I caught crap. Literally. She went to the bathroom while I was giving her a bath. Though my reaction was instinctive, and natural, I had poop in my hand and it was gross. She jumped because her outburst scared her and I laughed so hard, I had tears in my eyes. Usually not my disposition when someone has just shared so much of herself, but she was so stinkin' cute. I couldn't help it. That is one of oh, let's say a trillion fond memories I have of raising The Boss Lady. Wherever she is twenty years from now, she will be in charge. She's easily the next Martha or Oprah. She has personality for days; she carries on a conversation like a grown up; and she's the best kid ever.
We had a very difficult time having a child. We could get pregnant with no problem. But we couldn't have the right kind of pregnancy because of earlier issues with endometriosis, cysts, and scar tissue.
Finally it happened. We were pregnant and she was where she needed to be for a healthy pregnancy. She came AFTER an ectopic which is a medical miracle alone.
She came via emergency C-section after like 300 hours of labor. The joker did not want to come out, and she still doesn't want to get out of my lap. She's quite territorial about it too.
Since then, she has been the sunshine of my life, and I am in love with her. She gives me at least a million kisses a day, and that's not enough. Next to my husband, she is the only person whose company I constantly desire. We get our nails done together; she puts on lipstick in the mirror right next to me; she walks around in my "heel highs", wears my jewelry and my shades (she's a total diva); and she tells me (usually after I cave in and let her eat candy after saying no at least 100 times) "you're the best mom ever!" This is good news because, lately, that's one of the only things I care about.
I know a LOT of songs. Really. I have lyrics and melodies to thousands of songs just floating around in my head. Everyone who knows me, knows this about me. Of all the songs I know and love, and as much as I love music; more than any symphony, her laugh is the most beautiful thing I've ever heard.
I'm very aware of what I teach her with my behavior, my words, and my actions. I care about my legacy because of her. What she learns about God, money, relationships, education, and (God help us all)men, will initially come from me. (beads of sweat, beads of sweat, beads of sweat...). But I'm up for the challenge.
I understand why I see big old fifteen year olds still trying to sit in their mother's lap. It's because it's theirs. And no one else's.
Happy Birthday Big Mama!
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Rhetorical Listening: Gender, Whiteness, Identification
Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness
by Krista Ratcliffe was published in 2005
Krista Ratcliffe's Biography
Department Chair
Rhetoric and composition is her primary field of study. Ratcliffe's teaching includes undergraduate and graduate courses in rhetorical theory, composition, and women's literature. Her administrative duties currently include serving as Chair of the English Department.
Krista Ratcliffe’s third book, Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness, was one of two winners of the 2007 Conference on College Composition and Communication Outstanding Book Award. The CCCC Outstanding Book Award is presented annually to the author or editor of a book that makes an "outstanding contribution to composition and communication studies."
In Rhetorical Listening, Ratcliffe "examines how whiteness functions as an 'invisible' racial category and provides disciplinary and cultural reasons for the displacement of listening and for the use of rhetorical listening as a code of cross-cultural conduct." She studies eavesdropping and listening metonymically and pedagogically as "approaches to rhetorical listening." Her theory is grounded in classical rhetorical theory, Heideggerian theory, feminist theory, and critical race theory.
An alumna of Ohio State’s Rhetoric and Composition Ph.D. program, Ratcliff wrote her dissertation, "Words of One's Own: Toward a Rhetoric of Feminism in Selected Essays of Virginia Woolf and Adrienne Rich," in 1988. She is the author of three books, including: Anglo-American Feminist Challenges to the Rhetorical Traditions: Virginia Woolf, Mary Daly, and Adrienne Rich; and, Who's Having This Baby?: Perspectives on Birthing. Ratcliffe teaches Rhetoric and Composition, Feminist Theory, and Women’s Studies at Marquette University, where she directs their first-year English program.
Rhetorical Listening: Gender, Whiteness, Identification
What the text is really about (thesis):
This book argues that listening should be revived within rhetoric and composition studies via a concept of rhetorical listening. This project defines rhetorical listening as a *trope for interpretive invention and as a code of cross-cultural conduct. Defined generally as a trope for interpretive invention, rhetorical listening signifies a stance of openness that a person may choose to assume in relation to any person, text, or culture. Defined more particularly as a code of cross-cultural conduct, rhetorical listening signifies a stance of openness that a person may choose to assume in cross-cultural exchanges (1).
*Tropes are figures of speech. They influence signification, or how meanings are made within discourse(s). Most commonly tropes are defined as rhetorical figures, such as metaphor, metonymy, analogy, and aposiopesis…all terms are tropes (111).
