(TRIGGER WARNING)

Dear friends,

As has become my custom, I would like to introduce this web event with a short description of my motives and hopes.  I want to tell you how this web event came to be (a long story in this case), what I hope to communicate through this web event, and what future directions are possible.

            Allow me to start at the beginning.  In the past few weeks, I have found myself increasingly aggravated, confused, and above all inspired.  My aggravation stems largely from Haverford’s policies regarding rape and sexual assault, which seem to become more and more inadequate the more that I learn about them (for anyone who hasn’t already done so, I strongly recommend reading AmyMay’s web event Biological Discourse and Rape Culture at Haverford College and jmorgant’s web event “Consent is Sexy” at Haverford: Not Yet).  While my belief that the Haverford policies are insufficient was immediately strong and clear, I grew confused about how to effect change.  I pondered a variety of questions, including:

I was very surprised by what this course had to offer.  I was looking forward to it, but I assumed that it would be similar to all the other gender and sexuality courses I have taken at Bryn Mawr.  This course was much more interactive than i could have participated.  Before this class I did not know what Serendip was and did not have the opportunity in any of my other classes to reflect on class after it had already finished.  I really appreciated that because I am not the most vocal in class, and sometimes I need to opportunity to talk and think things out with people before I say them in a public forum.  Sometimes I would wait most of the week before posting on Serendip because I liked to see if there was anything I would want to comment instead of starting my own post.  There were a few people in the class who I talked with outside of class about a lot of the course material.  Usually we would come up with a few ideas and one of us would post and the others would comment.  This is one of the few classes where I have had so much discussion about the course after class was already over.

This was possibly the most insightful, honest, awesome way to wrap up the semester. I feel as though it really mirrored my experiences in this ESem and was really happy to have been a part of it. While each of us had the opportunity to work with our groups to convey in a short, 10-minute presentation what it is that we wanted to say about class and education, I think this series of final presentations went above and beyond that goal. I think rather than tying things up neatly at the end, we left it in the spirit of our ESem, in a continuing dialog, a continuing thought process, and a continuing relationship with all the students in this class. I am really grateful for having been a part of it all and I think we really got the chance to see many talents of our peers from slam poetry to rap music videos to creative games and presentations, while bringing more ideas of class to the foreground. I really wanted to say thanks to the class and to Jody and Anne for this awesome opportunity and I hope that we continue this dialog and awareness of class on campus.

When I look back at this course over the span of the semester, I view the Gen/Sex class not as a linear progression and building of thought, but as a diffused and (of course) diffracted set of ideas that have significantly shifted the ways in which I see and interact with the world. Even during this finals week, I was struck by the influence PPPPP has had on my writing and my work; as I studied for my History of Western Civilization final, for instance, I increasingly saw the words “entangled” and “diffraction” in my notes. I view history and literature (my two academic fields) differently, as well as the implications and potentials of my inter-personal relationships.

However diffused of an influence the theory in this course has had on me, I can still track my linear, temporal progress through my web postings. In my first posting, I wrote that one of the activities we had conducted the week prior “forced me to consider my position both in the classroom and outside of it, as a student and as an activist.” I was frustrated by the disconnect between my behavior inside and outside class, and the standards to which I was being held in both areas. I had hope that these different lives of mine could converge; I wrote that “I realize that I will be a better student and a better activist when I can synthesize critical thinking and unconstrained action. So hopefully, my visions for the future will (in the future) be a lot less timid.”

            I have thoroughly enjoyed this course. When I decided to take the class I only did so as a bit of an adventure. I mean, I had never taken the course and after taking Gender & Technology I was thirsty for more knowledge on gender. I honestly didn’t have much of an expectation entering this class, as I wasn’t quite sure what we would be doing. All I know is it was a good place to start and see where the movement would take me.

Last Friday (December 9th) I posted an opinion piece on the napkin notes and MTVu discussion that’s been happening in Erdman Dining Hall for the past few weeks. When I wrote it, I knew it would be public – that was part of the assignment for our class. However, I didn’t realize how quickly it would spread to be a topic of discussion. Even as we speak the MTVu situation is growing more and more complicated.

On Wednesday night (December 14th), I spent three hours talking to some friends about gender, class, and different appreciations for body types based on race and culture. I can’t possibly capture everything that was said, but one aspect that I felt was very important to our discussions of objectification and the television was who is criticizing the TV’s presence, and why. 

Disruption in the Interpretation of Embodied Symbols

Final Web Event

Assumptions are made about individuals through the expression and interpretation of embodied acts and body language is the conduit for social meaning.  The social meaning behind bodily acts are disrupted when the movement itself is not completely controlled by the individual.  Disability, gender, and communication are all entangled in a web of perception, symbolism, and agency.  This web of entanglement causes people to not see an action for as it was intended and make assumptions about a person on their limited controls on bodily action.  Interpretations of bodily actions are often misunderstood when an individual is not completely able bodied.

In my second web event I questioned Bryn Mawr Colleges admission policy regarding transgender students. I wrote a mock scenario in which a prospective transwoman has a discussion with her mother about wanting to attend Bryn Mawr. In preparation for this project I talked to a few people in administrative positions at the College and was faced with requests at remaining anonymous in their answers. Because of the lack of receiving answers to my questions, I posed my web event as a question. Are transwoman allowed to apply to and attend Bryn Mawr College?

In my third web event, I traced the history of the College in regards to its mission and history of transgender topics. There have been several web events posted by Bryn Mawr students on Serendip, which were very informative and useful in my own movement towards gaining more knowledge of how to build a right relationship between Bryn Mawr College and transgender students. In this web event my focus switched from not only transwomen, but also transmen. I also used information on the Transgender Task Force, which was created in 2007. I noted that President McAuliffe approved the recommendations made by the task force in 2009.

Now, where do I go next? I’ve noted what I believe is Bryn Mawr’s role in the 21st century regarding transgender students. However, I don’t have enough facts. I lack information…knowledge…