COM 101 : Entry 5

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Stereotypes and Prejudices: The Otaku

Recently, I came across this new video that originates from NicoNico Douga and I was reminded of the Maid Cafes commonly associated with Akihabara in Japan, as well as the activity known as Cosplay.

With stereotypes and prejudices being one of the main attitudinal barriers to intercultural understanding, it is interesting to see that even within a largely collectivist culture as portrayed by the Japanese and exemplified by the distinction between Soto (外) and Uchi (内), also known as out-groups versus in-groups, there exist a strong negative stigma associated with the Otaku.

What is an Otaku ?

In modern Japanese slang, the term otaku typically refers to a hardcore fan of any particular theme, topic, or hobby. Some of us might already know about the anime otaku (a fan of anime ), cosplay otaku (a fan of costume play, or dressing up as various characters) and manga otaku (a fan of Japanese comic books). However, types such as the pasokon otaku (computer geeks) and gēmu otaku (video games fans) as well as several others are hardly known to many. Though the term is generally known to be associated with males, there also exist many female otaku.

In other videos of the same maid and panda duo above, they have dressed up in other costumes and as such, can be seen as an example of a cosplay otaku. Not many people in mainstream society would dress up in costumes and film themselves dancing. This is also an example of the usage of new media, such as the internet, to gain fame yet remain anonymous at the same time. Apart from those who might know them personally, no one else would know their identity even if their videos get thousands of hits each day, unless they choose to reveal it.

(Cosplay Otaku)

(Stereotypical Anime/Manga/Figurine Otaku's Room)

The exact origin of the term 'Otaku' seems to be unclear, with speculation that it was first used by people working in TV or animation companies, spreading to viewers of anime (Japanese animation) and the closely related fields of manga and games. Otaku are stereotypically viewed as recluses, obsessed with their anime and spending money buying useless figurines or supporting their idols, sociopaths and in general, people who contribute nothing to mainstream society. (Ironically, doesn't all this contribute to the economy ?)

In my opinion, people should be allowed to follow their interests without fear of negative stigma. Different people have different interests, just like people have varying tastes in food, music, movies and the list just goes on. Thus, it is not right for us to judge others. Of course, this does not apply to interests that harms another human being or those that fall under crime. There has to be a line drawn.

The Otaku Murderer, 1988-1989

A 'otaku/moral panic' that greatly contributed to the negative stereotyping of Otaku was caused by the mutilation and murder of 4 little girls by Tsutomu Miyazaki between 1988 and 1989. When he was apprehended, police found a huge collection of anime and manga, some of it pornographic, as well as several horror and slasher films in his apartment.

The media picked on this fact and repeatedly labelled him as an Otaku, catapulting the status of Otaku into the class of sociopaths and outcasts. This is reminiscent of killing incidents in the West being linked to computer games, and as such, the collection might have been used as a scapegoat in an attempt to make sense of his actions. Remember that Stereotypes are a kind of preconception, technically defined as "generalized 2nd-hand beliefs that provide conceptual biases from which we 'make sense' out of what goes on around us, whether they are accurate or fit the circumstances."

Since the occurence of the Miyazaki Incident, "Otaku" has been strongly associated with negative stigmas, carrying with it a hint of fear and loathing. A line is clearly drawn between in-group (mainstream society) and out-group (otaku) members and as such, many innocent people who may like anime, manga etc. suffer simply by pursuing their hobbies innocently. With the media acting as a secondary source, people blindly take up their view point without checking their validity.

Densha Otoko (Train Man), 2004-2005

In 2004, a purportedly true story of an Otaku who intervened when a drunk man was harassing women in a train (sounds familiar ?) emerged on 2Channel, the largest internet forum in the world. After receiving thanks from one of the women whom the drunk was badgering, they subsequently started going for dates and became a couple. Throughout all this, he asked for and in turn received advice from many other 2Channelers, showing a real sense of collectivity in Japanese culture at this point.

(Look familiar ? You bet! This part was shown in class!)

In 2005, a drama and movie based on the story were released and they were well-received by the public.The closer look at the Otaku culture as well as the portrayal of the main character, an Otaku, in a positive light helped in alleviating the negative Otaku stereotype somewhat and allowing mainstream society to be more accepting with regards to certain aspects of the Otaku culture. In this case, we see that the media acts as a source promoting (whether intentionally or not) redemption of the Otaku culture, a role contrasting that during the Miyazaki Incident.

Discussion

Even within a local context, many stereotypes and prejudices exist, not necessarily relating to culture per se. For example, someone *cough* once mentioned to me that I seemed aloof due to a stereotypical view of my school. Are there any stereotypes out there that you find interesting ? Or in the context of the Otaku, do you think that they deserve to face such negative stigmas ?

Random Post I : Eye of God

Thursday, February 26, 2009

The Helix Nebula, nicknamed 'Eye of God', stares down at us from the depths of space, watching our tiny world from 700 light years away.

The blue pupil, the white of the eye and pink lid are created by layers of gas and dust thrown off and illuminated by the star as it comes to the end of its life over the course of thousands of years.

Source: Dailymail

COM 101 : Entry 4

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Groupthink

In this entry, we shall take a look at an example of the Groupthink that played a part in the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster. For those who might be unaware, this tragedy involved the disintegration of NASA's space shuttle, Challenger, over the Atlantic Ocean 73 seconds into its flight. This resulted in the deaths of the seven crew members and the incident was made all the more significant due to the presence of a teacher, Christa McAuliffe, amongst the crew as the first member of the 'Teacher in Space Project'.

