rage one has. Using rage as a creative force is a new beginning, to create new is to destroy something.

Desires of the power elite: Us under the phallocentric order.

1. Desires of the power elite: Us under the phallocentric order
2. Dominance and seduction, five looks, one accessory
3. What makes a classic, what makes a movie?

Introduction: Nevertheless the impossible mission one must make an effort and tackle the copy-paste culture where there seems to be unbreakable circle of tradition in how gender, talent, abilities and possibilities are seen and dealt with. To see opposing, questioning and anger justified not apologised for, one’s own art and body of work worthwhile, necessary and valuable and because someone has to lead the way and do it what few dare to do. This is an article trying to understand what is the feminine in movies for especially in Hollywood. Role of women in movies, in art and place of ours is to go against, not play along but question. I know you will be called difficult. Be difficult in demolishing and constructive way. To be difficult and demanding is to build something new. Becoming movie critics, producers and directors, active makers in the business ruled by white men is of vital importance. Importance is also there who evaluate the films made and how, what issues are emphasised when talked about making movies and distributing them to the audiences. What is the sellable item? How pushing the envelope even though it is difficult makes a difference no matter how small and powerless you feel. This means women should write and put in action new rules how we are to be viewed, displayed, portrait and talked about. Our roles are to be active not playing according to the old comfortable ones. One problem being lack of finance, demand and support is one women face which is telling women should support each other.

1.Desires of the power elite: Us under the phallocentric order

Movie is a continuation to something experienced in real life. It is an interpretation of how we can experience and see, but it is up to the viewer to grasp what to make of the seen movie. How movie can explain an experience and tell what to look at or for, what there is to see and experience further. Truth of a movie is truth of the movie maker, an illusion, make-believe, coloured tale or fact-based illustration, a portrait and depiction. Whatever movie is to fulfil it is also image of the makers. We like to think reality is fixed, there is normal and the weird, to go weird doesn’t take that much of effort. To break this illusion of normalcy movies function beautifully partly it is why movies get made, to imagine again for us in a new way. Some movies are made to strengthen our fixations and feel powerful via them which patriotic movies tend to accomplish forcefully, they often don’t offer any kind of new perspectives but repeat the same story with some extra boosting and hyper-hyper. The experience needed to break down the normal wire and comprehension of what is and what movies can be marginal plays an important role. Mainstream moviemakers are given the glorified position of telling large-scale fables and larger than life stories. How these stamped ideas can be altered is a matter of art and courage. How much about the reality movie tells is up to the makers and what we think is reality, story worth telling. What have been the stories told for those who make films and what remains untold. What have been discovered before and during the making of a film, and after movie was released, to make a movie is to unearth and research. Interesting is towards what kind of issues moviemakers have their curiosity focused. What can be told via the medium, there probably isn’t much which cannot be depicted via film. Moving pictures are hypnotizing, whether holding a camera or sitting in front of a screen.

What lies hidden but is told via clues, what is not shown but is still there in the expression and how that invisible can be the most interesting part of films, the most realistic and humane part and forces us to imagine beyond the seen. What is the perspective there, decisions made how to tell, whose points of view are we looking at, whose truth or lie, what a movie is telling us, is it about the viewer as we choose what we watch, do we have to know about the makers as in excess we are curious about the stars as they are the heroes, they are those with means and visions, capabilities to make their ideas happen there where it is almost impossible to get. Movie continues in mind as it is at best a full body experience depending where and how movies are watched, how personal the story is, how relatable and what is universal in human experience. What kind of interests the viewers have in seeing films. Why do we watch movies is the easiness of just watching, the forgetting and sinking in to a world, and some of us watch very many movies of all kinds. This easiness is thought often not having much value, just sitting and watching. Movies feed the mind but in what way is the question we should be asking. Is it just less thinking needed, is there blame and guilt be felt for this indulgence.

