Revenge

In Tod Browning's "Freaks," the circus performers use the negative stereotypes to their own advantage at the end of the story. Throughout the show, the "normal" people working at the circus separated themselves from the "freaks." They felt superior because they did not have some sort of disability, and therefore ridiculed and took advantage those who did. For example, Hun was taken advantage of by Venus because of his feelings for her. Because she was "normal sized," she felt that it was okay to play with Hun's emotions in order to get his inheritance. At the end of the story, her treatment of the disabled comes back to haunt her when she is turned into a chicken by all of the people she used to ridicule. The disabled circus performers used the negative stereotypes of Venus in order to scare her before turning her into a chicken. They accepted the things that made them different, and used these differences to their own advantage in order to get revenge.
cailee-11

Offend One, Offend them All

In the movie Freaks, there were many points in the movie where the "freaks" were insulted. When this was done, the rest of the freaks there were offended and upset about it as well. This is because if one person is humorous because they are different, then anyone who is different will feel as if they are being directed as well. Many people don't actually consider what the consequences of the things they say will be. For example when they say "don't get her started, he'll punch you in the nose" to the male/female combination.
Saying this led to his/her feelings being hurt and her feeling like an outcast. Things like this are devastating truth bringers, because even the freaks make fun of and mess with the other freaks. One example being when the Siamese female twins were arguing with one of their significant other who had a stuttering problem and as he stuttered they told him to spit it out already or something to that extent. This goes to show that even disabled people sometimes poke fun, but dont realize how much damage their statement actually may do.
-Derek Guarino

Modern Day Freakshows?

Eli Clare brings up an important point about the treatment of the disabled by medical professionals. Instead of a one on one, personal meeting with a doctor, those with disabilities are put in front of large groups of people in order to be studied by medical students. It is almost as though those with disabilities are put on display as "freaks" were put on display in circuses and freakshows in the past. However, the main difference between the disabled being presented for medical students and the freak shows of the past is the purpose. Today, the purpose of a large group of students studying one disabled person is for education, so the students can learn about the disabled in hopes of becoming a better doctor. In the past, those with disabilities were put on display for others' entertainment. Because of this different, I think there needs to be more understanding from medical professionals as well as the disabled.

Medical professionals and students need to think about the feelings of the disabled when they are being presented in front of large groups. They need to understand that in a sense, they are gawking at the disabled as people gawked at freaks in the past. However, the disabled need to be more understanding that the intentions of the students and doctors are essentially good. They are not being gawked at because it is entertaining for others, but rather to educate others about disabilities and improve the lives of those that are disabled. It is for the benefit of the disabled as well as the students to be studied, because the ultimate goal is a better life for those that are living with a disability. Because of this, there needs to be a compromise. Rather than displaying a disabled person for hundreds to look at, there should be a much more personal approach. For example, maybe one or two medical students will sit in on a disabled person's visit to the doctor. This way the students can observe and learn both about the person with the disability, as well as how they should interact on a more personal level.
-cailee 10

Eli Clare and Stones

Several times throughout the article Eli talks about how his body was stolen or taken from him. He mentions that he was raped several times by his father and that his mother stated she never knew. By addressing his sexual abuse and neglect, he connects this to his homosexuality and trans-gender identity.

However, one of the passages in the story makes me debate whether Clare really does attribute the abuse to him becoming a transgenders person.

“How did his gendered abuse reinforce my sense of not being a girl? How did his non-abusive treatment of me as an almost son interact with the ways in which fists and penis and knives told me in no uncertain terms that I was a girl? ... and later “How did my mother’s willful ignorance of the hurt he inflicted on me influence what I absorbed about femininity and masculinity?” (126)

Clare states that he does not know and will never be sure if the abuse or neglect he was exposed to in life caused him to be transgender or homosexual. (Shawn Parkhurst, 20)

right vs. wrong

Just wanted to continue on my last blog and answer some of the questions posted. First the question about considering the public stripping of the children. I kind of look at it this way when I have a doctor look at me I don't consider it public. Aren't we supposed to have patient doctor confidentiality? I don't think that would change by the amount of doctors who view the child its still confidential. While this may effect a child physically and/or emotionally what about the million of children it will save? It may sound crude but you have to look at the risk reward factor. Possibly hurting one child may be worth the amount of children it could save. Also it is not the doctor who can take on how this will effect the child. The child's guardian has a right to say no. That part should be put on their shoulders.

