Boring Contemplations of the Stereotypical Graduate

I feel so very out of my element today.

Pathos takes over.

Here are the expected and boring contemplations of a stereotypical soon-to-be college graduate.

It isn’t just the topic of discussion in the honors commons which is working to list for Tom all of the movies he needs to see. I added two or three to the list but mostly weakly, un-profoundly echoed the insights of others. Clearly my expertise is elsewhere.

Today, I am like Galinda in that I am confused about how I feel but radically different from her in that I am sure my current emotions are not rooted in a hatred for another being. Just a case of lost-ness. perhaps.

Today is the last day of legitimate classes. From now until May 16^th I have one last day of work, a few easy response papers and a handful of final exams. Following the completion of these I will walk with hundreds of other to symbolize the completion of an expensive experiment: Can She Learn?

The following transition into “real life” seems like it will be relatively easy. I’ve been “ready” for it since February. But now… today…  I falter. Ready? I’m so unimpressed with myself while so impressed with the expectations.

More on Crabs

Sadly… Alisha and I have yet to partake of Maryland’s famous crabs here. However we attended some cool things today and I shall recount them in chronological order.

We attended the panel: Top Competitive Papers in Voices of Diversity

An Advanced Intercultural Communication Project exploring the Relationship among DNA Ancestry Profiles, Narrative, and the Social Construction of Race (top paper) – Anita Foeman, West Chester University

This was such an interesting paper! Unfortunately we walked in too late to hear the whole part of it but it was about testing persons’ DNA and tracing the ancestry then recording some of the reactions to the information that the test revealed. Like… how does a “white” person react when she finds out she’s got african blood? How does an African American react when they discover asian and european blood? How are these reactions different? What does that tell us? It changes how we see ourselves and how we define others around us. Like, all of a sudden the idea of “foreigner” is quite different. Her research including people of all sorts of different backgrounds and her stories were so great. Fascinating research! And she really knew her stuff.At first I was a bit leery about DNA definitions of race but I think Dr. Hostetler explained it well enough to my irrational mind that I don’t have a problem with it.  It isn’t really a DNA definition of race but a mere… look we have the DNA from this area of the world oh so long ago and you look like you have some of that so… Yeah, awesome!

Domesticating the Muslim Other: A Critical Investigation of Aliens in America (top student paper) – Joseph Saei, College of Charleston

I have never seen the TV show Aliens but now I sort of want to. Joseph explored the different myths that he thought were being played upon in the show. His presentation focused on the myth of the model minority working withing the US society’s perspective to earn tolerance. He was of the slave type as a Pakistani exchange student in a midwest white family who are clearly not as hardworking. So it’s a domestication of Raja (the protagonist) but not as an individual phenomenon but in making the Muslim body more reachable. What is clear from his presentation is that there was a lot more going on in his paper than he disclosed in his short ~ 15 minutes. It was refreshing that his criticism was balanced. He was like… look the show makes a good multi culturalism argument and is trying to do something for the placement of Muslims in the american mindset but it falls prey to some pretty big issues. For example, he touched on how raja’s character development takes a backseat to the family’s angsty teenager. really interesting paper and I felt like I could have some fascinating talks with him over coffee or whatever by the way he made such poetic correlations to what he was doing. I can’t remember what they were now. I think one was a harlem ren poet. I was feelin’ it at the time. Those kinds of people have magical minds and I wanna be in company with ’em.

True Blood: The Narrative of the Living Dead – Meredith Hitchins, College of Charleston

I smiled all the way through this presentation. The presenter was SO dynamic. Great flow and very funny. She performed a narrative structure. Her initial question was about the captivation that True Blood is capable of. What is the appeal to vampires anyway? Her argument was that the show reflects cultural discourses on: (1) sexuality (2) discrimination and (3) gender and power structures. I had no idea that the show updated our idea of TV sexuality with a vampire form of AIDS (Hep D, apparently?). Also the taboo coupling updates and normalizes the issue of inter-racial and homosexual dating. That this is placed in the South is clearly a heavy factor in the power of these examples. Lastly she discussed the relationship between Bill and Sookie and how it is much more complicated than a traditional female submission. Really cool pop culture rhetoric stuff and considering how put together the presentation was I can only imagine the paper was that kind of impressiveness.