Interesting is how we experience a movie, even a movie poster is an experience. What is the liking, time span, being influenced by and thinking about a movie, its messages, images, stories, artistic decisions and perspectives. Images and scenes of a movie stay there in our heads. The more curious the more puzzling. Too weird, surrealistic does not make a blockbuster but it can make a classic. We need familiarity which also can be totally unrealistic and adventurous. Films making euphoric and thrilling or otherwise felt sensations, cultural, artistic and political statements need a fruitful and fertile ground to live in. There is candy for thought and candy for the aesthetics which must be taken and somehow had, felt. At best movie has a mystery in realistic way which leaves space for thinking and puzzlement of not knowing. Feeling of learning about important events watched from a safe place as a spectator may be enough for some. Do we know more via films, definitely. Is movie experience comparable to life experiences? What raises our curiosity, is it the personal and something new? What makes a movie brilliant? How to define a movie, how is it defined? Technically it is how many pictures per second flashes before one’s eyes and make a moving scene, the running horse, a dancing woman, bullet from a gun. Films have different durations, different qualities, scales of evaluation, films have position in society which today play a big part. Movies are places of extravaganza and a huge part of entertainment industry, a way of life such as TV, it is everywhere.  Definitions and genres for films are maybe already irrelevant. Films that are and have been made are endless in the amount and technic. Tiny piece of what is being made make it to the consciousness of the average consumer or anybody via controlled system. Internet makes watching and making demographic. When life feels like a film we think we have captured something historic and worth filming and sharing.

Film has a position in advertising and often nowadays mainstream films look like ads, function like ads and ads in turn are like movies. Movies are the most powerful tool to impress, catch the eye and attention, make an impact on large amounts of people, to influence and manipulate as something sweet and meaningful, breath of fresh air in a dull moment. Cultural and personal importance of movies is what counts. We like the fun part of films. Moving image is like a car, an object to move with and in which as an object is male dominated vehicle but treated like a lady or named a woman. It has a status to impress, possess, take us from one place to another, seduce. Cinema is above us, a fantasy, untouchable, holding power in size, containing vast amounts of capacity to influence our thinking, vision and appreciations therefore to talk and write about what is shown for us is at critical importance. To write only on surface about the surface is not doing us much good or for film as art.

Films make stars, films are the stars, writing gives at best more depth to what was seen and another perspective than our own. Moving feature is what has a hold on us, energy and lightness of it is felt. Could a movie have any other definitions other than something moving forward and towards us? Is it always the personal taste telling what plays importance in a film or something else, a shock, a strong emotion, a surprise? Society rules much via what is shown, where and how we watch. General opinion, or probably is better to talk about what we are used to seeing, what is convenient, pleasant and interesting to us, is still a guide to what we are having. We reflect our desires in an interesting way through movie culture and the culture is us? Many are attracted to speed and not being bored, to be entertained and to have a feeling of something fantastic being witnessed is to feel alive as we watch living pictures that are more alive than us, size and amount count. To avoid being left out is in focus and one main interest is to give birth to desires and needs. How much of this is not make us think for ourselves, distract us from looking what is behind the glittering luring images and why we must want what is given to us, sold to us? What creates brilliance or circumstances for sensitiveness, a thrive to create beauty and meaning, how this creating is restricted or guided, banned or manipulated? Is it related to what is sexy and desirable in a straightforward manner, where we come from, what we are afraid of, what we know about the world, what we have read and seen already? How does gender dictate what we see as beautiful? I’m interested in which are the ways people get their work on the spotlight, what kind of work is put in the centre of attention, given media focus which focus forcefully is narrow and gendered. What kind of publicity movies and moviemakers get, are there girl movies and boy movies? What kind of voice do moviemakers have, are given, how are they heard, what is asked of them and from what kind of world do they make? What kind of things journalists focus on in interviews and stories about movie scenes? What creates interest in a certain movie nowadays? How brave can and should moviemakers be? Is it still restricted what can be issued and manifested in movies nowadays? Is it limited what kind of people make movies, what kind of people are shown in the movies, act in movies, talk about movies? Is there something to be afraid of other than lack of variety and making an echo chamber for ideological purposes? Are there certain kind of people who seek attention through the movie scene, attention seekers? How all this structure of creating moving pictures dictates and who dictates the structure? Is it basically corporation-based solutions that work in this business? Which are the interests of those corporations, interests of the investors other than winnings and cinematic fame? What kind of role do film festivals play in all this? Or press and media as a whole? I’m asking because they are all linked under a dome and mostly what get mentioned are the galas, trophies, celebrities, faces, bodies, lives of the famed and clothes they carry. Any irregularity is reported and scandalised. Everything moves along the direction of relations, scare of losing and where the money is, how the money is and should it be followed. What does it mean to be an independent movie maker in this picture? Does it mean marginal or original, having voice of one’s own? What is originality in movies, in this context of making, who has a voice? Is there any place or demand for independence, independent thinking and breaking the habit?