In order to spare readers all the technical jargon involved in the breaking apart of the Challenger, I will just list the fundamental cause: Failure of an O-Ring seal in a rocket booster to function during the "burn stage", resulting in rocket fuel being leaked. This can be literally portrayed as "Adding fuel to the fire". To further highlight the importance of the O-Ring, it is classified as a "Criticality 1" component, which means that a failure on its part, without a backup, would result in a loss of life or vehicle. A contributing factor to its failure is the O-Ring having been untested in freezing conditions similar to the one predicted on the day of the launch.

(Smoke plume from Challenger's disintegration)

What is Groupthink ?

Irving Janis, Yale Social Psychologist, defines it as "a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action".

Symptoms of Groupthink

It is possible to gain a rough insight as to how Groupthink played a role in this disaster by reading the next few points without having read about the incident. (NASA managers were thought to have compromised safety regulations in order to maintain the launch manifest)

Illusion of Invulnerability: When concerns were raised by engineers regarding the effect of temperature on the resilience of the O-Rings, NASA management dismissed it by claiming the risk was true for every flight, and that in the event that the primary ring failed, the secondary would still seal. This was an unfounded claim and defies the rule of a Criticality 1 component.

Belief in the group's own morality: NASA management were felt to have had shifted their moral rules, influencing engineers and their contractors to prove that that conditions were unsafe for launch rather than showing that it was safe.

Shared Stereotypes: The concerns regarding the O-Rings were raised by engineers at Morton Thiokol, the contractor responsible for the construction and maintenance of the shuttle's rocket boosters. As such, there may have been a hint of "Us versus Them" mentality used by the NASA management.

Collective Rationalizations: No one in the NASA management opposed the statement by NASA manager, Geory Hardy, that the secondary O-Ring was being counted upon to seal under the worst case conditions. The secondary O-Ring was there to provide redundancy in case of unforeseen failure, not to replace the primary O-Ring and leaving no backup.

Self Censorship: Thiokol engineers were hesitant to voice out their outright disapproval of the launch.

Illusion of Unanimity: NASA managers did not voice out hesitancy regarding the launch to their superiors

Pressure on Dissenters: Thiokol Engineers were pressured both by NASA management as well as their own. This was due to the fear of public regarding the agency as inept due to having already postphoned the launch several times for the former, and fear of losing NASA contracts for the latter.

Mind-Guards: Jesse Moore, top of the flight readiness review chain, was insulated from the negative concerns regarding the O-Rings. Thiokkol's expert on the O-Rings, Roger Boisjoly, was not asked to give input in the final decisions charts.

As we can see, a groupthink atmosphere tends to lead to negative consequences by disrupting problem solving, having members ignore alternatives, failure to test ideas against reality and refusal to make contingency plans. With the inclination towards groupwork in modern society, how do you think that groupthink can manifest itself in everyday life ?

COM 101 : Entry 3

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Love Bites

This week, we learnt all about Interpersonal Communications in class, how apt for the lead-up to Valentine's Day. Going by the assumption that most (probably all) readers would have had more experience in the love department compared to me, this week's discussion topic should be a piece of cake! As such, let's move straight on to the discussion topic: Is relational development an art to be mastered, or a branch of science to be perfected ?

Okay, so I jest. After all, most of us would probably not be able to answer that without attempting to draft an entire process essay. Instead, for this week's discussion, I shall gift my beloved readers 2 genres to choose from :

a) Relationships or Interpersonal Communications
b) Non-verbal Communications (Since it's fun to play with!)

(a) Before I continue further, let us do a quick recap on the Knapp Model of Relational Development.

Coming Together

Initiating:
Initial interactions that occur when individuals first begin to come together

Experimenting:
Individuals attempt to 'feel each other out'.

Intensifying:
Marked by increased commitment, awareness and participation amongst the individuals involved. Typically marks the first substantial overt disclosure of feelings to the other person.

Integrating:
Melding or coupling of individual character and personality into the relational unit. In other words, thinking 'we' and 'us' instead of 'I'.

Bonding:
Formalizes the obligation and commitment of the individuals in the relationship, for example through marriage.

Coming Apart

Differentiating:
Reaffirmation of Individuality.

Circumscribing:
Decrease in both the quantity and quality of communication between relational partners. Devolves to the next step.

Stagnating:
Partners simply going through the motion of a relationship, with the emotional rewards associated with a healthy relationship being absent.

Avoiding:
Partners avoid each other, withdrawing both emotionally as well as physically.

Terminating:
Goodbye.

Although most relationships tend to follow the resolution or dissolution stages progressively, sometimes, it is not easy to slot a relationship into any of the stages. Take for example two friends who become mutually aware that each has feelings for the other yet they are reluctant to take the relationship deeper for fear of being hurt, perhaps due to horrible past experiences. To even have reached the stage of mutual like, they should have had experienced the first 2 stages at least, be it even at a subconscious level. Do we then classify this as just a normal friendship, or a sort of stagnant coming together ?

Of course, relationships tend to be a lot more complicated and this being an extremely brief summary, does not touch upon every single detail.

Moving on to the fun part, what are your thoughts about the relationships shown in the following videos ? Can they be classified into any of the stages above, if not, how would you describe them ? Are there any gestures in particular that you like ?





(b) If you'd rather attempt to spot non-verbal cues, there are a lot of varieties shown in the 2 videos above. Are you able to point out at least 4 different ones and the feelings they represent ?

To refresh your memory, types of nonverbal communication are: Kinesics, Paralinguistics, Chronemics, Objectics, Oculesics, Haptics, Proxemics and Physical appearance.

If you happen to have more free time, I would like to challenge you to identify at least 2 different types of emotions portrayed within the following song (ex. hatred). Since most readers would not understand the language, it might provide a good example of how paralinguistics work.



I apologize if the post this time round is draggy, but more importantly, I hope that you readers will have fun with it!