This project…explores how rhetorical listening may help listeners negotiate troubled identifications with gender and whiteness in public debates, scholarly research, and classroom pedagogy (xiii)
Narrating Origins
An African-American woman in the audience told me afterwards that she refuses to read Daly because Daly’s critique of women in patriarchy is really just a critique of white women in patriarchy, one that excluded this audience member by erasing differences among women (2)
A young white woman in class said that although she was extremely moved when reading excerpts from Lorde’s cancer journals, she didn’t want to read nay more of Lorde’s writings. When I asked her why, she cited Lorde’s last line: ‘if one Black woman I do not know gains hope and strength from my story, then it has been worth the difficulty of telling’…The student felt that Lorde, by specifying ‘Black woman,’ was excluding her by erasing commonalities among women (2).
Although I certainly respect an individual’s right to refrain from dialogue at a particular moment in his or her life, I do not accept the U.S. culture’s dearth of discursive possibilities either for articulating intersecting identifications of gender and race or for promoting cross-cultural dialogues. Listening, it seems to me, might serve as one such possibility. But listening is hardly a simple solution; indeed, it raises many questions that pertain to all people: Why is it so hard to listen to one another? Why is it so hard to focus simultaneously on commonalities and differences? Why is it so hard to resist guilt/blame logic when listening? And how do power differentials of particular standpoints and cultural logics influence our ability to listen? Any definition of listening must account for these questions-and others (3).
Rhetorical Listening
Defining rhetorical listening as a trope of interpretive invention not only emphasizes the discursive nature of rhetorical listening, but [it] also plays with the etymology of the term trope as “a turning.” For rhetorical listening turns hearing (a reception process) into invention (a production process), thus complicating the reception/production opposition, and inviting rhetorical listening into the time-honored traditional of rhetorical invention. Second, rhetorical listening turns the realm of hearing into a larger space, one encompassing all discursive forms, not just oral ones. Third, rhetorical listening turns intent back on the listener, focusing on listening with intent to hear troubled identifications, instead of listening for intent of an author. Fourth, rhetorical listening turns the meaning of the text into something larger than itself, certainly larger than the intent of the speaker/writer, in that rhetorical listening locates a text as part of larger cultural logics. And fifth, rhetorical listening turns rhetoric’s traditional focus on the desires of both the speaker/writer into a harmonics and/or dissonance of the desires of both the speaker/writer and the listener (46).
The Rhetoric of Listening functions in this way:
Function One: Rhetoric of listening focuses openly on terms in order to engage them
Instead of reading the terms only as negative, listeners might also hear the terms as offering honest and painful claims that deserve further consideration
Function Two: A rhetoric of listening proceeds via a cultural logic that recognizes simultaneous commonalities and differences
Rhetoric of listening interrupts the emphasis of Western logic to perpetrate either-or reasoning, for instance, to recognize commonalities or to recognize differences. Such simultaneous recognitions are important because they afford a place for productively engaging differences, especially those differences that might otherwise be relegated to the status of “excess.”
Function Three: Rhetoric of listening offers listeners three functional rhetorical stances. A rhetoric of listening fosters recognition. Such recognition does not imply a simple reversal of racist and patriarchal binaries. Rather, recognition implies a complex understanding of how gender and race become embedded within our bodies via cultural socialization and identifications and also of how they intersect with other cultural categories, such as nationality and age, at particular historical moments to construct our personal and cultural functions and dysfunctions.
Function Four: A rhetoric of listening proceeds via the interpretive trope of listening metonymically.
Metonym signifies figurative juxtaposition; it assumes that two objects do not share a common substance but are rather merely associated, hence its prominence in postructuralist theory. For example, the metonym occurs when we say, “The chair speaks.” Literally, of course, a chair does not speak; the person who is head of a committee does. In such figuration, the chair and the person do not share a substance but are merely associated with one another. Thus, the trope of listening metonymically assumes that a text or person does share substance with all other members of its/his/her cultural group, but, rather, is associated with them. In other words, this trope invites listeners to assume that one member of a group (say, one woman) does not speak for all other members (say, all women); as such, this trope helps listeners avoid the trap of unfair generalizations and stereotyping (94-98).
Gender
Gender is a trope that signifies socially constructed “common-sense” attitudes and actions associated with women and men. This definition is predicated on the existence of two sexes, men and women (9).
Because the term gender is a trope within language and because language changes over time, the term gender has a history…gender arose in opposition to the category sex. The first principle of many early women studies programs in the 1970s was that sex referred to physical attributes of men and women, and gender referred to cultural attributes…Granted, men and women are born with particular, material bodies; however, they see, organize, analyze, and value their bodies as men and women because they are born into a culture with a symbolic system containing these terms and their associated meanings (10).
