All Posts

The Student Athlete documentary brought up mixed emotions for me. Although I am not a college athlete, I was a high school athlete and I was trying to commit to play tennis at a division 3 school. I also have multiple friends who are college athletes, on this campus and off this campus. Personally knowing these college athletes, I felt that the documentary did a good job in showing the billion dollar industry and how it exploits these teenagers.

 One of the scenes that stuck out to me was when Nick Richards, a high school senior in the documentary, but now a sophomore at the University of Kentucky, attended a Nike-sponsored youth league game in Brooklyn, New York. Richards told his high school coach, Chris Chavannes, that he didn’t have any Nike shoes to play in. Chavannes goes on to whisper to Richards, “You’re wearing an Under Armour shirt on camera? Are you kidding me?” The coach has a contract with Nike, meaning that his players have to wear Nike. Showing up in an Under Armour shirt was not acceptable according to Chavannes.

This scene reminded me of the concept of branding and how Nick is just representing a brand, rather than being valued for his abilities. In a way, Nick had to disidentify with being an Under Armour consumer and assimilate to what his coach wanted. In this scene, Nick seems to be bothered by his coach, but the power structures that allow the coach to seem dominant, make Nick suppress his emotions. This suppression can be seen as submission to power dynamics.

This class has allowed me to be more of a critical thinker, which will aid my understanding of the world we live in outside of this campus. I am now equipped with the tools to be a thinker that breaks down the walls that society has placed. After taking this course, I feel that I will look at systems of oppression differently and be more mindful of people’s actions, thoughts, and beliefs. Also, I feel that I have become more comfortable within the classroom setting and being myself during discussions and projects. This class community has showed me how my opinion matters and how discussions are formed by engaging with peers and having difficult conversations.

Presenting at 6PIC was an interesting experience for me. I enjoyed having an audience to share my project with and having a space where I felt my project was valued. Being able to have a space where public knowledge production is cherished felt good as the producer of my media. Volunteering my whole life and maintaining my exposure to non-profit organizations made me feel comfortable in this space because it felt similar to other spaces I had been previously. I am excited to continue going ‘beyond the bubble’ and exploring activities outside of this campus to connect with more individuals and create interpersonal relationships. Thank you Professor Chaz for giving us the opportunity to move outside the bubble and engage with an audience that we otherwise would not have had.

 

One of the readings I enjoyed this week was White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo. She titles this article “Why it’s so hard for white people to talk about racism.” I think this topic fits with many of our class discussions as we have been confronted with topics that have made us feel uncomfortable. DiAngelo made it clear that in order to understand racism, she has to make the clear distinction between prejudice, discrimination, and racism. DiAngelo offers insight and breaks down the norms behind each of these words. She discusses ideology and how it helps our society make sense of social existence. As we have talked about different ideologies in our class, I liked this definition as it was something comprehendible for me.

Sociologist Joe Feagin talks about the white racial frame as a way in which whites “circulate and reinforce racial messages that position whites as superior.” This frame works hand in hand with white supremacy. Within this frame, people of color are seen as inferior. White people resist the term white supremacy, but in reality, it is the definition for the culture we all live in.

This text was important for me because it discussed racism as the social construct that it is. It dealt with the concept of being responded to as white, which is something I had never thought about. It also talked about whiteness which we have previously discussed in class: “Whiteness rests upon a foundational premise: the definition of whites as the norm or standard for human, and people of color as a deviation of that norm” (25). This quote stirred something in me, kind of made me mad because it is the truth and sometimes the truth hurts as Lizzo said LOL. It struck a chord with me because it’s crazy how everything has to do with race. Our institutions, workplaces, schools, everyday activities, etc, it all goes back to who can get a sandwich at the end of the day.

 

 

madison moore’s discussion on nightlife and the concept of the “nocturnal self” made me reflect on my own nightlife. He described nightlife as a space of world making and boundary crossing. The nighttime has a connotation to deal with things we aren’t supposed to do, something that is dark and forbidden compared to daytime. I think there is more to why nighttime has this reputation as popular culture and the media has produced an image of nighttime having to do with parties, drugs, alcohol, sex, and other activities in movies and tv shows.

With some of the images madison shared, I felt a sense of empowerment as I appreciated and was enthralled by the different people he showed us. By being creative and unique, each person opened up an intersectional space for others to identify with them and express their fabulousness. In a way, the images he shared queered and restructured the way I looked at ordinary items and fashion, in general. 

During madison moore’s presentation, I caught myself reflecting on my personal style as a reaction to oppression. He talked about “undoing yourself from the systems” and I found this interesting because I never saw style as a political resistance. Madison seems to enjoy disrupting space and he communicated a message of feeling comfortable in the way he is and dresses as. I admire this aspect of who he is as I struggle to be comfortable with the uncomfortable, but I am slowly working to get over this concept as I have learned through his class that disrupting the public space says more about the person you are and less about the people around you, if that makes sense. In a summary by the Yale University Press describing moore’s book that he passed out in class, they quote: “moore positions fabulousness as a form of cultural criticism that allows those who perform it to thrive in a world where they are not supposed to exist.” Madison talked about aking “fabulousness” out to public space as an aesthetic practice and I had never thought about that until now.

