Queer

I am reporting on the word ‘Queer’ from the perspective of a student named Bart. Bart writes about his cultural use of the word having grown up in the Boston area. As a child, the word was used by children around him as another word for stupid. The first time the word introduced a new meaning to him was when he used it around his mother and she told him that by engaging in some activity with a bunch of girls, it did not mean he was a homosexual. Of course, at his age he had a limited understanding of the term gay or homosexual, but this made him realize that the word that was used to signify stupid happened to also be used at times when boys were expressing feminine qualities. Later on in his academic career the word queer was used again except this time the person using it was referring to the definition of homosexual, and so the teacher reprimanded the student. In the end, Bart makes a point about political correctness and of its plasticity. Bart understands that to be politically correct one should not use ‘queer’, but he also feels that some people would not be offended by the word so he isn’t quite sure when and where the word would deem appropriate. He tends to use the word when he’s extremely angry…or should I say irrational.

Queer:

1.	strange or odd from a conventional viewpoint; unusually different; singular: a queer notion of justice.

2.	of a questionable nature or character; suspicious; shady: Something queer about the language of the prospectus kept investors away.

3.	not feeling physically right or well; giddy, faint, or qualmish: to feel queer.

4.	mentally unbalanced or deranged.

5.	Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a. homosexual. b. effeminate; unmanly.

6.	Slang. bad, worthless, or counterfeit.

–verb (used with object)

7.	to spoil; ruin.

8.	to put (a person) in a hopeless or disadvantageous situation as to success, favor, etc.

9.	to jeopardize.

–noun

10.	Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a homosexual, esp. a male homosexual.

11.	Slang. counterfeit money

The word ‘Queer’ means something that deviates from the norm, but not in the sense of unique or an individual. It has a negative connotation of something that is odd, unconventional, and strange. It is best known for its popular use in referring to homosexuals. The word was created because homosexuality was not (and is not) part of the norm (those who hold power). The normative sexual orientation in the United States is heterosexuality and anything that differs is frowned upon. The label was put to use as an attempt to rid society of the homosexual, by making it publicly known that it was not accepted, should not be accepted by others, and to produce fear and suspicion. Basically, to put anyone who was gay in a permanent social status of being an outcast. This is where the ‘hopeless’ and ‘disadvantaging’ components of the definition come from.

As is the case with the infamous ‘n’ word, in some parts of the country the gay community has attempted to use the word to refer to themselves as a way to gain back some social power. In other words, attempting to make the word into a positive one. I personally do not agree and think that we should all refer to the popular saying, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” The word should not be used. It is equivalent to ‘Fag’ it no longer has anything to do with being politically correct. It’s a matter of hate and whether or not you have any morals by using the term ‘queer’.

Communication to the 10th Power

“Writing as Communication” has an emphasis on writing; emphasis on context, content, function and media to produce critical thinking and reading. It takes on a much more ritual approach on culture. The information presented in writing as communication is information that is shared and analyzed by other readers. Through such analyzes, meanings are created and recreated. “Communication as Culture” emphasizes the influence of communication on culture. Focusing heavily on the transmission model of communication, culture develops from the transportation of signals including people and goods. Since its origin, one of the primary objectives of communication was to control people and distance. Having control over these led to a centralized culture, which was followed by power. In this sense, culture has developed through communication. In writing as communication, communication is relevant and is meaningful through writing and semiotic analyzes.

Throughout this one semester course, we will be applying rubrics of both the ritual and transmission models. Using the transmission model, we will explore the “who”; the sender. In exploring the sender, we will summarize and then analyze what was intended by his message. If his point is evident in his message and understanding is reached, then the model worked to its full effect. The ritual model functions most effectively when the students in this class work together and give feedback to each other’s work. The message in this model travels back and forth between the “participants” and their messages are created and recreated.