What complicates matters is that symbolic systems often house competing cultural logics. A cultural logic is a belief system or way of reasoning that is shared within a culture…In the U.S., competing cultural logics about gender inform the way the term gender signifies. For example, some common cultural logic associated with gender in the U.S. include:
(1) The logic of patriarchy-imagines sex/gender as a biological difference between men and women; it uses this difference to claim physical, intellectual, and public-sphere superiority for men as well as to grant domestic superiority for women (10)
(2) The logic of equal rights, imagines sex/gender as biological and/or cultural differences but human rights as innate God-given commonalities (11)
(3) The logic of comparable worth, imagines gender as cultural differences, and attempts to reassess the cultural value assigned to “women’s work,” the purpose being to comparably value the different work that has been culturally assigned to men and women (11).
(4) The logic of postmodern commonalities and differences imagines gender as a culturally constructed discursive category possessing socializing forces within cultural contexts; this logic posits gender as a factor in-but not the sole determinant of-a person’s identity (11).
Gender is always a question not only of commonality and difference, but of unearned privilege and power-or lack thereof (10)
What makes gender a slippery category, though, is that its associated meanings shift across time and place; for example, assumptions about women’s roles differ when talking about women in India and in France, in 1805 and in 2005. What makes gender even more slippery is that its associated meanings always intersect with meanings ascribed to other cultural categories that classify people such as age, class, race, ethnicity, nationality, and religion. For instance, a woman is not simply a woman; she may also be young, poor, white, of French ancestry, Canadian, and Catholic-all of which inform her identity. Thus, while gender marks her identity, her identity cannot be reduced solely to gender. Instead gender functions as a cultural category that is embodied and performed differently by each person, depending upon his/her culture’s socializing messages about gender, upon his/her particular identifications with gender, and upon his/her reactions to these messages and identifications (11).
Identification
Thanks to Sigmund Freud, identification is inescapably associated with the tradition of psychoanalytic theory. Within this tradition, identification emerges as doubled and interrelated sites: (1) the place of ego/id interactions and (2) the place of self/other interactions. The ego/id site of identification directs attention to inner forces that inform subjectivity, specifically the relations between a person’s conscious and unconscious processes…identification signifies ‘change [that] happens whenever the ego, under pressure from an instinctual [id’s] demand for an unattainable object, transforms itself into the object ‘for the sake of the id’ (49)
Though not grounded in psychoanalytic studies, the concept of identification is not limited solely to that tradition. For example, in rhetorical theory, Burke assumes identification to be a place where conscious and unconscious rhetorical exchanges transpire (49).
Whatever their academic discipline, theorists of identification tend to agree with Judith Butler that identification always invokes “an assumption of place” with place signifying both bodily and historical/cultural locations. In sum, theorists agree that because people are always historically and culturally situated, so too, are their embodied identifications-hence the linkage of identification with place (49).
This performance of rhetorical listening fosters a rhetorical stance of humility (not weakness), a stance that recognizes interdependency among subjects (73).
The possibility of consciously navigating (some of) our own identifications and disidentifications also circles back to the question of coexisting commonalities and differences. Because non-identification is a place that assumes the existence of both commonalities and differences, it provides a place for listening rhetorically across both (75).
Whiteness
In its best efforts, whiteness studies questions the dominant culture’s tendency to define race in terms of a black/white binary while only articulating blackness. This field acknowledges that whiteness speaks as does the slash mark. And it argues that because whiteness is impossible to understand apart from its intersections with gender, class, age, and other factors, whiteness functions differently not just for whites and non-whites but for particular people within each category and for multiethnic people straddling these categories (103).
White women may assume (or be perceived as assuming) that to say ‘I’m sorry’ is sufficient; they may assume that one’s own pain is a sufficient lens through which to view each other’s pain; they may assume that commonalities among women should take precedence over differences, and, finally, they may assume that silence (even a dysfunctional silence) is the more polite and perhaps more politically expedient response (87).
While not everyone can be classified as a white person, everyone can perform white practices. Performing whiteness is often a very visible practice for non-white people. “Acting white” on the job or in school may garner promotions of good grades, but it may also garner charges of betraying one’s roots (112).
In the U.S., whiteness has consistently signified privilege-a privilege that fosters stasis by resisting and denying differences. Here are three elements of privilege:
1. The characteristics of the privileged group define the social norm
2. Privileged group members can rely on their privilege and avoid objecting to
oppression
3. Privilege is rarely seen by the holder of he privilege
If white privilege cannot be seen, perhaps in can be heard via rhetorical listening
Color of Fear excerpt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAnbRGJQv-g&feature=related
Other works about the author:
http://enculturation.gmu.edu/5_1/pdf/ratcliffe.pdf
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Why Did I Get Married: The Magnificient 7
That is an excellent question. I'm glad you asked. I was 26; he was 28. Everything went so quickly because it was all so easy. There was no drama. No baby mama. No crazy exes. Nothing.