I have only been home once since I’ve gotten to Richmond and it was an interesting experience for me. Home, for me, was always Wellington, Florida. The Sunshine State, where some of my family and most of my friends are. This changed when I came to Richmond in August. I started to call my dorm my “home,” and one of my best friends, my “home.” Going home always meant my family, my bed, and that home smell as soon as you enter the white door. Home is feeling safe in a place I was born and raised in, the only home I have ever known. This class has taught me that home isn’t necessarily a physical structure, rather that it can be a person, a group, or an object. The concept of the homeplace can also be related to political resistance as some people choose to leave their homes in protest or because they did not feel accepted. When people’s identities are challenged or frowned upon in the homeplace, they must find another place to call home because we all crave comfort and safety whether it be in a place or in another persons presence.

Going home from being a full time college student and talking to my parents and family members, I found myself being an observer more often than actively participating in conversation. I enjoyed watching my family, actively listening to what they had to say, and then inserting myself when I felt it was necessary. This ties back to the concept we discussed in class that we have gained knowledge while on campus that has opened up our worldview compared to our homeplace where things tend to remain the same.

In the episode we watched of “This is Us,” the home was usually run by the women. This is true for my home as my mother does everything she can, like cleaning, cooking, and being the handyman. This was interesting for me because I realized the cultural differences between my mother in Florida and my grandmother in El Salvador. Comparing this third world country to the USA made me realize the cultural variations even in the homeplace. My grandparents have a maid who cooks and cleans, a driver and landscaper, whom wee all adore. Their version of home includes these workers and now family members as they spend every day of the week and most weekends helping my grandparents. Additionally, my grandpa seems to run the house, rather than my grandma. Although she does boss people around in the kitchen, my grandpa has the utmost authority compared to my house where it is the opposite.

In my journal post about the Student Athlete documentary, I wrote: “Something I found intriguing was that the film only focused on basketball and football, but there are 24 NCAA sports nationally. Also, there were no female student athletes featured, which was weird because both directors are females.”

When we asked this question in class, Caroline and Molly spoke to how they didn’t think it was intentional that the directors of the documentary didn’t put female athletes. They believed there was a narrow focus on men in this documentary because they are seen as the money makers in the sports industry. Basketball and football are two sports that are tied to power structures. Why is it that these two sports are seen as the most engaging? Because they bring in the most money for the teams and the industry, in general. America has been structured to place higher value on these two sports as opposed to others. 

In terms of the film’s intended audience, I think it was trying to reach a population of coaches, athletes, and sports fans. This documentary was made to communicate a message about a business that many people have first hand experience with or are going through right now. Profiting from the glory of these student athletes is not only continuing the system of oppression that is the sports world, but it is also an unjust way to put these athletes through a system where they either can thrive or ultimately, fail.

 

This documentary disrupted dominant narratives by using first person accounts. By having honest and open student athletes relaying their stories, the audience feels as if they are reliable. Being able to follow the stories of these men and finding out more about their life as the film went on provided the audience with a more personal account. For me, this related to when we talked about the complexity of audiences in chapter 8 and how everyone has their own interpretation of films based on their values, attitudes, and beliefs. This intersectional lens of viewing a film, not being a student athlete in college myself, was interesting for me. I have friends who do go through similar things these men discussed.

Going into the main stars of the film, Silas Nacita, who was attending Baylor University, was couch surfing and barely getting by before his friends’ grandparents were able to assist him with financial aid. During their interview, the older white couple talked about helping “a boy who was in need.” I thought that this act of sponsorship was very meaningful for Nacita, but also stereotypical as they were rich white folks who had the power to use their resources.

In the documentary, Shamar Graves, who played for Rutgers for three seasons, talks about the NCAA and how it is “a business.” The ideology that athletes have a balance between academics and athletics is being disrupted here. It is truly apparent that this is not the case whatsoever. Most “student athletes” must focus on their athletics before academics, although they are told otherwise when they are first committing to a college.

Mike Shaw, who is 23 years old in the documentary, had to stop playing basketball due to his extreme back injuries. This completely stopped his career as he had to focus on his health over his athletic future. As seen in the film, he is put into a mental health facility because he felt as if there was no hope for his future endeavors. This is a common occurrence in the professional athletic realm as well as college. Most of the athletes are dependent upon their sport to support themselves and their families. When this is taken away, they feel like their world is over, as apparent through Shaw.

Something I found intriguing was that the film only focused on basketball and football, but there are 24 NCAA sports nationally. Also, there were no female student athletes featured, which was weird because both directors are females. I guess there is a mythical norm of the male student athlete, but I feel that since it is a more modern film, shot in 2018, there would’ve been a female representative.

One of the directors, Trish Dalton, discussed the documentary, saying: “Every year billions of dollars are generated off the backs of an unpaid labor force: college athletes.” I think this quote brings the whole piece together because the players don’t get enough credit for their hard work. The “labor force” behind being a student athlete is founded upon the ideal that athletes must perform in order to generate profit. Again, relating to power structures and how authority asserts their dominance through different athletic realms.

