Hello #soctwitter & etc, if you're planning a first-day-of-class (or etc) introductions, and you want to be inclusive of trans/non-binary folks, can I suggest (as a trans professor with a lot of trans & non-binary students) including pronouns as *optional* rather than required?
+
Pronouns in go-rounds & on name-tags & etc are great in many ways, bc they signal "we don't assume anyone's gender identity/pronouns here" and also "we're trying to be inclusive of trans & non-binary people."
BUT they're also deeply uncomfortable for anyone not ready to share.
I would have hated hated hated them when I was a not-yet-out-as-trans college student, and when I've made pronoun-sharing optional & explained why, I've gotten a lot of appreciation from my trans & NB students.
I also dislike them now, though I appreciate the intent a lot.
What I do instead is say A) have students write down all their important info on a card, including pronouns if they want to share, + ask them to answer some ice-breaker type questions B) ask them to say name, class year, pronoun *if they want* and one other thing they wrote down.
I come out as trans on the first day in every class I teach, and when we get to them introducing themselves I tell them that pronouns are optional because I would have hated to have to do it.
If I have to be more explicit about why I don't like mandatory pronoun sharing, it's bc A) it reifies the idea that the most important thing to know about someone is their gender and B) collapses their gender down to just do they use the pronoun you expect/think matches them.
IMO (but it'll vary by your institution's culture & your teaching style) the best approach is probably to say something like "I'd like to invite everyone to say their name and, if you feel like sharing, also the pronouns they'd like everyone to use for them.
+
"I ask include pronouns because not everyone uses the ones others might guess based on their appearance, and I want us to be as respectful as possible of each other. But it's fine to just give your name, too; then if we need pronouns for you we'll probably just use 'they.'"
(but really I hardly ever actually refer to a student in the 3rd person in class, in part because even in relatively small classes I'm rarely 100% sure I remember everyone's pronoun in the moment. I just refer to students by their names or address them in the 2nd person.)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#soctwitter & #poliscitwitter - if you're teaching something of mine this fall, I will very happily Zoom into your class (or come in person if possible). I try to make most things I write, and all my speaking, accessible to & engaging for undergrads & everyone else. Some ideas:
I would LOVE it if folks teaching American Politics, Campaigns & Elections, Political Sociology & etc use some or all of Producing Politics. It's got:
- an accessible overview of what we know about campaign effects (ch 1)
- discussion inequalities in pol participation (all thru)+
- insights into what campaigns actually do & what it's like to be on one (all thru, but especially ch 2)
- discussion of the campaign staff "revolving door" & of where they go outside campaigns (ch 6)
& lots more, in a short affordable book. bit.ly/ProducingPolit…
Hello students on the job market: many of your advisors don't think liberal arts colleges are good jobs for people who care about research. I'm here to tell you they can be GREAT for research, plus they also reward you for caring about teaching and your students.
As with so many things, there's at least as much variation within types (R1, R2, SLAC, whatever else) as between them. I've only worked at one SLAC but I have a pretty good sense of at least one other where I got an offer. I've never been a prof ar an R1 but went to one.
Course load, startup funds, and sabbatical policies all make a huge difference in your ability to do research. I am at one of the nicest/richest SLACs, not all are like mine of course, but many are similar in some ways.
I will write something longer & better argued later, but here's the thing: the only way to fight the ... it's not really even "creeping" fascism, I think it's "surging" fascism that we're seeing, is by drawing LOTS of people together to oppose it, from direct action to voting.
and the way you draw people together & get them to do stuff is not by yelling at them that the stuff they're doing already is wrong. This cartoon roughly encapsulates my political philosophy/theory of change
All the evidence from studies of mobilization & persuasion (and also from decades of experience from grassroots & union organizers of various sorts) says that the way you bring people into your rope-pulling, whether that's a party or a movement or a union, is by connecting w/them
Applies also to political analyses - so much
"OMG can you believe how BAD [pundit/candidate/politician/law/policy] is" when often that [...] is only very slightly to the left or right [or another directions] of the person critiquing it. Which doesn't mean they shouldn't critique
... but those critiques are for one or two audiences (fellow people in the same political space, and/or the people with the "bad" [...]). Most people are distant from that political location - bc they're unengaged or because they're much further to one side -
Oof the overt unvarnished homophobia coming from the right these days... I had imagined we were somehow past that but I guess the lessons in @louise_seamster & @victorerikray's "Against Teleology" apply to gender & sexuality along with race. doi.org/10.1177/073527…
Note 1: homophobia & transphobia (and misogyny too); on top of their increasingly overt racism etc.
Note 2: I mean, on some level I knew that already, of course social progress as I would define it isn't natural or automatic or irreversible. But there was a period where I really thought we (the queers & our friends) had "won" & I could relax a bit about this stuff.
Wow this makes me not like this guy. Good closing thought: "a person could fight so long to move ideas out of the margins that he could lose sight of the moment when they had finally made it close to the center." newyorker.com/culture/person…
I'm so glad I'm part of disciplines he doesn't consider sufficiently stylish. While I also appreciate a number of books & authors he's published.
A sociologist friend points out that he's been very helpful to many scholars, e.g. doing panels on book publishing for under-represented faculty, was encouraging to them directly, etc. So like all portraits the essay isn't the whole picture.