I really appreciated the time Celia devoted to introductions on the first day of class, as well as the way we went around the room voicing our concerns and expectations. One concern I neglected to mention is that I fear some of the more soft-spoken students will fly under the radar compared to those who thrive on loud, involved arguments (likely as a result of intimidation). Based on my first impressions, our class is comprised of a continuum of personalities, from very boisterous and opinionated to very shy and seemingly apathetic. Because shyness comes and goes for me (some days I wake up fully motivated to be outgoing and talkative with a desire for my voice to be heard, while other days I wish for nothing more than to quietly listen and reflect on the world around me), I expect to struggle with the desire to participate now and then (don't take it personally!). I do hope to improve this personality flaw of mine throughout the course of this class, and perhaps the atmosphere and range of personalities in our class will motivate me to break out of a shy spell, should I find myself in one.
With respect to the readings for last Thursday, I found myself easily overwhelmed and confused. While I understood both readings, I felt I was able to grasp the ideas of the Barker reading more easily as a result of previous classes (Human Nature, Psychology, Sociology, Anthropology) that introduced and covered similar topics concerning self- and social identities, social theories, cultural influence, etc. I was, however, confused by terms such as "agency," "modes of discourse," "essentialism," etc. Reviewing some of these terms in class on Thursday definitely helped diminish my confusion. The Nanako-Glenn reading was harder for me to read in terms of content, and I found myself overwhelmed by everything going on with gender, sex, race, identity, relationality, etc. Both readings brought up interesting points, such as the importance of power/knowledge and the tendency for us to consider White as "raceless."
I enjoyed the in-class activity on Thursday, but wished we could have analyzed the opposite opinions as well (i.e. guys illustrate/describe their ideal woman, gals illustrate/describe their ideal man). It really got me thinking about perceptions and ideals I have about each. For instance, I feel (naturally) more attracted to men who are taller than I am with dark hair, but is that an indirect/subconscious influence of the socio-cultural ideal of "tall, dark, and handsome?" Likewise, I feel more attractive and powerful with make up on, but is that natural or do I expect to be taken more seriously and be more respected by men/society in general if I alter my looks with cosmetics?
At any rate, I love how this class has begun (the readings/ideas/terms/discussions) and I'm excited for how it will progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment