I Have to Be Really Careful What I Say About That

Describe a situation that you were or could have been in that had a real exigency, serious constraints, and an audience that was paying close attention to your words, because it mattered to them. This could be a family situation, a social situation, a workplace situation. -- basically a situation in which you were 'walking on egg shells'. Describe the exigence, constraints, and the stakes for your audience.  Then describe what you said to them, and say whether it displayed rightness-of-fit. You should write at least one paragraph for the exigence, audience, constraints portion, and at least one paragraph on your response and its rightness of fit. You can be imaginative here if you can't think of a real incident -- the point is to think carefully about how to match your words to sensitive situations.

One situation where I had to be careful about what I said was when I ran into my ex-boyfriend at this year's Lotus Festival. (Lotus is a bit of a tradition from my high school; the juniors and seniors and some teachers all come to Bloomington for that Friday, and many alums come too, including some that don't go to IU like him.) Clearly, the exigence was that I was in a situation where I was caught between my instinct--run away--and the thing I thought I should have done, which was speak to him in a friendly manner like two grown adults. I felt a sense of urgency because I wanted to look like a mature and better person in the situation, and there was an unlikely chance I would have a possible opportunity to talk to him, nevertheless actually see him.

A major constraint was that I shouldn't bring up the relationship or say anything that could be seen as emotional, because he'd made it pretty clear he didn't know how to have any emotions for friendships and felt awkward when they cropped up, especially for me. I also shouldn't mention how I hadn't seen him much because our friend group didn't extend invitations for me. I should also not fall into my habit of getting defense or feeling the need to justify myself, like saying "oh, I didn't want to join a club like that because of my commitments," because my insecure comments like that had caused rifts in our relationship and friendship 

The stakes were likely our memories of each other, because it was unlikely we would interact much after that. It was especially important that it be positive--or at least, mature--because our last encounter was extremely frustrating and he had the wrong impression of it (I was talking to some friends about other friends, specifically not him because he wasn't the problem, but of course he thought it was about him), and he would not be convinced otherwise. I wanted to make the impression that I was not looking to tear him down but I was happily in a new stage of my life. As he was essentially my only audience (I admit a small part of me did think about how he may relate this encounter to mutual friends and his family, should they ask), I was focused on making sure he would perceive me in a positive way.

Ultimately, I ended up asking him how he was doing and we talked about our experiences at college, trading anecdotes, though I wish I could have been as happy as he was--I was still shaken from seeing him there. At the end I said, "I'm glad you're doing well with college," which seemed like the mature thing to say. (He was not so mature and didn't say something back, and he had spent most of the encounter seemingly suggesting that my new friends weren't playing the best card games and stuff like that.) Nevertheless, I think I came off positively, even if not overly enthusiastic, and it fit the situation because I focused on catching up with our lives, avoided heavy topics, and made the grown-up "I'm glad you're doing well" statement. I think I did come off as the mature person--certainly more comfortable and mature than in previous encounters!--even if I was annoyed by his behavior.

Mindsets

Here's a chance to blog out just what's your honest opinion about the theme of this mini-unit: people's mindsets. What do you think about having fixed or pliant views about the world, values, politics, etc.? Do you have friends who are too dogmatic? ...too 'whatever-floats-your-boat'? Do you think it's worth it trying to change the minds of doctrinnaire types? Do you think we need more testimonials to strong, unchanging values? Just give your opinion, but be sure it back it up with some kind of support -- a good reason, a rich example, etc.

I think the best way to view the world is a mix of fixed and pliant point of view. One should not be so fixed that he or she cannot consider other points of views to develop a nuanced view of the situation. On the other hand, being too pliant is also not helpful because one cannot make a conclusive decision and may be gullible to most arguments that sound convincing. Ultimately, the ideal is to have core beliefs but be open to other evidence and viewpoints to further develop these beliefs.

I knew someone at my high school who was quite dogmatic and prejudiced, particularly as far as colleges were concerned. He came from a privileged family and would talk poorly about local state schools, not able to see how they were affordable for many.I also knew someone who would flip viewpoints quite a lot. Some of this had to do with her shifting and developing religious views, as she decided to attend church and then switched churches. Both of these people could be irritating at times and difficult to have thoughtful conversations with.

I think it is difficult to change those with strong beliefs, and it can often be fruitless to argue with them reasonably if they are so resistant to change. Ultimately, they will not consider other viewpoints until they want to. My brother, for instance, will insist before he tries new foods that he does not like it and, if we convince him to take a bite, he will proclaim the same thing. It's a bias that can only be changed if he is open-minded, but he's only been that way on his own (such as wanting to try a taco several years ago). Our arguments only enforce his desire to be stay in his mindset.

Reflection on Blog Comment

I commented on this blog post from a classmate about standing for the National Anthem in America. Riley's argument was that the pro and con side need to come together and recognize they both are passionate about the country and instead focus on the debates that are being protested when one does not stand for the anthem. These debates are larger topics such as "killing people is wrong" and "equal rights," so Riley invoked some vague common topics to unite the sides (even though the sides do often have varying viewpoints on the specific issues, like police brutality).

My response was asking where the First Amendment fit into this debate, because I know it is a popular defense of not standing during the anthem, and it directly relates to the law. I think my comment can help deepen the illustration of the point of views of both sides and their reasoning behind the protest as American citizens. I mainly disagreed with the stasis; I think the use and limitations of the first amendment are the main points where the two sides specifically disagree, rather than about American values. This is a difference in logic, I think.

We haven't had a back-and-forth conversation.

Narrow path: religion

Dear Diary,

When I go home this weekend, I want to tell my parents that I have chosen to no longer be involved with church services. I may go on special occasions with them for the social aspect, but I currently am seriously questioning my faith and do not think I agree with a lot of the interpretations or feel comfortable to base my life around the Bible. However, I haven't adopted an easy-to-digest label like "athiest" or "agnostic," which makes it a bit harder to explain my feelings, but I know saying I won't go to church will invoke some of the negative stigma surrounding those groups.

My problem is that my parents have different views on this. My mother is a very devout Christian, so I know she won't react to anything radical and will prefer to think I still have more faith than I currently do. My dad attends with us sometimes, but he has never been as involved. He should be more inclined to agree with me, even though he's more apathetic toward a religious life rather than disagreeing with it. So, I need to avoid seeming like I challenge my mother's core beliefs, while also seeming to have the same attitudes as my dad.

The main issue I need to avoid getting too deep into is that of my views on God, the afterlife, and other core Christian beliefs. I think I'm just going to be vague on those details, simply saying, "I believe I can interpret with my own judgement what makes me a good person, and I want to remain open-minded about the creation and purpose behind the universe." Then, I'll point out the good aspects I do agree with, like no stealing and killing and having compassion for others.

I hope this works out well, and that I continue to explore my relationship with Christianity in a thoughtful way.

Book Censorship in Schools

Describe a current events controversy you're interested in, and say where you think the stasis lies. Be sure to describe different aspects of the controversy so that you have to make an argument for stasis. Your blog title can just be the name of the controversy

As someone planning to be an author and an English teacher, I am very interested in the controversy surrounding book censorship in schools. Common examples include books removed from classroom study or suggested reading lists because they are deemed "inappropriate," often for sexual situations or profanity.

Those for removing certain books, often on a book-by-book basis, deem them inappropriate in some way for the targeted population, whether it is a middle or high school library or a particular English class. According to the American Library Association's compilation of the most challenged books, common reasons include "sexually explicit," "offensive language," "unsuited to age group," "violence," and "homosexuality." It should be noted that those who challenge these books are often not advocating for them to be banned entirely, but rather to be unavailable to an age group they deem impressionable.

Those who argue for the instruction and inclusion of these books--which are often modern classics or young adult novels--believe that teenagers are already exposed to these topics in their lives. Books that deal thoughtfully with serious subjects can help them understand and engage with the world around them and develop sympathy for those in tough situations.

Ultimately, the stasis of this disagreement lies with what is "appropriate" for adolescents and teenagers to be required or potentially required to read. Should teens be shielded from tough but real issues? Do they have the capacity to not blindly follow the risky behavior in these novels?

Best Campus Transportation: Bike or Skateboard?

At a large campus like IU can certainly seem overwhelming at first. Admittedly, it can be difficult to get cross-campus to your next class in less than 15 minutes. But in this quandary, two passionate factions have risen to solve this problem: the bikers and the skateboardists.  Which one is right for you? In my opinion, biking is the quickest and most convenient way to get around campus, because it is superior in terms of ease, security in storage, and multipurpose use.

First, it is much easier to ride across campus on a bike than skateboard. You will be carrying a backpack or laptop case with you on your way to campus that may be quite heavy if you are going to multiple classes. Skateboards are naturally unbalanced, and having to also propel them with the added weight of a backpack may take more time than necessary. Bikes, on the other hand, are balanced and much easier to ride with a backpack on to classes. (Skateboards, on the other hand, can still be used for fun or shorter distances around campus where you don't need a backpack.)

Secondly, it is securely store a bike on campus if you are concerned about this topic. The residence halls and buildings have bike racks to store your bike during class. Unlike skateboards, bikes can be locked up securely, so you can be sure your bike will not be stolen.

Lastly, bikes are great for multipurpose use. You can bike just a mile to get to the campus mall to pick up something at Target or visit the pet store. Some classes also require "service learning," where you must you provide or find transportation to a local area such as an elementary school. Bikes may be useful in some of these cases.

Indiana University-Bloomington supports the use of both bicycles and skateboards to get around campus. If you are concerned about ease of use with a heavy class load, security, and multipurpose applications, bikes are the best way to go.