What are They Like? Non-Expert Definitions of Stereotypes and their Implications for Stereotype Maintenance – Anastacia Kurylo, Marymount Manhattan College (she used to be an adjunt at St. Johns and this is part of her dissertation)

Parts of this presentation I missed because I was sitting on the floor and all sorts of me was getting numb. Then in the back of the room I discovered that hot air is supremely uncomfortable while wearing a cashmere sweater so I stepped out for like two minutes.

Her presentation was huge. She discussed in detail the inaccuracy and the many (4) inconsistencies in expert discourse on Stereotypes – what they are, what they mean, judgments about them. So her question was if experts can’t get it a good grasp on it, can non-experts? What do they have to say.

She had participants write out their definition of a stereotype and then she did all sorts of complicated analysis on the answers to come up with 20 themes then collapsed to 5 or 6 (I couldn’t write fast enough). So the answers were fairly across the board and still suffered problems of accuracy and consistent judgment (I think). As may be guessed, she seemed to be saying that people admitted that stereotypes serve a function. Now that I am writing about it I realize how simplistic my understanding is of what her research revealed. Ug, I’ve failed my blog followers.

MMK, well it’s late and Alisha and I are gonna work on our poster presentations for tomorrow morning. It’s gonna be cool, I think. I hope. Also, tomorrow I will be attending some panels that are about teaching. So cool.

Baltimore Aquarium At Night - The National Aquarium

In the evening Alisha and I thoroughly enjoyed the Baltimore Aquarium. We ran around trying to see all that we could before meeting up with Dr. Hostetler for dinner at an Irish Pub on the Bay. We bought matching Aquarium t-shirts (cute, right?). We also fell in love with Baltimore’s jellyfish! And I made a fool of myself in expressing a completely underdeveloped but sounded-so-cool-and-profound-in-my-head comment to some ECA professor I didn’t even know. He wasn’t impressed – no duh.

but they are still super cool:

The Object of Alisha and My Fascination

Dinner was beautiful. There were performers on the water’s edge doing 40s-60s a capella and then some guitarists. The music coupled with a gorgeous summer view and two people I really enjoy… (also salmon dinner with beer) I had a very nice evening. So much more to tell about.

From B-town

Ladies, Gentlemen and Friends,

My first full day in Baltimore for Eastern Communication Association has been pretty interesting. However, I must not start on today without outlining last night for it was magnificently magical!

After checking into our “swanky”  hotel (We have used this word, now, 50 times to describe it), Alisha and I ascended the hotel floors to our own via a glass elevator. A very nice sight. The room is pretty good and the hallways perpetually smell like just the right amount of febreeze which is glorious.

The hunger and curiosity of the city drove us out of the hotel to walk but across the street to the Chesapeake Bay. There is a small waterfall park/garden with metal art and nice lights which we wandered before reaching a swanky bank of restaurants and stores along the bay. Two things were on our minds: Cheesecake Factory (for cheesecake) and P.F. Chang’s (for lettuce wraps).

We got the best of both worlds in choosing Cheesecake Factory (my debut at the establishment). For not only did we have a charming date (the lovely Alisha and I) with a beautiful view over the night lit water but we also enjoyed lettuce wraps and fresh guac followed by Kahlua Coco Cheesecake. It was a great time! We rolled ourselves back to the hotel. But let me say quickly that lettuce wraps are awesome! Tacos only… better!

This morning was a nervous matter, for me, of getting ready with an outfit that I realized too late doesn’t really work all that well together. That’s a sad thing to figure out in the hotel. But I owned it. Hello fucked up fashion rules, my name is Alia. In any case, Alisha and I decided very last minute to attend a Lambda Pi Eta Panel about rhetorical criticism on campaigns. It seemed up her alley for her paper and up mine when it comes to my interests. These were the papers:

Campaigns and Critique: Rhetorical Criticism of Media Messages

“World War II Propoganda: We Can Do It! & Rosie the Riveter” Lori Caldwell, U. of Pitt undergrad – feminist critique on these two images. How did the US gov use campaigns to illicit women? playing on women’s emotions and patriotism. (I think this was the best paper on the panel – it did the best job of being critical from all sides)

“Truth: Manipulation of the Tobacco Industry” Lauren Filotei, U of Pitt undergrad – cluster analysis about some video anti-tobacco campaigns aimed at youth on the internet. I thought it was to be about the discourse on both sides but she really focused on just those videos which meant, as the respondent said, that it was a critique of a critique. It was a basic presentation about the images and what they meant. It could be really cool with the respondents suggestions of problematizing the message more because the speaker seemed to simply focus championing the advertisements.

