Transgender (Semester 2 | Week 8)

The topic that was introduced to my 11 Ap English class this week felt a bit more abstract in comparison to the previous section on masculinity and femininity. The overarching idea still targeted the effect that gender roles play in present-day society, however, the concept in my class discussion this time around fell between the common labels for each sex. This week, I analyzed multiple articles and viewpoints on transgender males and females.

Personally, studying this topic with my classmates was a somewhat unique experience for me, as I was already familiar with various genders and identities. Due to this, I did not necessarily learn anything new through the examples provided in class. Instead, I was able to gather new knowledge through listening to class discussions, and examining peer opinions.

Each of interviews and anecdotes introduced in class (on people such as Zach Kerr and Ashton Lee, who identify as transgender in present day society) prompted a different type of discussion from my classmates. One question that appeared throughout the week, wondered exactly what it meant to feel genderfluid, and how it was possible to lack an association with either male or female. During a class discussion, yet another side of this question was brought up, saying that it is possible for some people to feel ‘male’ one some days, and ‘female’ on others.

The semi-unanimous confusion that followed these questions prompted me to consider how people define humans as male or female.

I couldn’t help but wonder if it is society’s enforcement of behavioral stereotypes of each sex that causes labels such as “transgender” and “genderfluid” to exist. For example, to say that a person is acting ‘feminine’ or ‘like a woman’, unconsciously uses predetermined stereotypes of femininity to do so.

In America, wearing beautiful clothing (dresses, skirts), applying makeup, and enjoying romantic/sentimental items are considered as activities for women; if such a man existed in America, he would be considered feminine. However, if it were considered to be proper and natural for a man to enjoy such endeavor, would this ‘feminine man’ simply become a man?

Adding on to this, considering the fact that the entire world has different stereotypes, roles, and expectations of each sex, is it possible that a human that would be considered transgender in my current area would be considered perfectly normal in a different area of the world?

Hopefully, I didn’t sound too ignorant or insane in my blog musings this week (I’m sorry if I did). I really loved the exploration of gender roles this quarter, and I seriously hope to explore more ideas and concepts like these in the final weeks ahead.

Education System (Semester 2 | Week 5)

Week five of 11 Ap English introduced me to various media sources that analyzed the present-day American education system, and prompted me to search for my own. My teacher encouraged her students to synthesize our sources, most likely in the hopes of helping us on the essay my class wrote later in the week; the personal pursuit of evidence and conclusion was helpful, but only if done with genuine effort.

The different articles/sources/discoveries connect to the overarching question of: “Who does the American Education System truly serve?”; however, my personal (mini) research question was: “Is the American Education System efficiently adapting to the changing world around it?”.

In my class, a comic was introduced, which attacked the faults of required classes with lighthearted visual support; in a nutshell, the author portrayed the redundancy and uselessness of the required classes imposed upon students and highlighted that the knowledge gained from required classes are not useful in the long run.

A different source, with a similar message, came in the form of a youtube video called “Don’t Stay in School” (a video that went viral approximately two years ago); the creator criticized the school system for its failure to prepare students for the real world (ie. taxes, cooking, buying a house, money management), as well the useless information it forces students to learn.

Both authors would agree that the American education system is in need of a major change, and strongly disagree with its current required classes. This brought me to wonder if problems/arguments such as these occurred as a result of our system’s inflexibility.

However, as I analyze different sources, I’m starting to believe that the purpose of these required classes are not meant to teach students the periodic table or the workings of a rollercoaster; they are to teach teach students how to think/learn/see the world in a different way. This is accurately summarized by Laura Thomas ( Director of the Antioch Critical Skills Program) when she writes “I use the logic, reasoning, and critical thinking skills all the time. If those teachers hadn't pushed me to use those brain muscles (for lack of a better term) at a time when it was the LAST thing I wanted to do, then I wouldn't be prepared to understand and evaluate the information that comes my way every day.”

As a result to arguments such as this, I’ve come to believe that the classes within our required curriculum such as physics is not taught with the intention of mastering/ remembering its formulas; instead, the purpose of such classes is to train students to think and see in a different way. This doesn’t seem to be too far of a stretch; formulas such as the law of sines and cosines don’t always stick in a student’s brain, but they are much less likely to forget how to actually do them.

The American education system still has a lot of noticeable flaws that need to be tended to, however, the required classes in our curriculum may not be as horrible as the two authors made it out to be. At the same time, I am unsure if these classes art taught in the most effective way.

Another interesting week of 11 Ap English has been completed.

Education (Semester 2 | Week 4)

Out of the string of articles and media pieces I analyzed this week, one was strangely aggressive, it’s name: “I Know Why the Caged Bird Can’t Read” by Francine Prose. In a nutshell, the author took a very strong stance against the novels that are currently taught in American high schools; famous works such as “Huckleberry Finn” and  “To Kill a Mockingbird” were brutally criticized for their faults.

While I do not agree with the majority of her opinions towards the chosen works of literature in our American education system, there was one particular aspect of her work that struck me as intriguing. In the middle of her writing, Prose states “ The question is no longer what the writer has written but rather who the writer is- specifically what ethnic group or gender identity the author represents.” From my own personal interpretation, she is claiming that our curriculum teaches inferior books - due to the fact that they are written by an author that is from a different culture/social group- as opposed to decent/groundbreaking works.

