Nonlistening

I think the biggest type of nonlistening I do is selective listening. As a student, it is really hard to hear everything in class, so you kind of train yourself to listen to important keywords and concepts. Another one that I have found myself in is pseudolistening. I find that this happens the most when a group of people are talking about something and I have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. I try and listen really hard in the hopes of connecting somewhere, but at this point I just do not want to seem rude and walk out of the conversation. 

Overcoming selective listening will be a challenge because it probably happens when we do not even realize it. Perhaps I can listen to the whole lecture in class and jot down key words instead of taking notes. If I listen to the whole lecture, at the end when I review the teacher’s notes, it will probably be more familiar. To overcome pseudolistening, I should learn to walk away before getting too involved and finding myself pretending to listen. If I feel the conversation has changed to an unknown topic, I should excuse myself and return to the conversation later on.

Concept from Chapter 6

All the concepts this week were very interesting, so it was hard to choose just one. However, I decided on selective listening because I think it is really relevant, particularly as a student. Selective listening happens when we zone in on certain parts of communication. It is hard to not engage in selective listening because there are so many things going on around us. Therefore, it is only natural that we pay attention to things that are relevant to us. I think as students, we are almost trained to be selective listeners because lectures provide so much information. When we take notes, we tune in to important parts because we cannot write down everything. We scan the information and note which ones are the most valid and valuable to future exams and reviews. The downside to selective listening is missing important information that we might have filtered out. It is hard to try to overcome this because we are always bombarded with more information that we can process and handle. When we are driving, we pay attention to the road, but certain words on the radio might catch our attention. When we are in class, we are furiously trying to write down everything the teacher says, so our ears pick up on key words we are looking out for.

Free Speech Museum

After visiting the Free Speech Museum’s Hate speech page, I learned that hate speech is primarily racist and anti-Semitic speech in the U.S, and those who engage in it would be such. It seems that regulating hate speech is somewhat hard to do, unless it falls under libel, obscenity, or fighting words. The problem with trying hate speech is that it often ties into the First Amendment right of freedom of speech.  Countries like Canada, Great Britain, and Germany have banned hate speech, but the debate continues on whether or not this infringes on the freedom of speech. Professor Catherine MacKinnon notes that the “principles of free speech and equality are at war in this country.” Unfortunately, I think this will always be a topic of heated debate. While I do not think hate speech is right or respectful in any way, I must also admit that it is hard to definitely define a line at what exactly constitutes freedom of speech. Can we truly say something is free, but include restrictions and exclusions? I would like to think that we are at a time in history where we can respect all people and disengage in hurtful words, but as we all know that is not always the case. The problem with censoring anything, is that there will always be opposition and vice versa. It is truly a difficult issue. I think the most important thing in reducing hate speech is fostering understanding and forming our own opinions afterwards. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but we should make sure that it is a valid opinion based on our own experiences, understanding, and learning, not those passed on from one group to another.

Metaphors for American Society

This topic reminds me of a discussion and activity I did in my Intercultural and Inequality Communications class. Our professor asked our team to come up with a metaphor to describe the diversity in our society. My team and I came up with the metaphor of a delicious combination pizza because it includes a multitude of toppings that come together to make a whole pie. A combination pizza can be different to a number of people, but the idea was that it retains its individuality while contributing to the completion of a recipe. While the metaphor may be unconventional, I think that it is similar in many ways to Jesse Jackson’s rainbow and quilt metaphor. All three emphasize the retaining of uniqueness and characteristics, but that it is also a part of a bigger picture. It can be put together in many different ways, leaving the possibilities endless.

While I think the metaphor of the melting pot worked for a time, I can see how it might be viewed negatively today. There have been discussions in school and even among my family and friends, how second-generation children seem out of touch with their roots and native culture, and they have become increasingly “Americanized”. The melting pot metaphor would certainly perpetuate this as it blends down cultures into one.

