This was another week of interesting sources and reflection. I was disappointed to finish Joel Spring’s book, as I was pleasantly surprised to really enjoy reading it. I also ended up deciding to purchase Tracey Ore’s book instead of continuing my renting, because I found this compilation book to be a great and useful resource to have going forward. 

The first assigned reading/viewing I wanted to discuss this reflection was sj Miller’s TED Talk “Why Gender Identity Justice Matters for Everyone.”  I mentioned this quote in my socio-cultural immersion project paper, but I wanted to mention it here: “Doesn’t everyone have the right to feel good?” What really stood out to me was the comments. There were many positive, but there were way more negative. I just don’t understand why so many people can communicate their thoughts about topics and it is fine, but then someone communicates a desire for people to be more accepting and respectful of others that identity differently and suddenly they are “forcing their beliefs on someone else.” I am definitely one that is all in favor of free speech even if I don’t agree. I am extremely wary of censorship, as the tables can always turn against you. However, sj Miller in no way was doing any forcing, and it just blows my mind how people think it is worth it to watch a video with no intention of even considering the content and then comment just to be hateful. I think this is an example where students can really analyze rhetoric and tone to evaluate how they think the presenter is presenting their argument and if the response matches. This video and the juxtaposition of sj Miller’s message and some of the video response set the tone for the rest of my reflection.

Secondly, I don’t have a good place to discuss the “Would You Stop Muslim Discrimination” video, because I do not have much to say except that I was absolutely shocked but also not surprised at the same time.  Definitely keeping this video for future use and discussion. Obviously, in this country, there will be many who agree with the shop owner and not stand up for the woman because of that or they will speak up against her. And then there will be some, as the video showed, who do stand up for her. However, what was addressed was that the most people just did not say or do anything at all. This video can be a great teaching tool for discussion in general but can also be a starting point to analyze what tools we can use to speak up in public. 

I also appreciated the asianfeminism.org website and their focus on how “Asian/American feminism is an ever-evolving practice” and recognize all the different possible intersections, including migration history, immigration status, and disability, as well as how they are indebted to ways Black feminist thought and Third World feminist movements enable us to think and act critically through our own positionalities to address systems of anti-Black racism, settler colonialism, and xenophobia.” It should be well-known that the feminism movements have been primarily white, and that same energy has not been given much to people of color, people with disabilities, immigrants, etc. The inclusivity and humility of this mission statement is really powerful to me.  I read one article on the website by Erika Harano called “(m)other(land)? / return.”  The article is quite a few poems she wrote. One that stood out to me is as follows: “escape runs bloodlines / what is it that the harano womxn / keep trying to run from.” Another is “skip a generation / shift perspective / will I be as / wanting-space-from / with my mother / as she is with / hers?”  Most of her poems are very short and would be amazing to share in class during my creative writing course in our poetry unit. I am overwhelmed by how many possible poems I could choose from in the world, and I am sure that I will over the years find my staples but change many of my examples every year. I obviously want to include diverse voices and perspectives. But also these poems, while short, do unique utilize structure and punctuation as well. Therefore, they can to the class interesting content and practical examples of syntax. We are discussing throughout the course identity, human nature, the natural world, etc, and her poems fit into that.  Those two poems in particular stood out to me because of the intergenerational trauma that is expressed but often not talked about. We know our family affects us, but how often do we really consider what patterns have been passed down for a long time. We need more inner reflection to really discover that.

Which leads me to my next reflection on OnBeing’s grounding virtues, as shown on the page “Human Transformation Makes Social Transformation Possible.”  I have heard of this podcast and website before but have not listened for a long time. There were a few lines that really stood out to me. They write, “This is work of inner engagement and engagement in the world. Deepened inner life creates space for the moral wrestling that can transform interpersonal relationships” and “There is an underlying violence that has become a part of our lives.” This resonated so heavily with me because to change society and systems, we have to work together. But it also takes inner work. We have literally created society. We do not have to do ANYTHING the way we are doing things. We can change at any time, whether it is easy or not. And that is the same with ourselves. We limit our power and just accept reality as it is when we literally create it. We are constantly affected by others. The world around us is inherently set-up to be oppressive and inequitable. At the end of the day, all we can really control is ourselves so we have to start here. I think the six virtues are ones that are incorporated into my class pretty naturally. We discuss that words matter and how to choose our words carefully. My students must practice generous listening when interviewing and working with the other staff members. We have to be humble and patient, as well as hospitable to our school and community. I want to work more on the adventurous civility, and I think that will be really interesting to focus on this year.  The website says of adventurous civility: “The intimate and civilizational questions that perplex and divide us will not be resolved quickly. Civility, in our world of change, is about creating new possibilities for living forward while being different and even continuing to hold profound disagreement.”  This is a line I would read directly to students, as they are some of the change-makers of the school and responsible for allowing disagreement, free speech, as well as being open to change and trying to create new discourse and ideas. 

