Last weeks reflection focussed on the idea of “institutions”, which can be defined as “an organization founded for a religious, educational, professional, or social purpose.”. I think the fact the idea of “religious” and “social” purposes being associated with institutions is what fueled the vehement dismissal of marriage by a large number of students in the room. I had never really considered marriage to be something that was so ridiculed, apart from the overwhelming majority who believe same-sex marriage should be legal in Australia.
Yet, contrary to what I would have expected, students in the theatre enthusiastically listed reasons as to why marriage is sexist, narrow and outdated upon request.
Some of these included:
– The fact that it assigns a residual role to the church
– The way it encourages gender roles
– The fact that it’s a commercial industry whose goal is to make and increase profit.
What intrigued me was the fact that it could be commonly argued that the reasons listed were arguably greatly differing in importance. For example, the fact that it assigns gender roles through its classification of “men” and “women” is arguable not as important as the fact that its deep ties within religion mean it currently does not allow gays to marry in Australia.
Easy there, Tumblr.
This is something I connected to our Project Brief 4 idea.
As previously mentioned, we are focussing on the role of social media in contemporary activism for our project, comparing the lives of an online “social justice warrior” and old school activist in a 2 to 3 minute short film. The linking of both “crucial” and “trivial” problems within society arguably occurred in the lectorial, and it is something that we hope to accurately present in our film.