“Herbal Essences’ ‘Organic’ Campaign” Melissa Marullo, U of Pitt undergrad – Cluster critique – what kind of images showed up most often and what were they doing. She discussed the sexualization of the advertisements and outlined the necessity of the company to do it as it was failing then the company’s hailed success as sales went up. She did a thorough job of outlining the organic elements and linking it to the orgasmic ones. the respondent made a great comment in that we can wonder what the implications are of replacing the male in traditional sex acts with a consumable product. critique that up the wazzo.

“PETA: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals” Phoebe Nixon, U of Pitt undergrad – feminist critique but Alisha and I are wondering how that was. She started out great with some ads for us to look at. She outlined well what a fem crit can be 1. explore the gender construction 2. explore the patriarchy and it’s ability to perpetuate itself or how to reform it. She didn’t seem to do that in the presentation (the paper may be a different story). She said that fem crit is useful with PETA images because feminists align themselves with other oppressed groups. Then the student discussed how the animals are depicted as lesser, helpless and unwanted. but… I don’t know. She didn’t have a reason for why only the ads she showed us. Her reason was because these were the ones that supported her argument. but eh. PETA has gotten into trouble for objectifying women inadvertently when trying to help the animals out in a Catch 22 (not to mention the “pure white” racist issues that may be there too). It would have been awesome to hear what she had to say about that.

They were interesting and very well written presentations. The subject matter was really great! And I applaud these girls for doing the panel. The greatest part about the presentations, for Alisha and I, is that we are right there. What these students worked on is something we can definetly see ourselves doing in terms of quality. So….

The next panel was sponsored by Voices of Diversity and it was so GREAT! for a later post though because Alisha and I are going to the Baltimore Aquarium like right now because it’s only a few blocks away and some shindig is going on with ECA. Lots of thoughts running through my mind. Much worry about the poster session tomorrow. I love having this experience and especially having it with Alisha.

Coaching. Shit!

Epic failure. An emotional post so be it.

Coaching sucks. Like, this shit is really hard. I had an allergy attack (didn’t even know I had seasonal allergies) the moment the practice round started. My note taking was blurry. I missed one of the time knocks. And my note taking is shit for judging because I write like I am in the debate round.

Amidst the blurry eyes and stuffy sinuses, I was so proud of Korey for making a great whip speech with what government was able to put together on the motion:

THW allow people serving lifetime prison sentences to choose the death penalty.

He did a great job. I almost cried because I realized that though the debate wasn’t great all of these debaters will only get better over the next year. THAT is exciting… and scary. Such powerful people. Awe-some. Plus, Imma miss debating with him so much. Imma miss debating at all.

But coaching is shit hard. I had never even thought of the politics of co-coaching. What happens when several people have a say on guiding a student? God dammit. And what do I say to a student when they start defending what they said in the round after adjudication? I’m pretty fucking flawed so maybe I did hear it wrong? What if I can’t get respect? What if students don’t look up to me, don’t trust me? What if I have to resort to a higher-up to verify me? Fuck.

I did listen very differently to what Steve and Jaime were pointing out. They did a good job of (Jaime) reminding debaters that the debate is about reality on the ground and (Steve) the problems in the speeches are more than just the details. Steve did a good job of talking about general debate cases and rebuttal so that you can take his coaching with you no matter the round.

paper to write. stupid fears. I own them. Not the other way around.

The most empowered have got to be the ones who believe themselves (with open hearts and self awareness) to have great potential. I’m getting there. maybe.

Of Blacker Ink and Boredom

It is always when I must write about something that I want to be reading and writing about something else. During my breaks (which are notoriously many), ideas go to play with each other in my impatient mind. If I had control over what I was studying at this moment… What would I choose? Stupidly I picture titles and topics that are basic but proclaimed on my mental playground with great trumpeting and awe. Because… let’s face it… I’m awesome.

The sad truth is that I do choose what I am writing about. Teachers are so good to give me enough wiggle room that I can pick an intriguing topic. The sad part is that I know I will never be free of this impatience. This grass-is-greener-on-the-other-side (read: ink-is-blacker-on-the-other-essay-topic) thinking. Ug.