It is a question of demand, what is in demand, who has control. What kind of people consume mainstream movies and what revolves around this mainstream ideology of spending and living a habit. It would be interesting to see how strictly audiences are analyzed. Anything that isn’t produced in Hollywood is basically marginal in the west. Hollywood movies or movies imitating Hollywood style get the most public space, attention and funding. Should we be concerned? Yes and concerned of what exactly? Some kind of monotonous Americanized view of the world perhaps, lack of complex views of the world and how things happen, lack of perspectives to difference, lack of imagination, having one-eyed view and one political perspective on good and bad. Consuming being the main focus of films is alarming, consuming being the good, the more as well. The way movies manipulate people to think and act, or not to act and think as the easiness is nice and a relief in complex everyday.

One answer to a couple of my questions come from an internet magazine The Gateway sponsored by Morgan Stanley article written by Matthew Reeves: ”The producer is the money person who buys the scripts, hires the director, actors and crew and organises the making and selling of the film. The producer is usually employed by a production company. Production companies are often referred to as “independent”, but all this really means is that they don’t have a distribution deal with a major studio, that is, Sony, MGM, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, Warner and Universal. While studios can buy scripts the usual way, they also have the power and money to decide they need, “a kids’ fantasy movie, with an A-list actor, for release in the summer holidays in 2011”, get a writer to craft it, attach a producer, put up the funds themselves, make the movie (in their own studios), and distribute it themselves.

But what if no distributor is interested in your film, which may have been made with nobodies, on a nothing budget and with no room left for marketing. How can you get the word out? The answer is film festivals. Cannes, Venice and Sundance are free marketing Meccas. You can enter Cannes, the most influential film festival in the world, for €50. There’s no guarantee your film will get chosen to feature, but it will get watched. If it does get chosen, thousands will see it, newspapers will review it and many distributors will be circling, looking for a bargain. Paranormal Activity was shown at Slamdance Film Festival, http://www.slamdance.com and a year and a half later it was released across the USA. It’s arguably the best $70 the producer has ever spent.http://thegatewayonline.com/articles/content/how-does-the-film-industry-work

Continuing with more answers: Structures of Discourse and Structures of Power TEUN A. VAN DIJK University of Amsterdam ”In the news media, this strategic control of knowledge is exercised through restricted topic selection, and more generally by specific reconstructions of social and political realities (Hall et al., 1980; Tuchman, 1978; van Dijk, 1987b, 1987c). This process is itself governed by a system of news values and professional ideologies about news and newsworthiness, which happen to favor attention for and the interests of various elite actors, persons, groups, classes, institutions, nations, or world regions (Galtung & Ruge, 1965). Preferential access and coverage (whether positive or negative) of news actors is one factor in the mass medíated reproduction of social power (Brown, Bybee, Wearden, & Murdock, 1982). The same ís true in education, where the curriculum, textbooks, educational materials, and lessons are also governed by educational objectives, subjects, topics, and learning strategies that mostly happen to be consistent with the values or interests of the various power elite groups (Apple, 1979; Lorimer, 1984; Young, 1971). Therefore, we see that the symbolic elites that control the style and content of media and educational discourse are also those who have partial control of the mode of influence, and hence of ideological reproduction in society. The symbolic elites, we suggested, are not independent of other”  https://archive.org/stream/IdeologicalDiscourseAnalysis/Ideological%20discourse%20analysis_djvu.txt

2.Dominance and seduction: five looks, one accessory.

