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.