But there is another level of worry. As I ponder, I am struck by the already-been-doneness of my interests.

Really, Alia?! Really? You want to write about the rhetoric of feminism bashing? The rhetoric of hip hop? The rhetoric of dating? The rhetoric of identity? Come on. What could you bring to the table?

I hear professors I know and trust talk about some pretty bad, pretty uninspiring, pretty cookie cutter papers that they’ve had to read and edit. God forbid, I cause someone that kind of boredom! And I feel it is inevitable.

My paper for ECA hasn’t really been brushed up. It was so hard to write it in the first place. SO very emotional. The more I look at it, though, the more I am struck dumbfounded by its simplicity. So what? Who the fuck cares? gah.

Fret not, my loyal, supportive and always reading professors/friends! I am scared but when are we not? It can be channeled. And I recognize that more reading on any topic will unfold more refined and specific questions. However I post these words now so that I can invite you to comment from your personal experiences. I ask you how you deal?

Falling in Love with ?

I’ve been thinking about questions. There used to be more around in my life – more emanating from my thoughts and more surrounding in the people around me. And here I really mean questions that alter you. (Asking about post grad plans doesn’t usually do the same thing.)

I played around today with some colorful chalk in an empty classroom. I guess there was some nervous energy and my mind needed something to hold on to. I needed some certainties. About me. About what I’m doing. Where I am going. So I wrote some things in the spirit of old fashioned pedagogy.

I will love.

I will love.

I will be.

I will love myself.

I will love my sisters.

But there was more that I felt I wanted to explore. I wonder about my relationship to the question mark. ?

I think I want to do it like this (thus I wrote)…

I want to fall in love with the question mark and interrogate the period.

But it’s problematic, right? I stared at the chalkboard and that statement for some time. The statement is a contradiction. Too many tiny chalk dots that ended things. They didn’t disencourage further discussion but there was no requirement that further thought happen. And this is what I want!

So I added…

Can I survive that?

It was like a splash of paint that an artist throws up because she feels that the paint should be thrown. It must be. It felt appropriate to write it before I had even considered what I meant or even what I was asking. But it’s true! I barely survived some of my Rhetoric courses because the questions upon questions obliterated my world view. It was so chaotic! And I felt like I was drowning.

If we are to approach a question with intellectual honesty then we inherently are taking risks. We suspend the solid-ness. We accept that things may not be as we thought before. But how difficult that is. How rare. Perhaps perfect intellectual honesty is something I am not capable of. But more of it I certainly need/want/will work towards. The chaos is outweighed by the poetic of impermanence and betterment.

Shout out to those who succeed in asking real questions. Contagious you are. Infectious. Bravo.

Also, shout out to whomever left that colorful chalk in the classroom. 😀

Rambling unpoetically About Change

Last day of the USU Nationals was a little depressing. I’ve avoided telling the tale just because I want to avoid setting it in the digital stone of blog memory. Korey and I were a point from breaking and our last round was not my best performance. Sad, right? Only sort of. I’ve reconciled with the necessity to take a new step and feel pretty pumped about the possibilities. More to come on that later.

Last few days of classes are coming up. I have a shit load of work to do that I feel less and less invested in. But this weekend is sure to be very productive cuz I have really nothing else to do with it. And… I like what I look like when I am a good student.

Last encounters with some amazing people. My debate family is just that… family. I will keep in contact and see them in the future for sure. I value my fellow debaters and coaches so much. But I am getting oddly uncomfortable about not seeing some people I barely know. In the Honors Commons (go ahead and hate), I’ve re-met an old friend from freshman year who is gorgeously insightful. There are some freshmen and sophomores who ask some great questions that I want to continue to listen in on. I hardly know most of them but they intrigue me.

So much change.

On to seconds

The first day was no let down.

Rd 1: This House Believes the US should make all aid to Israel conditional upon freezing settlements. We were closing gov. Took first. I think I got to use an interesting idea of “Imaginability” in this round. The settlements prove a unique problem not only physically but symbolically because peace talks are so impeeded. Harder to imagine a successful peace talk with such blatant negligence on Israel’s side. other args popped in… like this isn’t a chess game. Lives are at stake.