The patriarchal society makes it easier for men to take the lead which is for them compulsory and what manly men are supposed to do: direct, command, lead, have the answers, know. It is compulsive and violent for both sexes, toxic masculinity. It is given and forced on us as natural. Women have to fight for being heard, be taken seriously and a powerful skilled woman is easily a bitch, witch, weirdo, difficult and an outcast. It is a male feature to dominate with physical force and scare, to direct others with threat and it has been easier for men to imagine being a director and to become one, the role falls on them more easily, naturally. To my knowledge women like to dominate and do it maybe in more complex and subtle ways or imitating men, but nonetheless feminine domina play is normal everyday act in patriarchal society, meaning women use their power to destroy as well and to direct, question is why they cannot do it in business and in art. What happens more subtle doesn’t make it less hurtful or less powerful.

A lot did change what comes to equality during 20th century in the Western world but what is the change other than technical and in terms of production? What will the ultimate change and progress within movie industry be in the 21st century? Hopefully more about morals, art and justice of the business than technicalities. It still does not mean things are happening for women to the extent of men or that things change fast. Speed is in the renewing the machinery not human condition or doing away the patriarch. That is why it is very important to show movies from all kinds of makers, sexes, backgrounds etc. in schools, in movie theaters and TV. What comes to equality internet is showing the way, moving images are at the core of our internet experience. At the moment women directors are treated like marginal makers as emphasis is on the gender and it is said out loud male or female. Scripts written by women usually are different from men. Directors are treated like it still is a wonder a woman is a director or a producer, although there are many women in the business and have been for a long time. It is much easier to watch females pose on a red carpet wearing a designer gown asked how they feel expectation being the viewer wants to hear it and see this. Emphasis is on the assumptions what does a photogenic person look like and who can be filmed, who attracts the eye and why.

Movie people seem to live a fabulous life, images give us impressions. Narcissism is questioned in any media strongly but celebrated at the same time. Narcissists are interesting people as they entertain and know what they want, get what they want and make scenes. To want such spotlight life is praised and encouraged, idolised. Photographs of someone entering a gala of something are shown in every magazine that have a gossip column or want to comment the movie world or talk about movies in any manner. Movies nowadays is a very stereotyped world. Everything goes around the money-making machinery and what brings in the dollars. Biggest moneymakers are talked about and again idolised. Imaginary is highly glittered, narrow and thin. Shallowness can be turned interesting when reasons for it are investigated and studied. Such industry is massive and the biggest categorizor of people world-wide, advertising and movies are part of our visuals which we eat and consume. Most people watch movies, see the ads which are creating the world we live in and look at, and films get inspiration from the world we live in. To go outside that box can turn out to be more than just an image.

To make movies requires ability to tell stories, will to succeed in a very male-dominated world and money-oriented atmosphere. Stubborn belief in one’s ideas and abilities is needed and room to make ideas happen, also to make others believe in ideas of yours, to get attention is what we seek, all of us nowadays. What else is there to have? Luck? Moviemakers must be completely passionate about their craft just as any artist, making movies and seeing movies, making that particular film and story which totally extraordinary sounds like a dream. As a woman does one have to be a man to make it in this frame is an interesting question, to make a feature film as a woman but act like a man? Such a woman is easily considered a difficult person. It is much easier to be filmed and look beautiful, do as you are told but be unique. Womanhood posing as a fragile flower, young, polished in ads, in flashlights, photographers calling your name. And why is it important to talk and bring this issue in front, is there a problem?

Needless to say, but I’m saying it, women make different kinds of films than men, they have different points of views and interests. When women play roles that have been played by men there is totally new level to it, something lived by men is lived by women too, story gets vastly layered context and understanding of gendered experience, it is power which resonates within the powerless. Women see the world differently than men, experience it differently, do differently, walk and talk differently, are treated differently. Women should be given equal chance to bring their knowledge on to the screen, be active and create as they create, thinking instead of being looked at and they should understand it themselves too. Do men get their clothes examined on the red carpet? Aki Kaurismäki was drunk and danced at Cannes 2002 which was making appalled headlines in Finland. Men can and must disturb the scene in a moving way as well as business requires certain behaviour. Scene is asking to be cut open and questioned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcs3sottHm4