We were both secret creative types in our spare time, ambitious, and driven. We were the same. Two peas in a pod. I have an aunt who had not yet met him. She'd asked another aunt what he was like, and the response was, "he's the male version of [me]."
We always had a good time together, so why not. Right?
First of all, he was the MOST persistent person I have EVER met. He wouldn't let me say no to him. And when I finally said yes to a date, he made sure he took me out almost every night so I couldn't have time for his competition. He was very clever about pursuing me.
He has always loved me as I was. He still gets excited about me. He made me look at myself, my gifts, and my talents differently. There was something about us that let me know that ours had the potential to be an awesome partnership; we could be quite a team. He's not afraid to try anything along with me so we're co-adventurers in that regard.
So it's been seven years now. We've had a few ups and downs. I've called it off and walked away. He's never moved one inch. He's always steadfast. He's always stood strong. Unflappable. Unwavering. He wants nothing more than for "his girls" to be happy. And that means the world to me.
We share a life. We share tons of laughs. We share our food-with each other. I don't mind cooking for him, and ahem, I live to serve him. Why? Because I learned about service from him. Is he perfect. Nope. But neither am I, so I'm okay with that.
Boy do we have some stories to tell. Our travels. The birth of our daughter. The death of our dog. Losing our Uncle Larry. Realizing that NO ONE IN THE WORLD has our backs like we do for each other. Marvin/Tammy & Meth/Mary said it best.
Why did I get married? Who the hell knows. But I'm glad I did.
LK, you are my champion.
Happy 7th
We were both secret creative types in our spare time, ambitious, and driven. We were the same. Two peas in a pod. I have an aunt who had not yet met him. She'd asked another aunt what he was like, and the response was, "he's the male version of [me]."
We always had a good time together, so why not. Right?
First of all, he was the MOST persistent person I have EVER met. He wouldn't let me say no to him. And when I finally said yes to a date, he made sure he took me out almost every night so I couldn't have time for his competition. He was very clever about pursuing me.
He has always loved me as I was. He still gets excited about me. He made me look at myself, my gifts, and my talents differently. There was something about us that let me know that ours had the potential to be an awesome partnership; we could be quite a team. He's not afraid to try anything along with me so we're co-adventurers in that regard.
So it's been seven years now. We've had a few ups and downs. I've called it off and walked away. He's never moved one inch. He's always steadfast. He's always stood strong. Unflappable. Unwavering. He wants nothing more than for "his girls" to be happy. And that means the world to me.
We share a life. We share tons of laughs. We share our food-with each other. I don't mind cooking for him, and ahem, I live to serve him. Why? Because I learned about service from him. Is he perfect. Nope. But neither am I, so I'm okay with that.
Boy do we have some stories to tell. Our travels. The birth of our daughter. The death of our dog. Losing our Uncle Larry. Realizing that NO ONE IN THE WORLD has our backs like we do for each other. Marvin/Tammy & Meth/Mary said it best.
Why did I get married? Who the hell knows. But I'm glad I did.
LK, you are my champion.
Happy 7th
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Hakuna Matata
It means no worries for the rest of our days
It's our problem free philosophy
Hakuna Matata
-Timon and Pumba, The Lion King
Could it be the first stage of schizoid behavior? Follow me. I think I'm going somewhere with this. I'm not deep guys. And I'm not trying to be. Consider this me processing out loud.
Cognitive dissonance. Acting one way despite your personal beliefs, or doing something when you feel the opposite. If I'm sad, I really act happy. If I'm pissed off, I smile. Who in hell came up with this crap? Seriously. I understand the power of positive thinking. But who says that I have to keep a stiff upper lip if I don't wanna?
Think of it as practice. Mind over matter you know. It's the kind of psychology that promotes wellness when you think about it. Really. If life hands you lemons, you make lemonade, but how do you get to the point of producing lemonade from lemons? You have to first see the potential of the lemon instead of only thinking of the sour taste. You have to get to the place where you think "I wonder what would happen if I sweetened this up a bit?" "I'm not in love with this situation, but it is where I am right now. How can I turn this into something at least bearable?"
Just last week, I had two situations back to back that just a couple of years ago would have made me sit in a room, turn off all the lights, close the door, and listen to Paul Carrack on repeat (Solo Paul Carrack. Not when he was with The Squeeze or Mike & the Mechanics). But I consciously exercised cognitive dissonance. I decided that I would not cry, pout, or become angry. For what? After all the anger, the situation would still be unchanged. Instead, I could put all of that energy into improving the situation.