Prose may have a point. One of the main objectives in teaching high school students literature is with the purpose of opening their minds to the workings of the world. Simply favoring a work of literature for its author is no better than judging a book by its cover; it would be an ultimately inefficient method of enlightening the youth of America, having a culturally diverse range of authors does not guarantee that they will be effective in spreading cultural understanding or social acceptance.

However, I also believe that it is arrogant of Prose to assume that stories such as “To Kill a Mockingbird” were placed into our curriculum carelessly. It is only natural that we would seek out people of different ethnicities and beliefs to spread understanding of different cultures and beliefs. While it may be true that some of the stories in the American education system were chosen due to the origin of the author, I do not believe they are incompetent works.

While Prose’s essay was a strange change in tone to analyze, I had a lot of fun doing so. Hopefully, we’ll see more aggressive works in the upcoming week.

Strawman (Semester 2 | Week 3)

This week of 11 Ap English brought with it the study of a broad range of rhetorical fallacies and how it is used in the manipulation of language. It was almost an enjoyable experience to discover just how many of these fallacies are consistently applied in today's media and common conversations (especially arguments). The "Strawman" was a recognizable name, and easily became one of my favorites to learn about and search for as the week progressed. This is because I have noticed it is used as a sneaky and strangely effective weapon against opposing statements. 

For those who may not know: a strawman is a rhetorical fallacy used to divert attention away from a point/claim by intentionally switching the topic of conversation to a related, but misrepresented proposition. At first, I thought that this technique was only seen in unprofessional arguments, politics, or propaganda. 

For example, in the recent election, a point was made that Hillary Clinton desired the abolishment of the second amendment, due to the fact that she supported numerous gun safety measures. This flawed way of thinking negatively affected the audience's perspective of Clinton's support for gun safety in a stealthy and illogical manner.  

However, now that I have analyzed multiple examples of this, I realize that the strawman is a common occurrence for nearly all argumentative forms of communication. This fallacy has occurred in the form of both professional articles and misunderstandings (ex. the medias many writings of Pewdiepie's recent and controversial joke). 

The popularity of the strawman makes me wonder if it should actually be viewed in a positive and accepting manner. Many times, a strong claim is undeniable and does not exist with a justified counter. In turn, it appears that people react with methods that either twist the truth, avoid the truth, or redirect the conversation. This method is extremely effective when implemented correctly, and perhaps the most clever of the rhetorical fallacies for just how imperceptible and effective it can be. 

It is yet another example of how clever the world's manipulation of language can be, and adds on to my growing list of reasons to love this section of the 11 Ap English curriculum.  

 

Identity (Semester 2 | Week 2)

This week, my studies in 11 Ap English surrounded the concept of language, and how it is manipulated by society. Tearing apart different phrases and articles in search of the hidden intent of the speaker was both an interesting and eye-opening experience. The phrase "people never say what the mean", I have discovered, acts as an accurate description for a person's use of language; the intent of the speaker always alters the words they speak. 

One of the articles I analyzed this week, "Politics and the English Language" by George Orwell, has a question that asks 'Does language corrupt thought. Or does though corrupt language?' When this inquiry was first imposed on me, I was uncertain of the answer. However, as the week progressed, I slowly began to lean towards the idea that it is a person's mind that corrupts their language.

A nice example of this was demonstrated by a college professor from Oakland University (who visited my class as a guest speaker on Thursday). He told a story of two very different women -  one based off of a well-loved protagonist for children, and the other an infamous criminal-  with the intention of making the latter's cause seem more justified. In turn, the descriptive vocabulary he used was loaded with words that carried a distinctly positive or negative connotation towards the two women. The professor's objective to steer his audience's favoritism towards one particular person corrupted his use of language. Many similar scenarios such as the one previously described occur in our daily life when we argue, gossip, lie, persuade, apologize, etc.  

However, I believe that being informed and aware of such manipulation is a lovely way to combat it. If people become aware of the times when a story is false, an argument is biased, or a rumor is an exaggeration, they will be likely to fall victim to the manipulation of language. 

Identity (Semester 2 | Week 1)

It seems that identity is the major theme I have come across during this week of 11 Ap's second semester, and how it is affected by different forms of language and communication. The first article I received this week, "Mother Tounge", was very intriguing; the narrator had a family background very similar to mine, yet our experiences with identity and English contrasted greatly.

Unlike the scenario for most children with immigrant parents, my mother's English is superb; her Chinese accent is indistinct, and her use of language in writing is extremely formidable. In addition, she has exposed me to many different forms of English in various forms from a young age. As a result of this, I never experienced the form of language that many people refer to as 'broken English' during my childhood.

It leads me to wonder how drastically the circumstances of my upbringing has changed my personal sense of identity; there is a chance that the lack of disadvantage and sense of racial divide in my small little city has caused my perception of society and its limits to contrast with others.  In another article, "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", the group of people described as 'Chicanas' appear to struggle much harder to find a sense of belonging in the same world that I have often thought to be accepting. It is almost impressive how large of a factor spoken language plays in their personal conflicts.

In fact, I am lead to believe that language is connected to a sense of identity in very powerful ways. The role language plays in one's life appears to have the ability to offer a person both numerous social connections and a sense of belonging, as well as the ability to strip a person of power. It is also a part of a person's identity that influences not only society's perception of that individual, but also that individual's perception of society.

Week one has brought some very interesting ideas to the table.