This is of course my observation and a bothering issue, horrifying actually when you look at the picture at hand. What a world. What are male points of views then? Is it so that men do different kind of movies than women as I claim. I already dislike the topic at hand, I dislike that I even have to mention it, sex and gender and what they mean. What does gender got to do with anything what and how people make professionally? In making movies or making art? Unfortunately quite much. Everything revolves around it. Comes back to our bodies. Why is it so? What is sexy here? What is sex other than a toy? Why is it sold? Because it is the easy way and an obvious want, obvious defined and dominator. An act, the difference, organs, emotions, chemistry, molecules, desires, reproduction, repetition, perspective of the wanted and the ones who want. It is the power-issue ruling our behaviour which is in the visuals. It is regulated by religion, politics, traditions, rules made to give us frame to act upon and know where the limits go. Major topics in film, in anything and the leading couple kiss is the anti-climax in an action film but it has to be there. Image of movie industry, of its people, how it works and what for, it all goes back to sex, human sexuality and how to profit from it, use it, it using us.

Feminist film theory has opened up reasons behind film industry, given a voice and chance for women to analyze film as an art, our point of view and why it should be there on film. How women are on film, used, abused, cut open. ”Feminism is a social movement which has had an enormous impact on film theory and criticism. Cinema is taken by feminists to be a cultural practice representing myths about women and femininity, as well as about men and masculinity. Issues of representation and spectatorship are central to feminist film theory and criticism. Early feminist criticism was directed at stereotypes of women, mostly in Hollywood films (Haskell 1973/1987, Rosen 1973). Such fixed and endlessly repeated images of women were and are considered objectionable distortions which have a negative impact on the female spectator as well as on males.” Claire Johnston (1940-1987) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claire_Johnston was among the first feminist critics to offer a sustained critique of stereotypes from a semiotic point of view (1973/1991). She puts forward how classical cinema constructs the ideological image of woman. Drawing on Roland Barthes’ notion of ‘myth’, Johnston investigated the myth of ‘Woman’ in classical cinema. The sign ‘woman’ can be analyzed as a structure, a code and convention. It represents the ideological meaning that ‘woman’ has for men. In relation to herself she means no-thing (1991: 25): women are negatively represented as ‘not-man’. The ‘woman-as woman’ is absent from the text of the film (26).”

http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol8-2004/n17sloan Is it problematic for cinema as a whole to talk about women’s cinema? “This concept of minor cinema is quite fruitful for the purpose of concluding the debate on the strong political ground that most interests Butler. Since a ‘minor’ cinema is one that politicizes everything, women’s cinema well qualifies, generally finding struggle in all aspects of life, and value in confronting it. Further, a minor literature is written by marginalized authors, and so focuses on the challenges of belonging to an out-group.

The important theoretical shift happening was and is that women started taking up as voices and act out from places of power, from an understanding of cinema reflecting realities of variety of women, realities of many instead of one. Having a view to cinema as a constructing method, ideological and politically engaging on individual level. Classical cinema was not to show its means of production, or was it? It should be defined what we mean by classical cinema and why classical cinema is what we think it is. Characterised by veiling over its ideological construction and under restrictions rather than free expression? Thus, classical film as we think the classical presents the constructed images of ‘woman’ as naturally desirables, unrealistic and attractive for the male. This is the illusionism of classical cinema.  www.feministezine.com

It feels like a concrete wall, the notion that a woman in film is not the man, not as able as the man and is always in need of assistance. She lacks something. She is there to be looked at, in relation to herself to her being no-thing. To continue the misogynist tale Budd Boetticher (Hollywood film director during 1942-85) has put it: “What counts is what the heroine provokes, or rather what she represents. She is the one, or rather the love or fear she inspires in the hero, or else the concern he feels for her, who makes him act the way he does. In herself the woman has not the slightest importance.

3.Desire of the power elite; Us under the phallocentric order.

Do women objectify themselves by putting their bodies into a certain light where their body and sexuality is openly under gaze and played with, in a certain repetitious positions to gain profit and be seen as that is the way still to get seen? Of course, and I would say, it is not passive. It is a very active role to play and toy with, the game where women win in one way only and are therefore used for a certain time, as long as their looks grant it. Women are slaves as much as they must put themselves in that position to be looked at, in a way it is slavery, yes. There must be something more to it as it is voluntarily done. Victim is a spectator of her fate. She still must imagine what happens to her when she chooses to act in a certain way and like it. Film industry is an abusive machine which abandons those who are no longer useful which is seen tragic. This must be seen beforehand, calculated and be known, understood and accepted. Industry obeys only capital and how to get it. It gives models of how to be, become, what to be, where to be, what to wear, what is talked about and how etc. Seduction is deliberate, unforgiving and cruel, to seduce the audience, a mass has its psychology and logic. Movie industry is a brainwash operator where meat is power and murder. Movies are made to seduce the consumer. Movies to give goals in life. Movies to give dreams. How audience is seduced? Or are we really that stupid? What is seduction? From Wikipedia: ”In colloquial language and fictional literature, seduction is the process of deliberately enticing a person, to lead astray, as from duty, rectitude, or the like; to corrupt, to persuade or induce to engage in sexual behaviour.” The Internet has lately given rise to more open discussion on seduction and how to master it: The Rules for women and The Game for men.

MUCH ABOUT JENNIFER LOPEZ:
Actress, entertainer, music artist, film & TV producer, fashion designer, entrepreneur and humanitarian Jennifer Lopez has been called one of the most powerful and celebrated celebrities in entertainment. Forbes Magazine named her the #1 Most Powerful Celebrity in the World of 2012. Known for her beauty and fashion sense Lopez has been the face of many advertising campaigns— L’Oreal, Louis Vuitton, Ford, Fiat, Subaru, Lux, Brahma Beer, Gillette, Kohl’s and Pepsi just to name a few. In 2012, Forbes ranked Lopez number one on their list of “100 Most Powerful and Influential Celebrities in the World” “and she has appeared many times on The Hollywood Report’s list of best paid actresses. Also known as a fashion icon, her appearance at the red carpet events always garners considerable media attention.www.jenniferlopez.com

While Hitchcock goes into the investigative side of voyeurism, Sternberg produces the ultimate fetish, taking it to the point where the powerful look of the male protagonist (characteristic of traditional narrative film) is broken in favour of the image in direct erotic rapport with the spectator. The beauty of the woman as object and the screen space coalesce; she is no longer the bearer of guilt but a perfect product, whose body, stylised and fragmented by close-ups, is the content of the film and the direct recipient of the spectator’s look.www.feministezine.com

Watching her going in to an exiting event wearing Versace smiling and looking happy. The most beautiful woman on Earth, hugely wealthy and desired, influencer on the beauty market. She has her hands leaning her waist. She is a business woman, it is said she is in control of her image, meaning what exactly? She is strong and independent, her own boss and ruler of her art. Poses telling so and the interviews strengthening our perception. But she isn’t saying much concerning entertainment business or how it could be something other than it is and should it be different as it has served her so well? What other could it be and what else is there. Industry serves her as she serves it. I wonder the machinery behind creating the phenomenon like JLo. Is it pure and simple as I think in businesslike? This is awesome. I love you and your arse, your body is part of your art. The publicity is moving around the globe. Beautiful women sell enormously well, so conducting from that there is incredible power in women which remains on image level as it is not completely let go, released. Wildness is ok up to a point. Too much rock and roll is too much the devil.

How it functions building an image for one person around her or his sex symbolism, luxurious life, incredible life story of being discovered and how the story continues, relationships, children, houses, clothes, movies, making music and money, going around the world dancing, having pictures taken, videos being made being followed. The amount and quality of imagery is about style + beauty, body+mind says also her website, a place for worship and to know her a bit better: Lopez’s dedication to assisting children in need and to the empowerment of others is far-reaching. The Girls & Boys Club of America has named her their national spokeswoman. Gucci is featuring Lopez in a national advertising campaign along with her twins Emme and Max launching its children collection. The campaign will benefit UNICEF. Lopez set the branding standard for celebrity fragrance, apparel and accessories. Her latest fragrance, Love and Glamour, marked 17 successful launches, taking in over $2 billion combined. A new fragrance, Glowing, was launch in 2012. In 2006, Lopez was awarded with the prestigious ACE Fashion Icon of the Year for her contribution to accessories and the fashion industrywww.jenniferlopez.com 