I heavily appreciated the article “Proposition 203: A Critical Metaphor Analysis” by Eric Johnson. I absolutely love rhetoric and that is my writing passion. I took numerous rhetoric courses in undergrad and absolutely loved researching and writing about rhetoric. This piece was incredibly interesting to me. I also think this is a good example to show students as it shows how the writer took a very specific topic and opened the conversation to a wider discussion and issue. In this case the topic was the rhetoric used in widely distributed media prior to the November 7, 2000 general election on proposition 203 where voters were deciding on implementing bilingual education in the schools. Johnson asserts, “in most cases, media discourse is presented in an ostensibly benign format (versus outwardly vicious slurs and accusations). Some of the most harmful images are not necessarily the most blatant” (2005, p. 70). He writes that research has shown metaphors and images are really effective and useful in how we communicate.  The fact Johnson was able to see so clearly the patterns of language and the connotations was incredible. Bilingual education and bilingual students and immigrants were discussed alongside words like failure, pathology, industry, bad investment, segregation, trap, broken, barrier, victims, swimmers, invaders, war.  But English was described as success, unity, tool, gift, acceleration, etc.  One of the main standards for ELA in Missouri is to be able to define words using connotative meanings. This is the exact type of authentic reading students can do to really evaluate connotative meanings. My students would heavily benefit from this as not only are they journalists, but they research constantly and are taking in many articles. I want them to be able to read an article and think critically, and this includes taking a moment to consider what words are used to describe people, policies, situations, and what the connotation really is. What is being given to us that is shaping our perceptions unconsciously?  

This conversation leads me to an article in Ore called “How the Right Made Racism Sound Fair- and Changed Immigration Politics” by Gabriel Thompson. I loved this article, but I will highlight just a couple lines: “The words refuse to be confined to their legal and economic senses; they swell with emotional meanings that reflect the fears and passions of the time” (p. 324). He also discusses how after September 11, the AP stylebook decided to bring together experts and decide how they will refer to undocumented immigrants. They decided the neutral term would be “illegal immigrants,” and journalists should refrain from using “illegal” as a noun and using the term “alien.” However, undocumented immigrant has been pushed to be preferable for what should be obvious reasons. The article also quoted Joseph Nevins who said, “The fact is, they agreed on all the fundamentals with the Republicans. If you accept the framing that your opponent’s put forth, then you’ve lost the debate. And this helped lay the groundwork for the situation in which we find ourselves today” (p. 343). Firstly, I found it interesting that the AP stylebook would say that any language is “neutral” because not only is language rarely neutral, but it also changes throughout time. Words are highly emotional especially when we are reporting news. News is always seen as the objective form of media, but it is so far from the truth. I think that the assumption news is objective makes people not really evaluate what is being said and how. I also think that it is an important lesson for students to look at WHO is saying the quote. Because who it is and their history brings important context. I think about Joe Biden and some other democrats who since Roe v. Wade was put decided in 1973, their opinion on it has changed and gone back and forth with Biden, for example, saying at the time that it “goes too far.” Also, in reality, a two-party system is not effective and the Democrats and Republicans have more in common than they do different. The much of popular media incites violence, conflict, chaos, and tries to control the narrative. And we can see this through who finally supports them. I have so much more to say about this topic, but what I am going to end on is that these are the critical thinking skills I want my journalism students to think about when they are engaging with and writing media. Even though they are just producing a high school yearbook or newspaper or other various projects, they are still practicing these skills and can model the type of reporting that is needed. Analyzing reporting similar to this would also bring some ideas to the students and make a good story or report.

In conclusion, I was heavily inspired by the last two week’s readings. I have many quotes from Spring’s book that I just didn’t get to this reflection; however, I really appreciated Spring discussing the controlled linguistic and cultural environment cultivated for non-white students, as well as the hatred towards immigrants when we are a country of immigrants. And I appreciate his mention of corporatism in the final chapter as that is the new divider on top of all the others we have wrestled with.  I cannot believe we only have two more weeks of the course and my next reflection will be my last.