Fat Tip and the University of Sexualized Children

SOMETHING TO LISTEN TO WHILE READING THIS RATHER MARATHON POST:

I know I brought this idea up in class, but then it was just inchoate-an inkling. I'd like to expand on it a bit here, even if it doesn't turn into a viable conference paper.

So as I mentioned before, I noticed some striking similarities as we discussed the formation of Grosse Pointe as a community between it and USC:

1. Both are idyllic paradises situated in the midst of lower income, less well-manicured neighbourhoods of Detroit and vaguely South-central LA.
2. Both emulate nature through trees (i.e. the elms, all the fifty different species of tree by Annenberg). But the issue is the methodical pattern in which they are planted kind of destroys the randomness inherent in nature.
3. Neither maintains fluid connection with the surrounding communities- in fact, both Grosse Pointe and USC constructed physical walls to demarcate boundaries. (But to what extent do those walls serve to keep others out or do they work more to encourage people to stay inside?)
4. The females of both USC and Grosse Pointe are highly sexualized. Just a few weeks ago we
   discussed Francesca Bessey's article on the lack of response from USC towards reported student-
   student rape cases, whereas immediately after a shooting occurred just off campus, action was taken to erect that ugly wall. This speaks to a double standard for the security of USC students. We also mentioned USC's stereotype of being a school for beautiful people, and more specifically one for "hot girls."

I can't help but believe there is some connection between the superficial nature of such isolated- even estranged- beauty, and the rampant sexualization of women and young girls. I think this phenomena occurs because people's mind reflect the structures of their communities. For example, rape or violation of any kind (the boy narrators' objectification of the Lisbon girls) could very well be considered an unnatural means to a natural end because it assumes the reproductive ability of females, but it does so without their consent which makes it unforgivably, unnaturally forced. That reflects Long's idea of "faux-countryside" present in both Grosse Pointe and USC. Perhaps the superficiality of our surroundings adds to the collective sexual drive by provoking a thirst for the truly natural, recalling the primal urge to reproduce. Additionally, the isolation and limitations of closed off communities prevents curiosity from spreading to other areas and diffusing through communal learning, perhaps resulting in boys resorting to sexual exploration.

The idea that people's minds are microcosms of their environments is an obvious enough statement, I suppose, but why does that happen?  I think my next step would be to look up article on the psychology of how we mimic our home environments, in both geographical and social ways. I wouldn't want to make simple comparisons about the communities; I think I'm more interested in how it happens and why, and perhaps how/why it doesn't.

Becca Weber