Here's the backstory:
When I first got married, I didn't cook. My husband wooed me by cooking for me when we were dating, so I expected him to do that once we were married; he's an EXCELLENT cook. But he expressed the desire for me to cook for him and to like it. Immediately in my mind I recite the line from Boomerang and remind him that he "didn't marry me for my cooking" and snap my gum. Cooking is a really big deal for him because it is associated with his love language (Acts of Service). I'm happy to do it. Plus, he's my Sugar so he can have whatever he wants from me. So over the years, I've perfected this culinary act of kindness, and we, as a couple, enjoy being foodies together. It's a huge part of our trips when we go out of town and we enjoy trying new recipies. It has become a significant part of our partnership.
When I am absolutely livid with my husband, I cook*. To be clear, I cook all the time, but I really get in the kitchen and whip up something extraordinary. And it's poison free. (Sidebar: I wouldn't do that, but I felt the need to say so because someone reading might be expecting that, and I just want to clear it up early.) I even go to the good grocery store. Why? Because when I'm angry with him, it's the LAST thing I FEEL like doing, but I do it anyway. First of all, it gives me something to help release that energy (Remember the Physics lesson from Two Can Play That Game?). Think about it; what else is better than picking up a butcher knife and chopping up garlic, onions, tomatoes, and veggies? And manually tenderizing meat? You can't stay angry long after that. Trust me. Second, it teaches me to manage my emotions. The last thing you want to do for something who has made you angry is serve them. I've grown to accept this as a major arc on my growth chart of maturity.
Hakuna Matata is about self control. It's about not letting your emotions rule you. Instead you rule your emotions. Hakuna Matata is the decision to have joy regardless of your situation. Try it. It's hard at first but it is a fantastic alternative to liquor, weed, cussing, and frustration. By the way, all of these are the formula for high blood pressure, and who needs that? Hakuna Matata will help you deal. Try it. After all, you've nothing to lose except for maybe some dead weight that if held on to for long can become bitterness and who needs that?
*cook is meant in context and as a euphamism (tee hee)
It's our problem free philosophy
Hakuna Matata
-Timon and Pumba, The Lion King
Could it be the first stage of schizoid behavior? Follow me. I think I'm going somewhere with this. I'm not deep guys. And I'm not trying to be. Consider this me processing out loud.
Cognitive dissonance. Acting one way despite your personal beliefs, or doing something when you feel the opposite. If I'm sad, I really act happy. If I'm pissed off, I smile. Who in hell came up with this crap? Seriously. I understand the power of positive thinking. But who says that I have to keep a stiff upper lip if I don't wanna?
Think of it as practice. Mind over matter you know. It's the kind of psychology that promotes wellness when you think about it. Really. If life hands you lemons, you make lemonade, but how do you get to the point of producing lemonade from lemons? You have to first see the potential of the lemon instead of only thinking of the sour taste. You have to get to the place where you think "I wonder what would happen if I sweetened this up a bit?" "I'm not in love with this situation, but it is where I am right now. How can I turn this into something at least bearable?"
Just last week, I had two situations back to back that just a couple of years ago would have made me sit in a room, turn off all the lights, close the door, and listen to Paul Carrack on repeat (Solo Paul Carrack. Not when he was with The Squeeze or Mike & the Mechanics). But I consciously exercised cognitive dissonance. I decided that I would not cry, pout, or become angry. For what? After all the anger, the situation would still be unchanged. Instead, I could put all of that energy into improving the situation.
Here's the backstory:
When I first got married, I didn't cook. My husband wooed me by cooking for me when we were dating, so I expected him to do that once we were married; he's an EXCELLENT cook. But he expressed the desire for me to cook for him and to like it. Immediately in my mind I recite the line from Boomerang and remind him that he "didn't marry me for my cooking" and snap my gum. Cooking is a really big deal for him because it is associated with his love language (Acts of Service). I'm happy to do it. Plus, he's my Sugar so he can have whatever he wants from me. So over the years, I've perfected this culinary act of kindness, and we, as a couple, enjoy being foodies together. It's a huge part of our trips when we go out of town and we enjoy trying new recipies. It has become a significant part of our partnership.
When I am absolutely livid with my husband, I cook*. To be clear, I cook all the time, but I really get in the kitchen and whip up something extraordinary. And it's poison free. (Sidebar: I wouldn't do that, but I felt the need to say so because someone reading might be expecting that, and I just want to clear it up early.) I even go to the good grocery store. Why? Because when I'm angry with him, it's the LAST thing I FEEL like doing, but I do it anyway. First of all, it gives me something to help release that energy (Remember the Physics lesson from Two Can Play That Game?). Think about it; what else is better than picking up a butcher knife and chopping up garlic, onions, tomatoes, and veggies? And manually tenderizing meat? You can't stay angry long after that. Trust me. Second, it teaches me to manage my emotions. The last thing you want to do for something who has made you angry is serve them. I've grown to accept this as a major arc on my growth chart of maturity.