 

For me, self care starts with my favorite music. I have an obsession with Billie Eilish, so I tend to listen to her TOO often. Look how cute she is, oh my god. Anyways, I listen to her, Khalid, Bazzi, Lewis Capaldi, and Harry Hudson, those are just some of my favorites. I started my Tuesday off with some music and then

I called one of my best friends from home, Lauren. She has been my friend since third grade and her grandpa recently passed. I was going to fly back home to attend the funeral, which is tomorrow, but I don’t have enough money, so I called to apologize and wish her the best for tomorrow. She is wearing one of my cardigans to the funeral, so I will be there in spirit. After I called her, I spent time with one of my closest friends here, John. We laid on the hammocks by the lake, talking and listening to music. It is a beautiful day out, so I was happy to be outdoors. Instead of telling myself I needed to go to the library to procrastinate, I enjoyed the weather and my best friend. This weather and the season of fall in general is new to me since I am from the Sunshine State. Being

able to appreciate this season on our campus and seeing the trees change color as everyday passes is absolutely beautiful.  After I went to the hammocks, my friend invited me to go to Chipotle. Lately, I’ve been struggling with body image and watching what I eat. It’s not something I like to talk about because I feel like people just

automatically tell me “Your skinny,” “You shouldn’t worry about that,” but it’s what I think and what I see myself as, that matters. Instead of watching what I eat, I treated myself to Chipotle, which is one of my favorite places. It reminds me of home because my friends and I would go there frequently. It’s also just so good and it makes me happy. I’m conflicted when it comes to being happy versus being happy with my physical appearance because one side of my brain is telling me to not care and to eat whatever because at the end of the day, I’m my own kind of beautiful.The other side is telling me that I’ve gained weight and that I need to workout and eat healthy. This internal struggle affects me everyday, but I am just trying to take it day by day depending on how I wake up each morning.  Is this a good plan? I honestly don’t know, but it’s what I’m going with, so I’m just going to stick with it LOL. After Chipotle, I went thrifting and I bought two sweatshirts for $6. Richmond has great thrifting stores, unlike Florida (Fantastic Thrift is where I go)!

Every Tuesday, I go to the South Side of Richmond to Sacred Heart Center. I volunteer at the Kids of the Corazon Childcare, helping Spanish speaking children with their homework and playing games with them. Even though it is volunteering, I think about it as self-care because it makes me happy. It’s good to get off campus and be apart of the city of Richmond’s community being Sofia, rather than being on campus and just being another student. I love going to see “my kids” and spending two hours with them 🙂

My self-care Tuesday ended with taking a long, hot shower and watching Netflix. I’m watching a show called Seven Seconds because I finished my telenovela 🙁 Seven Seconds actually applies to our class because it’s about the Juvenile Justice System. A black 17 year old was killed by a New Jersey cop, and a group of 4 cops covered it up as if it was nothing. I recommend the show, I’m on the last episode! Overall, it was a good day, thank you for letting us have this self-care period of time. You’re definitely right, it is easy to get caught up in the day to day college routine, and it’s refreshing to step back and focus on myself, for once.

This short story brought lots of themes to my mind, including police brutality, Afrofuturism, disruption of space, and the concept of the personal as political. In Kara Keeling’s Intro chapter, she talks about Afrofuturism as an area of “critical inquiry and cultural production.” She discusses the four elements that come with it, being imagination, technology, future, and liberation. I think some of these elements can be seen in “The City Born Great” as it is projecting the concept of imagination in a political way.

In terms of police brutality, the systemic attitudes or beliefs towards the police can be seen through this story, “Or maybe those are the rumblers of police sirens? Nothing I like the sound of, either way.” The imminent fear that the police projects as a unit is apparent through this line and especially in the scene where the protagonist is running from what he perceives to be the cops, but it is unclear. I think it’s more than just bringing up the issue of police brutality, but also shining a light on the power structures that favor certain groups. Jemisin is highlighting the way a black male can live in a city in constant fear that he will be hurt, killed, or threatened. This also reminded me of the class where we talked about When They See Us and how the case stirred up feelings the general public already had about black people, which resulted in the media framing of the Exonerated 5’s case.

In discussing the personal as political in the story, the protagonist talks about his style, “the holes in my clothes aren’t the fashionable kind.” This reminded me of Madison Moore and how he talked about style being political and a reaction to oppression. Even if the protagonist literally didn’t have any other clothes, her is still undoing himself from the systematic structures by taking his expression out into public space for the world to see.

I talked to Ryan Keep about his take on the short story. He talked about the concept of “breathing” and how the narrator uses breathing and graffiti art as a metaphor to be able to express himself. As a graffiti artist, the protagonist preferred the nighttime because he connected with the city more. He attempted to disidentify with being an artist in the daytime, while also trying not to attract attention in the day. Ryan’s interpretation and mine differed in many aspects as he did more of a close reading and I focused on central concepts I took from the story. I really liked his reading of the story as he connected it to Jose Muñoz, which we all seem to resonate with.

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1RB8jftmz3z9t1csKngRvn8ubPZKFS9HD

click then download! it was the only way for it to work! sorry!