Concept from Week # 3

I found that the readings this week, again, were very interesting. The focus on languages this week definitely peeked my interest because I have always thought that we what we are able and not able to say somehow communicates more than we think. My favorite concept from this week though, was Engage in Dual Perspective. I liked that the book reminded us that to be an effective communicator, one has to “recognize another’s perspective and take it into account” (Wood, p. 112-113). I thought the book put it perfectly when it said dual perspective “requires honoring both our own point of view and another’s” (Wood, p. 113). I always try to keep this in mind when communicating with others. I have certainly encountered people with strong opinions, and although I may not always agree with them, I do my best to express my views while considering theirs at the same time. When I talk with others, it is not my intention to argue with anyone, in fact, I do not like heated debates. The book notes that to accommodate others, we do not have to stifle our own voice, which I think is very important. The point is to not be a passive or aggressive communicator, but to recognize that we all have diverse opinions.

What's it like as a 20-year-old?

For this post, I talked to my parents and grandparents because of the generations they represent to get an idea of what it was like when they were 20. I found that compared to 20 years old today, they came from a society with much stricter expectations. My parents and grandparents note that when they were younger, social activities were much more family oriented. They came from large households, so it was more likely that you would play with your siblings than go hang out with friends.  It was also inappropriate for unmarried women to be seen with a man without her parent’s permission. The male had to have intentions of marriage before correspondence was deemed appropriate. They also noted that children’s relationships with parents are much closer today. I consider myself pretty close with my parents and we laugh and make fun of each other. My parents note that it would have been rude to do such things with their parents. It was not appropriate for children to interact with their parents as if they were with their friends. My grandparents note that they had the strictest relationship with their parents. It was one out of a high regard for respect, so a certain protocol was expected.

My dad was the oldest male in his family, so as a 20-year-old he was fit enough to help out. He was expected to help his mom with the business and look after his brothers and sisters, all the while attending college. When my mom was 20, there was a lot of turmoil in her country, so she did not get to finish school. Rather, as the second oldest, she helped her mom keep the household running and looked after her younger brothers and sisters. When my grandfather was 20, he had already joined the army. This was the norm during his time as men typically entered some sort of law enforcement position. He was already married at this age and expected to provide for his wife. My grandmother already had two children by the time she was 20 because she married young. She notes that women of her time period were not expected to go to school and get educated. Instead, they married young, had kids, and kept the household running for the husband.

I can see that being a 20 year-old, 20 or 40 years ago is a lot different than today. My parents expect me to go to school and finish my education. As the oldest in my family, my parents expect that I help out when I can, but that school should be my number one priority. I do not have to worry about hanging out with friends or taking care of my little brother. There seems to be a lot more leniency in what is expected from someone at my age.

Race and Identity

Our text defines race as a, “primary aspect of personal identity” (Wood, p. 49). It seems to be a way to identify our heritage and background, to tell others where we came from. I personally think that race is not a useful way to classify people. I have heard arguments over the years about how race is just another obsessed way to label something for a sense of purpose and statistics. I took a class last semester about intercultural communications and structural inequality and it really made me think about race and identity. On the one hand, the idea of “race” seems to allow us an identify marker, to construct ourselves in relation to some group. But at the same time, I feel that “race” creates barriers to how we perceive ourselves and others. It sometimes seems that this concept alters how we perceive certain things, without us even realizing it. I think that in some cases, systems of classification create pre-programmed views in order to make sense of the world. 

I remember taking standardized tests in school and being asked to mark our race and ethnicity. I know that some of my friends were uncomfortable labeling themselves as one group over another. Some felt that their groups were not even properly represented. I think that the Census Bureau should allow people to check multiple races to define themselves. I can understand that for the purposes of statistics, it makes collecting information a lot easier if there are only a handful of groups to analyze, but I believe that our society is so diverse today that doing this would be pointless. Even if these statistics will make it easier to analyze, it will not be a true representation of our multicultural world.