Hakuna Matata is about self control. It's about not letting your emotions rule you. Instead you rule your emotions. Hakuna Matata is the decision to have joy regardless of your situation. Try it. It's hard at first but it is a fantastic alternative to liquor, weed, cussing, and frustration. By the way, all of these are the formula for high blood pressure, and who needs that? Hakuna Matata will help you deal. Try it. After all, you've nothing to lose except for maybe some dead weight that if held on to for long can become bitterness and who needs that?
*cook is meant in context and as a euphamism (tee hee)
Monday, April 20, 2009
Civic Responsibility
Teaching is certainly a profession that chooses you. I get that now. My students often ask what made me become a teacher and the answer is never simple. Really. The question always sends me into a mental retrospective of the past ten years and the only thing I can come up with is that teaching chose me. More than the profession, I'm at a school right now where I'm needed. That's not as arrogant as it sounds. I'm sure you've been somewhere and had that feeling or seen the need for your presence, your gifts, your talents in that place. That's how I feel.
My school is 1/3 African American, 1/3 Hispanic, and 1/3 White. All of my children are wonderful, but they don't always act like it. There are a number of African American girls here who are pregnant and I am furious. There are a number of young African American men who have already seen the inside of a jail cell. Seriously. I don't have to tell you. The stats are out there. You've read them. The problem with stats is that they are numbers and it's easy to be detached from numbers. Let me make it a bit more real for you. The registrar called my classroom a couple of weeks ago and asked for X student's grade in my class. I told her that he had an F because I've only seen him about three times this semester. I then asked why she needed a grade, and she said, "he's incarcerated and they've asked for his grades." Incarcerated? Yes. Now imagine he's your son. Actually you don't have to, because he is.
I understand that teaching isn't just about grammar, spelling, literature, rhetoric, and composition. Oh no. In fact, I spend about 10% of my time doing that. I realize that I am on assignment. Especially with my kids. They have just as much potential as anyone else, they just need a chance to show the world they can do it. My kids get a bad rap because of their circumstances. But I'd like to see the best of students put in a mud pit and escape sparkling clean. It's virtually impossible.
So what's my point right? You're looking at the title and it seems I'm rambling about at risk teens. Well, whether you believe or not, these are your kids too. They are the future.
*Cue Eddie Murphy as the lead singer of Sexual Chocolate sans the activator, the gold crown, the baby blue tux, and the grinding* Ok. I couldn't resist.
At the top of President Obama's list of priorities is volunteerism. Spend time mentoring our youth and teens. If you're in Tulsa, Chicago, NYC, LA, NO, DC, VA, DFW, New Jersey, Houston, Milwaukee, OKC, KC, Oakland, San Francisco, Birmingham, or Miami, you can find someone to mentor. Kids need to see you doing your thing. At this age, modeling is so very important. That's how they learn what to do. THEY WILL DO WHAT THEY SEE SOMEONE ELSE DO-GOOD OR BAD. So they may as well follow in the footsteps of someone who is hard-working, well spoken, intelligent, educated, and lives a life of integrity right? Why you, you ask? I'll answer your question with this question-Why not you?
This entire time I've referred to the students as MY students. I've taken ownership. This is important because some of their parents don't even take ownership. But what if we became so involved with national mentoring initiatives that the mentors and volunteers outnumbered the absentee/deadbeat parents? Can you imagine? We have to stop looking at them as someone else's kids. Remember, it takes a village. Taking ownership of them teaches them ownership. You don't have to be a teacher to do this. Just volunteer. Every church, every city, every community has some sort of program with which you can become involved. If not, then start one. In the words of the great Cos, "COME ON PEOPLE!"
My school is 1/3 African American, 1/3 Hispanic, and 1/3 White. All of my children are wonderful, but they don't always act like it. There are a number of African American girls here who are pregnant and I am furious. There are a number of young African American men who have already seen the inside of a jail cell. Seriously. I don't have to tell you. The stats are out there. You've read them. The problem with stats is that they are numbers and it's easy to be detached from numbers. Let me make it a bit more real for you. The registrar called my classroom a couple of weeks ago and asked for X student's grade in my class. I told her that he had an F because I've only seen him about three times this semester. I then asked why she needed a grade, and she said, "he's incarcerated and they've asked for his grades." Incarcerated? Yes. Now imagine he's your son. Actually you don't have to, because he is.