New Questions for Topic

1. Why is marriage so important?
2.           
3.            It is important to identify the overall importance of this institution to Americans. Also important to explore the legal benefits of being married, in terms of finances/property, health insurance, parental rights, etc. To go into detail in explaining the outcome of a couple )in terms of what I previously mentioned) after one has passed away, contrasting married versus unwed.
4. Is homosexuality innate or is it a choice?
5.             If homosexuality is innate, the positive outcome would be social acceptance because people would realize that they are not choosing to be different. (Although the outcome could also be genocide.) Marriage along with other rights of equality would not be as difficult to gain.
6. What has influenced the Anti-Gay movement and who/what continues to spread the movement? What’s the norm?
7.              If the source and all its arguments can be discredited and proven false, then we can begin to sway peoples’ attitudes to support gay rights. The source is important because it is the origin for all the hate towards gays and the reason why a gay couple cannot legally marry in the majority of states.
8. In what areas/states in America can a gay couple be legally married?
9.               Exploring why these few states have supported and recognized gay marriage is crucial. Knowing how these states reached their decision can help in persuading other states to do the same. It is also important to see who in particular these states had to oppose when deciding to support gay marriage.
10. Are these states predominantly democrat or republican?
11.               It gives a general idea of who in the population will be more willing or open to accept gay marriage.
12. Has the U.S. Consitution ever been altered (edited)?
13.               When marriage is discussed in the constitution it mention man and woman. Some will argue that for this reason alone, marriage should only be established between a man and a woman. In answering this question and reminding people of women’s suffrage and the drinking age and consumption of alcohol, people will realize that in cases of the previously mentioned, entire amendments were altered whereas in this situation regarding marriage, man and woman would simply need to be replaced by person; one word!
14. What are the divorce rates between heterosexual couples in America?
15.                If divorce rates are high, then this would imply that the institution is devalued among heterosexual couples. So, if the institution is not quite situated on America’s pedestal, then there shouldn’t be any harm in allowing addition people to marry.
16. Why does the Death Penalty exist in America, yet gay marriage is illegal and suppressed?
17.              This conveys the unjust and ridiculous hate system against gays. Killing someone, but marrying another person is illegal. Strong contrast.

Feedback from Civic Letter

As an average writer, I am not expected to create perfection in my writing and I am always well aware that there is room for improvement, whether it involves my grammar or the message I am sending to my audience. At the end of my civic letter, Steph made note that it was passionate. That one comment was enough to make me content with the entire paper because the topic I chose to address has some personal relevance to me. I understood what she meant by most of her corrections. Many will help me in our next major assignment in conveying a stronger, more concise and effective paper. I realize I know what is morally right and wrong about my topic, but what I need to learn more about is the technicality of it all. I need to think of it as an institution and break it down from there, referring to legal terms, etc. I also need to make logic parallel to poverty, abortion, and the death penalty. In bettering my writing, I need to reread and rewrite several times. This simply means I need to set an ample amount of time to work on my writing.

The Devil-Wiki

Steph’s use of the Umasswiki is educational. She wants to emphasize the alternative means of communicating that we partake in, but do not acknowledge as frequently as we use them. For instance, many of us use AIM or Myspace on a regular basis. We set up profiles that communicate to others who we are and send messages to accomplish something, yet when people think of communication they instinctively only think of verbal communication.

The conversation between Steph and her first year students is reflective of this online communication system, but in its educational context. The objective that the students seem to reach unanimously is that the wiki allows for diverse feed back which to them is beneficial. Students as well as Steph, are all receiving feedback from different groups of people. The first year students find it especially beneficial that juniors, who presumably have more experience in writing, are reading their work and providing feedback. Most important is the concept of anonymity. This provides students within the same class to give constructive criticism without feeling as if they are overstepping boundaries.

In addition to feedback, Steph conveys how being detail oriented is a crucial component to communicating. Posting and searching for material in the wiki involves a series of steps that require its users to pay attention to detail, including the detail in their own work. Steph’s article is an example of using details because she discusses each assignment that has been given to both her freshmen and juniors, and the interaction between her two classes through specific assignments. Some assignments for both classes overlap to allow for more in depth feedback.

I think using wiki is very modern but not very beneficial, unless you plan on blogging in your future career. Although I enjoy change from time to time, I prefer a much more traditional mean of communicating that consists of more face-to-face interaction. I enjoy reading other people’s work on paper, right before my eyes as opposed to staring at a computer screen that causes my eyes to dry up. Indeed, the anonymity of the feedback provides constructive criticism which we can obviously benefit from but it is not reflective of the real world. In the real world, especially once you begin your career, feedback will be given to you upfront and personal, from say, your boss. If we can’t benefit from feedback in a formal setting now, and heavily depend on a response coming from ‘Casper’, then we are not properly preparing ourselves for what the future holds for us; for the real world. Ah yes, credibility is lost when you do not know your source, which is a common problem over this online community.

