Month: October 2018

What does Yoshino see as the problem and why is it problematic?  What solutions does he offer?

Covering is one of the major problems because people go through a lot and they get based of their skin color etc… which was on of the major problems

“Defining terms is an important part of academic writing” (Barrios 548). After reading Yoshino 538-547, locate a sentence or sentences where Yoshino defines his key terms:  covering, assimilation, and authenticity.  Quote from Yoshino, including the page number, and then analyze his strategy for defining each terms.  For example, in Language Matters at the end of the Yoshino reading, the editor of Emergingsuggests that Yoshino might use a dictionary definition, might cite an authority, or might offer an example (Barrios 548).  If not one of these, what other strategy does he use in his definition?

What Yashino says about assimilation is that “I recognize the value of assimilation, which is often necessary to fluid social interactions, to peaceful coexistence, and even dialogue through which difference is valued.” ( Yashino 540) What he is explaining is that people need to see the dark side of assimilation, so we can know what is going in the world today.

what Yashino expresss about covering is he says that it is race, sex, religion, etc.. “Everyone covers. To cover is to tone down a disfavored identity to fit into the mainstream. In our diverse society, all of us are outside the mainstream in some way… every reader of this book has covered, whether consciously or not, and sometimes at significant personal cost.”

 

 

 

No Prompt, so just stating important facts on the Yashino video

 

Kenji Yoshino describes the difference between passing and covering, and how companies will sometimes employ a myopic form of diversity inclusion that necessitates the abandonment of one’s identity. Too often, “diversity” means showing up to work sans one’s identity. This inauthenticity robs people of their sense of self. In order to define “authenticity,” Roosevelt wasn’t trying to pass as someone without a disability. He was simply hiding the part of himself he felt opened him up to judgement. Yoshino explains that we do the same thing in our own lives each and every day. As part of the “Uncovering Talent” study, 61% of people surveyed by Yoshino reported covering

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ozz_5Uy8VCX89MGhugZQZnakOMzZJecs

Where do you see stumbling blocks for readers who might want to listen to this writer, but may be offended or put off? How could the writer “soften” these stumbling blocks? Should they?

Maybe some of the stumbling blocks in this article was that she said her friend Gina wasn’t there anymore. “My friend Gina is dead. I had just talked to her that morning in art class. We laughed together, we sang together, we smiled together. We will never do that again.” This may be offending to some people in a way because it may be a little “too much” for the reader and make them un-easy. And also, the writer mentioned a name, and that make people feel offended if they know who was mentioned in the article. This is a very traumatizing moment for these kids at the school, so it may be hard for them to “soften” these stumbling blocks, but maybe in a way be less descriptive and don’t say names of the people who died in this fatal attack, but there aren’t much ways they can soften these stumbling blocks.

Conversation.wav

To extend your thinking about the issues you are writing about, write about a question that you can ask yourself about what you are saying in Paper 2. You might ask a question about what one of your sources means, about what the sources mean when you consider them together, or about what you meant when you wrote a particular sentence or sentences. Be sure to quote the text you are questioning. Then free write an answer to your question.

 

1. Why does Appiah talk about hate debate and arguing? I feel like Appiah expresses this because it is one of the biggest obstacles in conversation, this prevents conversation because very heated arguments can lead to friends breaking up etc.. back to my paper, the article everyone has an accent, People having accents can lead to arguments and leading arguments. in my paper i said “there was an event on social media that 2 people are speaking spanish and a person called the cops on them. you can’t have a conversation like that.

• In your blog post, write about who you are going to interview and what you want the interview to do.  You can use the post to make up your mind if you are considering more than one person.
• In your blog post, write 4-5 open-ended questions that you might use in the interview.

1. I am probably going to interview one of my roommates off  campus
2. Questions: What is the definition of conversation? what problems prevent conversation? Do you know anyone who writes about conversation? Is conversation between people always good, bad, or both?