I understand that teaching isn't just about grammar, spelling, literature, rhetoric, and composition. Oh no. In fact, I spend about 10% of my time doing that. I realize that I am on assignment. Especially with my kids. They have just as much potential as anyone else, they just need a chance to show the world they can do it. My kids get a bad rap because of their circumstances. But I'd like to see the best of students put in a mud pit and escape sparkling clean. It's virtually impossible.
So what's my point right? You're looking at the title and it seems I'm rambling about at risk teens. Well, whether you believe or not, these are your kids too. They are the future.
*Cue Eddie Murphy as the lead singer of Sexual Chocolate sans the activator, the gold crown, the baby blue tux, and the grinding* Ok. I couldn't resist.
At the top of President Obama's list of priorities is volunteerism. Spend time mentoring our youth and teens. If you're in Tulsa, Chicago, NYC, LA, NO, DC, VA, DFW, New Jersey, Houston, Milwaukee, OKC, KC, Oakland, San Francisco, Birmingham, or Miami, you can find someone to mentor. Kids need to see you doing your thing. At this age, modeling is so very important. That's how they learn what to do. THEY WILL DO WHAT THEY SEE SOMEONE ELSE DO-GOOD OR BAD. So they may as well follow in the footsteps of someone who is hard-working, well spoken, intelligent, educated, and lives a life of integrity right? Why you, you ask? I'll answer your question with this question-Why not you?
This entire time I've referred to the students as MY students. I've taken ownership. This is important because some of their parents don't even take ownership. But what if we became so involved with national mentoring initiatives that the mentors and volunteers outnumbered the absentee/deadbeat parents? Can you imagine? We have to stop looking at them as someone else's kids. Remember, it takes a village. Taking ownership of them teaches them ownership. You don't have to be a teacher to do this. Just volunteer. Every church, every city, every community has some sort of program with which you can become involved. If not, then start one. In the words of the great Cos, "COME ON PEOPLE!"
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Allow Me To Introduce Myself...
How To Deal
The almost incessant ramblings of a wife, mother, creative type, and teacher just trying to make it happen without getting hit over the head by an anvil like some tortured cartoon character.
I’ve not been teaching in the public school arena for very long. Before public school, I was a Writing Program Administrator at a community college, and I taught Freshman Comp at that same college.
I left for public school for a myriad of reasons. My boss was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. She was passive-aggressive and I was either going to leave, or knock her the hell out. Because I valued my teaching role and did not want to jeopardize it, I decided it would be best for me to just move on down the road. Plus I would have to wait for someone else to retire or for some sort of manna to fall from heaven and fund the hiring of more teachers. It wasn’t worth the wait. I didn’t see the opportunity for advancement, so I rolled.
Fast forward to now. I’m at an at-risk high school and the stuff I see each day is a complete mess. Hence the name of this blog. If I process my thoughts out loud, hopefully, over a period of time, I will learn how to deal. This blog won’t just be about my teaching experiences. I will include stories of marriage, parenting, creating, winning, losing, triumph…ok. That’s enough. I was starting to sound like Don Pardo [the famous announcer]. Google him.
Anyway, I’m figuring this out as I go along. Literally, figuratively, and metaphorically. I’ve been encouraged to write publicly for years because the crap that happens to me is just too good to waste. And if my experiences can be fodder for everyone else’s amusement, I may as well benefit in some way. Maybe I should change the title to “How to deal with being a masochist…” No? Ok.
The almost incessant ramblings of a wife, mother, creative type, and teacher just trying to make it happen without getting hit over the head by an anvil like some tortured cartoon character.
I’ve not been teaching in the public school arena for very long. Before public school, I was a Writing Program Administrator at a community college, and I taught Freshman Comp at that same college.
I left for public school for a myriad of reasons. My boss was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. She was passive-aggressive and I was either going to leave, or knock her the hell out. Because I valued my teaching role and did not want to jeopardize it, I decided it would be best for me to just move on down the road. Plus I would have to wait for someone else to retire or for some sort of manna to fall from heaven and fund the hiring of more teachers. It wasn’t worth the wait. I didn’t see the opportunity for advancement, so I rolled.
Fast forward to now. I’m at an at-risk high school and the stuff I see each day is a complete mess. Hence the name of this blog. If I process my thoughts out loud, hopefully, over a period of time, I will learn how to deal. This blog won’t just be about my teaching experiences. I will include stories of marriage, parenting, creating, winning, losing, triumph…ok. That’s enough. I was starting to sound like Don Pardo [the famous announcer]. Google him.