Rd 2: THW create seperate divisions for the openly gay in the US military. We were opening op. We took first. I adored this motion. Korey and I were able to argue a ton! Great matter grab. Korey rocked it in delivery – he shhhed the PM when he spoke out of turn. THAT was awesome! We counter propped (sort of…. perhaps it can be called a hypothesis test) full integration. “Seperation without Stigmatization” and gov couldn’t give us that. But that was my favorite line. I think we  just did really well building solid bricks to make a good wall. I shed a tear when a female from gov worded one of her arguments as anti suffrogettes might have. So… I enjoyed advocating for the Opposition side. OH! Closing op made the best reference to Audre Lorde EVER!

Rd 3: THW ban the US federal government from deficit spending. We were opening gov. We took fourth. I PMed. It is a really tough one for gov but nothing that closing gov said I didn’t already know so I know the next time around I could really make a much better case. I enjoyed this round so much. Partly because it was some old friends from Vermont and Cornell who are phenomenal speakers and, I think, good for debate (the goal is not, fyi, to beat people up and these guys know that). We needed more analysis on China and probably Greece. In the end, Korey and I gave a good go at an econ motion – our weakest link. I learned. 🙂

Now for another day. We are at 6 pts. It’s a safe bet that 12 is needed to break but maybe some 11’s will get in too. Not sure yet. I am so excited!

PS Denver is pretty.

Much on the brain on the first day

There is so much to consider at the get-go! This is my last tournament as an undergrad – USU British Parliamentary Debate Nation Championship. I hope all goes well. Korey and Steve remind me of the mindset I ought to aim for. I can do that. Speak holisitcally with quality and never forget that this is a game with flawed rules – by no means is it a final judgment on who I am.

I’ve to wake in a few hours refreshed and ready for business. We’ll rock this shit – me and Korey – because that’s what we came for. I love little more than to be debating with him and I am sure that the ride this time around will grant me an arsenal of lessons. I seem to think differently about the rounds now that my mind considers coaching…

So much to unfold.

Dear haters in my head

Dear haters in my head,

You are ruining me. I am miserable. When you whisper I struggle to decipher the more probable state of affairs (internally and externally) from your demeaning and de-edifying lies.

I am less fun to be around when you whisper so. I think my loved ones suffer me in moments like these out of loyalty and long term faith rather than for anything that I offer them in the moment. I drain them. My patience is thinner and I can get mean. My lips quiver more often for I am weaker and my feelings are more vulnerable. I am timid often when I otherwise wouldn’t be – shameful. You silence me, haters. A terrible thing to suffer.

My self worth plummets because you encourage the competitive comparisons in my mind between me and every other woman I know – most especially those whom I admire most and are friends with. I then hate them. These beautiful, powerful, wonderful women for being all of these things. Jealousy. And (big shocker!) I fail each competition you goad me into. My flaws against another’s strengths. My looks, humor and intelligence never enough!

The uniqueness each woman in my life possesses and wields so elegantly deserves to be adored and celebrated. Not envied and thus discounted. True and full-hearted unions with any one of them could be so… much! How to characterize “much”… I think the haters are scared of the potential, the possibilities. Perhaps I am too.

I write about you, dreadful and spiteful haters because I must tell you (and myself) clearly how useless you are to me. I must reprimand you for the terrible chaos you incite. Most importantly though, this letter serves to name you. You and all of your (D)effects. Uninvited HATERS in my head.

Haters, you whisper because that is a hateful thing to do and it is all you are capable of. Infectious fictions of exaggerated failures and flaws. All for what? You’ve no constructive purpose. And though I know that I shan’t ever be rid of you, I will not suffer you so terribly any longer. Those fallacious, poisonous whispers will no longer gain so much ground as I’ve permitted before. You have successfully harmed my self perception and my attempted communions with other women for far too long. I love these gorgeous gals fate has gifted me with. I love the grand guys I have similarly been blessed by and now is the time that I attend as much to my gals as I have my guys.

Now is my time and my space when “competition” becomes a different word in my feminism. Not so inherently good. Now is when the haters’ din is successfully disregarded in lieu of more probably accounts of myself and the reality around me. Haters, you pain me. Quiet down! For I speak louder than you now.

Angry but glad to have had such a discussion,

Alia

P.S. Haters and More