in which I rant. and other things!
This is apparently the week of NIKKI GETS WONDERFUL THINGS IN THE MAIL because today a letter from mycroftnext came for me in this jkl;afeijk;ldk;jlgaea wonderful thai envelope. Aside from a letter that is written in such large font I almost couldn't believe it came from my love, was a half-finished letter on what may possibly be the cutest stationery in existence singing my praises. It also had written at the bottom: It rides on a balloon and is where. What kind of trip does it become today? which i love for what I'm sure are obvious reasons.
this admittedly old blogpost is worth taking a look at, if only because it convinced me that there is actually some value in Mean Girls
Lately at work when I am killing empty time, I have been reading blogs with a decidedly feminist bent. This is probably a Bad Thing because you get used to ignoring all the little indignities in life you are subjected to by virtue of not being a man (particularly a straight, white, man) and I have all these ridiculous notions of entitlement, like the idea that I am entitled to basic human rights, and that I am, in fact, an actual human being, not a pleasing woman-shape there to please the people (who are necessarily men, because women aren't people remember?) around me. Also, I've read a lot of people saying online that they think that women sometimes deserve to be raped, and people who say otherwise are proponents of never taking responsibility for one's actions (because sexual assault is not something you should have to take responsibility for, since it was clearly her fault for like, breathing). As you can imagine, these misguided entitlement issues lead me to be very angry.
Which kind of brings me to something I'd been thinking on (and subjected mycroftnext to in incoherent, brief, garbled rant form some weeks ago) and can now articulate more clearly. Somewhere in the ACF, someone is in charge of compiling a bunch of ACF (administration of children and families)-related articles. One of them had a speaker coming hold a workshop on family-related issues in the bad economy, and some guy stood up and spoke about how men feel in the current economic situation, and a lady spoke up saying something in contrast to his point. The facilitator turned around and said 'See, right here is what we need to work on! Women interrupt men all the time! Listen to what they have to say!' which ok, i think listening to each other is a good thing. But! in fact, extensive linguistic research has shown that women do not, in fact, interrupt men all the time. On the contrary, men interrupt women more often, and then go on to hold the conversational floor for much longer periods of time. So, this faciliatator, apparently, would rather subscribe to 'common knowledge' than actual scientific research, which is kind of annoying, since the article was touting her as a linguist. Inaccuracy aside, I've been kind of mulling over where this 'common knowledge' about how gabby women are, and how they're unable to shut up, and the guys around them can't get a word in edgewise comes from. And now this is where I, as a linguist, get into trouble, because i'm moving away from actual facts and statistics (which i suppose i can try to dig up actual articles if i have to, but i am lazy for now) and into the arm-chair realm of conjecture, but I think women get this reputation because actually, it's sociatally normalized that women aren't supposed to talk. They're supposed to be chaste, silent, and obedient, particularly in public. As such, any talking a woman does constitutes an 'interruption,' a societally illegal snatch stealing the floor from the legitimate speakers--the men.
Now Tego has come over and we shall watch some television (last night at dinner we did a quick figuring of how many years' worth of tv we're planning to get through, and we're probably somewhere in the 14-20 year range). We both took naps today. How cool are we!
this admittedly old blogpost is worth taking a look at, if only because it convinced me that there is actually some value in Mean Girls
Lately at work when I am killing empty time, I have been reading blogs with a decidedly feminist bent. This is probably a Bad Thing because you get used to ignoring all the little indignities in life you are subjected to by virtue of not being a man (particularly a straight, white, man) and I have all these ridiculous notions of entitlement, like the idea that I am entitled to basic human rights, and that I am, in fact, an actual human being, not a pleasing woman-shape there to please the people (who are necessarily men, because women aren't people remember?) around me. Also, I've read a lot of people saying online that they think that women sometimes deserve to be raped, and people who say otherwise are proponents of never taking responsibility for one's actions (because sexual assault is not something you should have to take responsibility for, since it was clearly her fault for like, breathing). As you can imagine, these misguided entitlement issues lead me to be very angry.
Which kind of brings me to something I'd been thinking on (and subjected mycroftnext to in incoherent, brief, garbled rant form some weeks ago) and can now articulate more clearly. Somewhere in the ACF, someone is in charge of compiling a bunch of ACF (administration of children and families)-related articles. One of them had a speaker coming hold a workshop on family-related issues in the bad economy, and some guy stood up and spoke about how men feel in the current economic situation, and a lady spoke up saying something in contrast to his point. The facilitator turned around and said 'See, right here is what we need to work on! Women interrupt men all the time! Listen to what they have to say!' which ok, i think listening to each other is a good thing. But! in fact, extensive linguistic research has shown that women do not, in fact, interrupt men all the time. On the contrary, men interrupt women more often, and then go on to hold the conversational floor for much longer periods of time. So, this faciliatator, apparently, would rather subscribe to 'common knowledge' than actual scientific research, which is kind of annoying, since the article was touting her as a linguist. Inaccuracy aside, I've been kind of mulling over where this 'common knowledge' about how gabby women are, and how they're unable to shut up, and the guys around them can't get a word in edgewise comes from. And now this is where I, as a linguist, get into trouble, because i'm moving away from actual facts and statistics (which i suppose i can try to dig up actual articles if i have to, but i am lazy for now) and into the arm-chair realm of conjecture, but I think women get this reputation because actually, it's sociatally normalized that women aren't supposed to talk. They're supposed to be chaste, silent, and obedient, particularly in public. As such, any talking a woman does constitutes an 'interruption,' a societally illegal snatch stealing the floor from the legitimate speakers--the men.
Now Tego has come over and we shall watch some television (last night at dinner we did a quick figuring of how many years' worth of tv we're planning to get through, and we're probably somewhere in the 14-20 year range). We both took naps today. How cool are we!