 

Read all of Appiah’s “The Primacy of Practice.”  Become an expert on your section and post to share with others in your group.  For your section, your job is to understand and explain by looking up unfamiliar words, names, places etc. to be sure you’re clear about the terminology and references Appiah is using.  Your post should include a short summary, a link to a resource to explain a reference that Appiah makes, and a focus on what he’s saying about making a difference by talking and listening.  Here are examples from last semester.

What I am reading by Appiah is “Winners and Losers”, and when I was reading this the first thing that jumped out to me is abortion and gay marriage.  Appiah wraps up his example of disputes on abortion and gay marriage from the “Fighting for the Good” section by explaining how they divide those who share a society and government because of their strong appeal to emotion. Appiah then goes back to the idea of a shared government to bring up international human rights and the treaties (which are weaker laws) that we expect every nation on the earth to follow such as the outlaw of slavery. From my initial interpretation, I saw those with the most power who imposed the treaties as the “winners” of the situation and those enslaved who would lose their means of survival as the “losers” in the situation. This example was extremely confusing but I believe was included to show how telling someone what is right and wrong and thinking you are right in the situation without fully understanding their individual situation will possibly evoke a negative response. Appiah states “We make treaties enshrining these rights. And then we want their government to enforce them”(Appiah, 81) without realizing that this would change the balance of power between men and women which is an extremely long process. This passage gets deeper as Appiah talks about our societies gender habits in our culture that continue to show the attitudes of the old ways of life where men and woman were not treated as equals that are still prevalent to this day. Overall I think the overall argument Appiah tries to make is that there is a right and wrong way to communicate, and by making treaties about what is right and wrong and expecting them to be followed no questions asked makes our nation the “Losers” in Cosmopolitanism and the “Winners” are those who understands that “people are not easily shifted by reason”(Appiah, 82)

Read “She Ran From the Cut…” by Jina Moore and “The Art of Social Change” by Kwame Anthony Appiah in Blackboard Week 6

Annotate and write a blog post in response to this question: Where does conversation in either of the meanings Appiah gives us play a role in these social changes? Include both readings in your response.

In the first article I read, The Art of Social Change, they explained a type of conversation to start a social change, there main conversation method was having meetings and talking about ways to start a social movements. In this article,  a guy named John Macgowan, and he asked them to sign this treaty to abandon foot binding“…called a meeting of Christian women in Xiamen. He asked them to sign a pledge to abandon foot-binding. Nine women did. Eventually. Women joined the Quit-Footbinding Society in larger numbers, pledging not to bind the feet of their daughters and some choosing to undergo the often painful process of unbinding themselves. Then they were joined, in 1894, by the Unbound Foot Association, which the Confucian scholar and reformist leader Kang Youwei helped found. It eventually had more than 10,000 members.” This quote is explaining that in the first meeting, only 9 people showed, but then the number got to 10,000 people which is a big number, and it started a huge social movement. 

In the next article, She Ran From the Cut, a girl from Kenya named Nice Leng’ete tried to save and help people from cutting themselves in and around their villages, What she did is that she went village to village (different from the other article because this is going village to village, the past one was arranging a meeting) and tried to stop people from cutting themselves. “Ms. Leng’ete never forgot what her sister suffered, and as she grew up, she was determined to protect other Maasai girls. She started a program that goes village to village, collaborating with elders and girls to create a new rite of passage — without the cutting. In seven years, she has helped 15,000 girls avoid the cutting ritual. Her work mirrors national — and global — trends. Rates of female genital cutting worldwide have fallen 14 percent in the last 30 years. Here in Kenya, cases have fallen more than twice that fast.” She really helped people all over Kenya save themselves by not cutting themselves.

There can be different ways to start a conversation that impacts a social movement. In the first article, he arranged a meeting to get people together to start a social movement. in the second article, there was going village to village or house to house etc…, to try to help people with that persons idea for a social movement