The two videos depict three different conceptions of humor. First, the films depict many behaviors that are representative of the superiority theory. For example, a manager who conducts the interview peeps the interviewee's shirt, as well as the case in which a management imposes on employees the requirement to appear early to work and even to remain on the job for the full duration. There appears to be a war for domination in the workplace, as seen by the first video, in which an employee is shown burning the employer's shoe, and a colleague employee sets fire to the former employee. It goes even further to an extent where a big male boss dances with two female employees and other men seems to follow suit. The second theory is a relief, which is not so clearly presented in the films. However, incongruity is vastly shown in the clips. For instance, when the viewer expects one thing to be done, a different one is done instead. In the films, it is observed that employees are joyful as they are getting to work only to be followed from behind by the manager pointing a shotgun at them. Another case is the comedy that is rampant in most parts of the film, like the falling of the manager’s pants, banging of the heads, different types of sounds produced as well as presenting men in the painting rooms when we expect to see ladies.
Q. Ethical issues in the clips
The speaking of the African American individuals is closely linked with the speaking which the slaves spoke. Then, most slave women were considered instruments of sex during the time of relaxation. This is evident in the way the manager who conducts the interview is steering at the blouse of the lady interviewee. The way in which the women are portrayed in ink as well as in the painting room is also an attest to that fact. Such kinds of behaviors can lead to prosecution for sexual assault in the workplace.
Q. The stereotypes in the videos and how they might appeal to or affect participants as well as various types of audiences
If in case what happens in the two clips were to happen today, especially to the African American people, I believe they would match on the streets as well as take the matter to the courts of law. The way in which the blacks are portrayed as answering their masters is not acceptable in the current world setting. Women in the clips are seen as objects of sex and are merely assistants to the administrators. These shows can be very dangerous to the viewers who may want to practice such kind of behaviors in the workplace since such are likely to lead to being taken to court over discrimination or harassment against gender. Such a relaxation theory which was then considered as funny cannot be applicable in the modern workplaces.
Q. Compare and contrast how this type of workplace humor differs from the 1939-1940 era to today’s values
Today’s workplaces are guided by ethical principles that are not only internally controlled by the guidelines set aside by the organization but by the regulations that govern against human rights violations as well as equity. What was enjoyed by the male workers in the 1939-1940 cannot be tolerated now. The clips also showed women as being merely assistants to the managers, which is not the case today, since, in this present times, some women professionals are also great managers. Today, unlike in those years, Human Resource managers would face a hard time is the male employees would try to treat their female counterparts as sex objects. The portrayal of the black workers addressing their white counterparts as it was to be during the slavery periods cannot occur in today’s workplace since all of them are placed in the same position of human dignity, equality as well as sensitivity. However, there is some form of teasing that is still considered safe in the workplace that makes the place a desirable place.
We will email this sample to you with pleasure!
Type your email