Lastly who would this benefit? Does it benefit the child? I would say yes all those doctors discussing one child the more thoughts and ideas the better. Will it benefit the medical profession? Why sure it's cost affective and unfortunately in the state we live in that has to be a factor. So does time with the amount of time some children are given to live with disabilities the more help the better. Unfortunately this whole idea is not pretty, but getting over the political correctness of somethings is the best way to help people. I just think this maybe one of those occasions. Thomas Moss (post 15)

Freaks? Or Just Different?

I do not believe that Browning meant to portray the freaks as objects of interest. Naturally, they are going to attract attention, not all of it positive, because they look so different from the typical person, and they are not usually seen an everyday person’s everyday lift. In fact, it seems that he does just the opposite of portraying them as “freaks”. If he truly wanted to show them as being “freaks,” I believe that Browning would have shown the acts that they performed for the circus. He does not do this, in order to keep the film from becoming another platform on which to prove their “freakiness”.

I think that Browning successfully allowed his viewers to see the “freaks” as people. We got to know each character and what their personalities were like, which were not freaky or different in any special way. They seemed like regular people that just had different bodies. They had their own family, and they all fit in and served a purpose to that family, just like normal people have certain roles and purposes in their own societies. I also think that Browning effectively portrayed how the circus people react when their family is threatened. They had absolutely no problem accepting Cleopatra and Hercules into their family. They wanted to include them, as equals in their “circus people” family. They showed this at the wedding feast.

It was only when Cleo and Hercules began showing threatening behavior to members of the family that the other members began to react and treat them accordingly. When they did begin threatening bodily harm to Cleo and Hercules, it was with switchblades and guns, probably two of the most common weapons for everyday people to have. If Browning had truly wanted to play into the “freakiness” of his characters, I think he would have had the circus people act in completely unexpected ways. He would have really gone to the extremes and possibly pulled stereotypical fears of physically deformed people like having them have particularly gruesome ways of killing people. Instead, he gave them two very common weapons. They did end up turning Cleo into a chicken-woman. I think that was justified, and just a play on her being terrified and prejudiced against the circus people, effectively turning her into a freak, so she could experience how she had treated them from the other side.

(Sarah Jaworowicz, Post 20)

From Beginning to End

In the beginning of the movie "Freaks" the circus people were being shown as how they were different and how they were viewed upon by other people. When the family of "freaks" was out in the woods dancing around and having fun 2 men walked by and yelled at them. Since they were acting so foolishly they could possibly be seen as children. The woman said they were her children and the men said they weren't children they were monsters and he felt bad so he kept letting them play. They were shown this way on purpose even Han was shown as a child by the way he fell for Cleopatra so easily. He acted in a way that a child would have acted when he saw a toy or something he wanted really bad and would do anything for it. He ignored what people said about him and Cleopatra whether or not they were right.
In the end of the movie the "freaks" were also shown as being freaks but in their own way. When the second part of the movie started with the family accepting Cleopatra into their family it was showing her as being the "freak." Most people would see her as being the normal one but since they were the freaks and she was normal she was a freak to them. When Cleopatra poisoned Han the family acted like the mob and attacked her and Hercules. When thinking about the family attacking them it almost seems like the childest side is still coming out. The reason it seems this way is because I feel like they could have called the cops as Venus wanted to do, instead they went the easiest way out and killing Hercules and turning Cleopatra into a chicken woman.
Kevin Ostempowski Post 2