globalization

CBS Sunday Morning had a segment on the new-ish phenomenon of “Maid Cafés.” I gathered from the report that they are most popular in areas of Japan where there are a lot of (male) “geeks.” Here’s a description from a Boston.com article on these restaurants:

“Welcome home, Master,” says the maid as she bows deeply, hands clasped in front of a starched pinafore worn over a short pink dress.

This maid serves not some aristocrat but a string of pop-culture-mad customers at a “Maid Cafe” in Tokyo’s Akihabara district, long known as a Mecca for electronics buffs but now also the center of the capital’s “nerd culture.”

“When they address you as ‘Master’, the feeling you get is like a high,” says Koji Abei, a 20-year-old student having coffee with a friend at the Royal Milk Cafe and Aromacare.

Here’s a wikipedia description— discussing how these cafés pull various cultural practices– Japanese manga, anime, Japanese geishas, and French (or English) maids. Apparently, there are now Maid Cafés in Canada and Hong Kong (the one in Hong Kong is called the “Master-and-maid café”). Here are some videos as well– from the U.S. news, and from Japanese news (sorry it isn’t translated). These might make for an interesting discussion on culture, globalization, and gender.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjNGX-jQS94[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0JmfyP4KPs[/youtube]

Worldmapper offers maps in which the actual land area is morphed to represent various disproportionalities across the globe. The website has over 300 maps! Thanks 73man for the tip!

I borrowed a few examples and pasted them in below. The first map is an actual land area map for reference.

Territory size shows the proportion of worldwide net exports of toys (in US$) that come from there. Net exports are exports minus imports. When imports are larger than exports the territory is not shown.

Territory size shows the proportion of worldwide net imports of toys (in US$) that are received there. Net imports are imports minus exports. When exports are larger than imports the territory is not shown.

Territory size shows the proportion of carbon dioxide emissions in 1980 that were directly from there.

Territory size shows the proportion of all territory level decreases in carbon dioxide emissions between 1980 and 2000, that occurred there.

Territory size shows the proportion of state military spending worldwide that was spent by that territory in 2002.

Territory size shows the proportion of species worldwide that became extinct between 1500 current era and 2004, that became extinct there.

Territory size shows the proportion of all people over 15 in the world living with diabetes who live there.

Territory size shows the proportion of all people aged 15-49 with HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) worldwide, living there.

See more alternative maps here.

.

How do we feel about this campaign, by Keep A Child Alive, to encourage people to donate money to Africa on the basis that we are all African? (Apparently we only care about ourselves, so if we suggest that Africa is ourselves, then we’ll donate?)

Do Americans, many of whom are white people with privilege based in race, class, and nation, get to claim Africa as theirs? Do white people now get to have blackness too?  Is this insulting? Some people think so. Here is a larger version of the poster with Gwyneth Paltrow (scroll down for a response):

I borrowed this image from Blackademic.

NEW!  Julie C. noticed that the Canadian Centre for Diversity put out a similar campaign.  There’s something very interesting about it, but I’m having a hard time putting it into words.  Click here to watch the short commercial.  What do y’all think of it?

Here is a link to a website sponsored by Tampax and Always about their work with the UN to give pads to girls in Africa, supposedly because these girls miss school each month because they don’t have pads to wear.

Here is a t-shirt you can buy to support the program. It says “Use your period for good”:

The t-shirt costs $21.99. Of this, $1 goes toward the program.

This brings up all kinds of issues–for instance, where does the other $20.99 go? To Tampax and Always? What do these companies stand to gain from this? Positive publicity or lifelong customer loyalty in Africa?

It could also be used as part of a discussion about consumption and activism–the idea we have now that you can just buy something if you want to fix a social problem. If you pick up any fashion magazine, there will be a page or an article in it telling readers they can change the world by buying some product–nevermind that only a tiny part of the purchase price goes to the charity.

For other examples of shopping as activism, look here, here, and here.

30% of the retail price of these shirts will be donated to “some of the country’s best charities. What better excuse to go shopping?” The retail price is $68. The charities are:

Women in Need
Free Arts NYC
Rape Treatment Center at Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center
National Multiple Sclerosis Society
Children’s Hope India
American Refugee Committee’s Darfur Relief Effort

I like these kinds of things because they bring up two issues: Why don’t people just contribute $20 (or, in most cases, something like 10 cents) directly instead of filtering it through a corporation? And should we have to personally get something out of it in order to contribute to worthy causes?

For other examples, look here, here, and here.