It’s good publicity to be a humanitarian. Cynically put, but mentioning one’s humanitarian work after all business and entertainment deals and PR is as cynical as business can get and only in couple of sentences her humanism is clear, she is clean and good. I would like to know more about the results of her humanitarianism. What is being made exactly? What is done? What comes to being powerful and influential? She is hypnotizing and playing on many arenas, sure. She attracts men and women that is called power, she makes people wild and dancing, that could be called freeing. The queen bee, a person as a classic beauty to imitate, movie personality with looks to kill, movie star who gathers people to watch her perform, a role model. There are many out there who play this particular part and use their gained position to make a difference as well. She has acted in several Hollywood movies which gives her a platform where she is listened to. Still such story is not the most important issue in a Hollywood feature film, in Hollywood, to be humanitarian it is a side trail, something rich people feel compelled of doing. What kind of sexual vibes arise from the making it. It is a Hollywood cult of icons, stories behind and what actually makes difference in the world. The industry is like a religion with angels and demons, money as the only God. Is philanthropy a distraction, a cleanse? What are movies then? Tools to become rich and famous?

The paradox of phallocentrism in aIl its manifestations is that it depends on the image of the castrated woman to give order and meaning to its world. An idea of woman stands as lynch pin to the system: it is her lack that produces the phallus as symbolic presence, it is her desire to make good the lack that the phallus signifies.” Laura Mulvey Visual Pleasure NarrativeCinema http://imlportfolio.usc.edu/ctcs505/mulveyVisualPleasureNarrativeCinema.pdf

Hollywood film is a monolith, what I have seen, watched and as I see, it is leaving much out and sticking to the very narrow tones of humanity and sexuality, posing sexual stereotypes, showing a look-a-like magic tricks with a lot of bling and bang. The thing I don’t understand is why is it doing so when it could be doing so much more? With a lot of noise to get so little is strange. Hollywood as a factory would have an enormous potential to do better quality, interesting, experimental, progressive cinema offering the masses variety and actual change. To me their way is more and more commercial humbug offering ecstatic experiences which other art forms also try to achieve, mass appeal and instant ecstasy. Musical sounds are the same, people look the same, has every fucking thing become a clone, an ass and pair of tits? And the world has become an image of the movies. We are coping what is being copied, becoming copies of each other. Copy that.

 

 

 

Hate speech and freedom of expression

https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2016/11/jodie-ginsberg-question-hate-speech/#.WDxY6Fx-WBE.twitter

To think about what we must censor, not show and talk about, make an interesting map of how we are expected to behave and be, what we can do and who monitors what we can do (is it me?), how we must do in order to belong and not cause conflict as we like comfort and stability. I claim that conflict is a compulsory element of becoming, understanding, learning and about all essential issues we must know about life and ourselves. We appear via conflict. With essential things I mean really concretely face dilemmas and walls within. This process takes hard work which is annoying part of learning. It is pushing, not only yourself but those who you come across. This is a very at the core issue for me as I never accept things and life as it is given to me, as I in other people’s opinion should. So a conflict after a conflict I become and am becoming whole. Those who conflict me, may realise something about themselves or may not because it is in repeat the need to agree, need to like, need to please and need to be nice when there really should be happening the opposite. To disagree, to debate, to do differently and say the conflicting opinion or fact out loud.

Gender rules do apply to me strongly, not because I wish them to but because they exist for me to keep me in place. I cannot be a buddy but a lollipop sucking sexy and horny female. I cannot be a serious, thinking academic but a joke. Those are the one stereotypes I conflict with because it is strange for a girl and someone who looks like me do things that do not traditionally interest or belong to women like me. I get this, I really get this. The stereotype isolates me, it pains me still and it truly is restricting and I don’t have to say anything. So if I am not allowed to object my objectification by doing what I do as I please, if I cannot be seen in any other way than sexually, in need of penetration, in need of attention as a gendered toy, which for some equals fun or love, it is a sorry world. I cannot have strong noteworthy opinions and ideas about politics, art, science because it is difficult for some to take me seriously, I do take a strong point and go to an extreme which will make a point.

Slashing of negativity, doubt, suspicion, minimising, leaving outside, turning back and abandoning are the conflicts of everyday for people who dare to do differently and are those who stick out. It is hate and hate speech which can go unnoticed by those who do it because it is an accepted way to deal with difference and out of ordinary things and people. It does not mean one should accept the way things are and be glad for the difficulty given, even though it is inevitable.