Battle of the Argument Summaries

 

Bela’s argument summary and mine are similar in a few ways. We both believe that Jacoby makes a strong claim for penal reform because most murders and crimes go unpunished. Bela also briefly mentions how prisoners become skilled in their criminal activities while in prison, which I also tie into my summary through reference of the “graduate school of criminal studies”. My argument differs in its emphasis on the amount of money spent on criminals in present times in our jail systems versus the Puritan’s low cost method of corporal punishment. I disagree with Bela when she states that Jacoby does not take into consideration of how the Puritan’s way of dealing with criminals would be interpreted today. Jacoby states that our society would interpret corporal punishment as “too degrading” and “too brutal”. Although it can be argued that being locked up in a prison is degrading, the prisoners are not exposed to the public. Prisons are not designed of glass and placed in the middle of a city for inmates to be looked down upon as objects.

My summary and Amanda’s summary are similar in that we discuss how our present system is more inhumane than that of corporal punishment as used by the Puritans. We use Jacoby’s mentioning of rapes and murders (that Amanda terms as “horrors”). The “horrors” are a result of the maltreatment inmates receive in prison. Prison guards, as described by Jacoby, are indifferent to inmates and will look away while a prisoner is being raped or murdered. Corporal punishment leaves scars, but in our present society, the “cage” devalues the human being and can lead to their death. In terms of the $30,000 spent annually per inmate, Amanda focuses on the tax payer and their waste of money, whereas I focus more on the luxuries provided for the inmate, such as the “graduate school of criminal studies”.

BellaBerly points out Jacoby’s critique of our ineffective court system. Bella mentions how the court system can not possibly be fair if all crimes are receiving the same treatment and implies that our current punishment and its use of cages is no different than corporal punishment, which is the thesis of my argument. Being whipped in public can not be more degrading then being locked up in a small jail cell with no access to the outside world. Some of our jail cells have bars, the fourth wall resembling that of a cage; others have a steel door and other cells are in complete darkness. For the most part, inmates are in these small cells for twenty-three hours daily, with another inmate who’s a complete stranger. It’s like placing two animals in a cage, not caring if they’ll get along or kill each other. One of the points made by Jacoby that I failed to mention in my argument was that judges in our court system fail to send first or second time offenders to prison. Without proper reprimand, it is being suggested that crimes will only increase later on if not in number than in severity. The resolution that Jacoby implies is to deter these “amateur thugs” as opposed to allowing for them to become “career criminals”.

ElR6′s “Torture is Cheap” brought to my attention something that never once crossed my mind as a result of reading Jacoby’s article. I made note in my summary that Jacob’s resolution was to imprison murderers but to refer to corporal punishment for crimes such as thievery. When I read this, I thought it wasn’t too bad of an idea. From experience, I know that extreme public humiliation can change one’s behavior, but corporal punishment is a little different. For one, in today’s society, the audience would most likely be disgusted by the whipping of another person and pity them. As a result, the criminal’s response would most likely be one of hurt and anger as opposed to the expected emotional response of shame, as experienced by criminals during the time of Puritans. Both sets of emotional responses would elicit different behavior, the latter being the more effective response in ceasing criminal activity. Now, what ElR6 mentions is the definition of the whippings for criminals or “thugs”. The scars resulting from corporal punishment would be equivalent to the scars left by stab and gun wounds, which in our cultural organization of criminals defines manhood. I still can’t believe that it didn’t cross my mind, but it’s an excellent point that conveys the crucial differences between the past (Puritans) and present American society and the lack of effect in applying what worked in the past with our current culture.

Blah Babel Blah

After seeing some more of the film, I feel the director was focusing on communication between different cultures (including intracultural) and the conflicts that occur due to lack of understanding one another. In Japan, we see the struggles between the deaf and the rest of the world. The volleyball team of deaf women does everything together, from eating at a restaurant to attending a nightclub. The one particular woman the film focuses on, has to either write down what she wants to say or do, or she has to go to extremes to physically express herself. In Tanzeen, the American couple struggle not only to communicate with one another, perhaps because of cultural gender specific reasons (rapport vs. report etc) but they also struggle to communicate with an entirely different cultural that speak a different language. The husband is trying to get an ambulance and at the same time trying to convince tourist to continue waiting until help has arrived. In Mexico, the nanny’s nephew has difficulties communicating with the American children because he doesn’t speak a lot of English and he shows a bit of dislike towards them for being Caucasian Americans. Back in Tanzeen, we are shown communicating issues between family members. The father and his sons clearly do not communicate effectively because the children do everything the father is opposed to such as watching their sister nude, or shooting at a random tourist bus. Honestly, I would like to just finish watching the damn film : )