Anyway, I’m figuring this out as I go along. Literally, figuratively, and metaphorically. I’ve been encouraged to write publicly for years because the crap that happens to me is just too good to waste. And if my experiences can be fodder for everyone else’s amusement, I may as well benefit in some way. Maybe I should change the title to “How to deal with being a masochist…” No? Ok.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Control
Got my own life
I'm gonna make my own decisions
When it has to do with my life, my life
I wanna be the one
In control
-"Control" Janet Jackson (ca. 1980s)
Janet Jackson first made this declaration when she wanted the world to know what was up. It wasn't Joe's life. It was hers. Damnit. Penny wasn't gonna be burned by Chip Fields anymore. She was in CONTROL! And she had the pelvic thrusts to prove it. I know how Janet felt then because that's how I feel now. But our lives contrast.
She sang this song as a young woman entering her twenties who wanted some breathing room. When I sing this song, it's with a question mark. Not because I don't believe the lyrics, but because I'm twice the age she was when she sang it, and I'm nowhere near being in control. Of my own life.
I must first say that I am not complaining. There are facets of my lack of control that I consented. For example, motherhood. I signed up for that. Checked yes and intialed that contract. No problem there. I love being a mom. It can be exhausting but it's fantastic. Then there's the whole wife thing. It's delicate. It's frustrating and rewarding. I AM NOT IN CONTROL, but that's what I signed up for. Ok. Now there are some areas where I am not in control and it's not ok. One of those areas is my career and that, of course, affects my whole life.
Since our daughter was born, I've become obsessed with my legacy. What would I leave behind financially, familially, etc.? What would be my mark on this world? My imagination has never been the problem. Check that. I've always been able to dream big enough. But lately I've experienced some anxiety regarding my accomplishments.
I'm sitting at the computer, I'm clicking the mouse, but it's not following my commands; THAT IS SO SUPER FRUSTRATING.
I'm not quite ready to expose everything, so I'll simply say that I teach public school. I teach some of the roughest kids in town. My kids are good kids, but they have ISSUES. I write at least one referral per week. Usually the issues are simple things but through my own experiences, I understand that their behavior is simply their response to a bad situation and they too lack control in their lives. Everyone is telling them to do what they think works for them, and if they just follow the rules, their lives will turn out fine. What do I say when I know different. I followed those same rules and the only thing I can say is that I could have saved myself a few thousand dollars in students loans. I'm in my early thirties and I look at my students everyday and wonder if I will ever be in control. Not just in my classroom, but in my life. I guess I'm just learning how to deal.
I'm gonna make my own decisions
When it has to do with my life, my life
I wanna be the one
In control
-"Control" Janet Jackson (ca. 1980s)
Janet Jackson first made this declaration when she wanted the world to know what was up. It wasn't Joe's life. It was hers. Damnit. Penny wasn't gonna be burned by Chip Fields anymore. She was in CONTROL! And she had the pelvic thrusts to prove it. I know how Janet felt then because that's how I feel now. But our lives contrast.
She sang this song as a young woman entering her twenties who wanted some breathing room. When I sing this song, it's with a question mark. Not because I don't believe the lyrics, but because I'm twice the age she was when she sang it, and I'm nowhere near being in control. Of my own life.
I must first say that I am not complaining. There are facets of my lack of control that I consented. For example, motherhood. I signed up for that. Checked yes and intialed that contract. No problem there. I love being a mom. It can be exhausting but it's fantastic. Then there's the whole wife thing. It's delicate. It's frustrating and rewarding. I AM NOT IN CONTROL, but that's what I signed up for. Ok. Now there are some areas where I am not in control and it's not ok. One of those areas is my career and that, of course, affects my whole life.
Since our daughter was born, I've become obsessed with my legacy. What would I leave behind financially, familially, etc.? What would be my mark on this world? My imagination has never been the problem. Check that. I've always been able to dream big enough. But lately I've experienced some anxiety regarding my accomplishments.
I'm sitting at the computer, I'm clicking the mouse, but it's not following my commands; THAT IS SO SUPER FRUSTRATING.
I'm not quite ready to expose everything, so I'll simply say that I teach public school. I teach some of the roughest kids in town. My kids are good kids, but they have ISSUES. I write at least one referral per week. Usually the issues are simple things but through my own experiences, I understand that their behavior is simply their response to a bad situation and they too lack control in their lives. Everyone is telling them to do what they think works for them, and if they just follow the rules, their lives will turn out fine. What do I say when I know different. I followed those same rules and the only thing I can say is that I could have saved myself a few thousand dollars in students loans. I'm in my early thirties and I look at my students everyday and wonder if I will ever be in control. Not just in my classroom, but in my life. I guess I'm just learning how to deal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)