Freedom of speech is a curious thing, as is freedom of expression.

I gather some have it more than others, so much so that for example a named male artist has more of it than an unknown female artist. I have also felt that this is the thing between male and female artists in general (it is a male dominated area of expertise still, expertise generated specialty field), whether the artists are known or not the barriers, prejudices and suspicions are very clear. Men have more credibility that is taken for granted. It is quite a lot same as me working as a welder or having to do business at a hardware store, to study sculpting which traditionally is very male dominated and testosterone packed field. Yes it was difficult for men to tolerate women at art school and at work a woman who welded well, it was unbelievable even. The same curious similarity in trying to find my place in the arts, proving myself to those who need a lot of proving and still they don’t somehow take it, my professional artist identity as a fact.

What has this got to do with freedom of speech and freedom of expression? A lot. It is fairly easy to see that what women represent and what they are thought of being capable of can be unfairly underestimated, turned down as unworthy, laughed at and the enthusiasm for the craft killed by endless discrimination and bullying that has no ground whatsoever.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-news/11416465/Jack-Whites-very-angry-letter.html “lesson about truth and ethics hopefully. all they have to do is google this to know that it’s not worth it. look for real problems instead next time. look for the truth, not fake drama. i got pissed during my show and berated the crowd? no. sorry, didn’t happen. i made jokes about the paper publishing that info, so which of us is thin skinned? they have freedom of speech but i don’t? “

Go Beyond it. (no judgmental tone, do not judge, who is the judge) Part of those who entertain us.

Powerful over whom and for whom? How does power manifest itself by women, via women, via visibility and what is the stage women can be powerful on? What is female power and do women have it in the end? Do women make decisions and decide for their work? Who is the weak in this image of making it? Who is stepped over in this business driven world as it is struggle for survival? Women have battled with those who have power over them, who have justified their power with god’s word. That woman is not capable of taking care of herself, making decisions not even over her own life. The repetitious mantra of having control and power over one’s body, life, work and art is rightful, but it is still a mantra if women do not take the stand. World is changing fast, women gain their rights by putting up a fight. There is no other way. The opposition is bigoted patriarchy and religious tradition, God’s word. 
 
How are we affected? How are we made numb?
Part of entertainer’s job is to entertain. The more it gets noticed the more political it is. The more people listen the more there is reason to put out a message to be heard. To share is political act, to act for all the oppressed couldn’t be more needed. The more people do not pay attention the more they have to be shaken and woken up.
How does entertainment shake the world other than making sexual advancements, opening a blouse, taking it off and showing genitalia. Nothing out of the ordinary. We have seen it. The most ordinary landscape on the scene. Do they who create this visual spectacle for us speak for free sex, for prostitution and sex trade, sexual expression and what it is to be a woman? Is that freedom to be able to show skin, sexual freedom to be taken over and had? Beyoncé showing her buttocks in her show becomes a hit in YouTube. It does not make the society more approving towards sexual expression. Our obsession over sex could still not be more obvious. A matter talked over in talk shows and by journalists. It is a funny topic. Scenery is exactly from a red light district as her dancers wear the same behind showing accessories, posterior-revealing lingerie. It is the latest superstar fashion on stage. Or is it? Position as standing back against the audience, bending one’s back and looking the crowd, gazing behind one’s shoulders and singing holding the microphone. This saying by me sounds I disapprove. I disapprove the cliché, I dislike the ongoing similarity and unwillingness of pushing any envelope. That envelope has been opened and seen. Lack of any kind of self-criticism nor effort to do differently. Is that power, to be a wanted body? Is that showing the world how to be wanted. To portray women on platter singing about relationships, having sex, breaking up and being a strong independent woman.
Ms Winhoffer says Beyonce’s body yesterday represents a marked change from her more muscular shape of last year. ‘We can see a major change in her body from previous years. She represents female empowerment and embodies it on stage, her body is lean and elongated but most importantly, feminine.‘She was able to keep her V shape while maintaining her rear, keeping it plump and lifted.’She says this new silhouette is the holy grail for a female client.”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2546821/Leaner-leggier-curvy-Top-celebrity-trainer-reveals-secret-Beyonces-showstopping-Grammys-body.html
Follow us: 
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook