So today I was reading the minutes from the last university senate meeting and I was reminded of an exchange that took place during the "open floor" item on the agenda, i.e., when anyone who has anything (important) to say that was not contained in the agenda can raise an issue that can be discussed or put on the table for future discussion.

At this last meeting it was brought up that the university is very highly-ranked for many of its outcomes and mission goals--research, aquisition of grants, teaching--but that in the category of "Doctoral studies" it is consistently ranked 10th or so in Poland. This fact did not provoke a discussion of what we could do to make our graduate studies better, or how to gather data from the doctoral students to find out what is lacking here that is present at other universities. It did not provoke a discussion of the flaws in the existing system that hinder young scientists from fulfilling their potential in these hallowed halls. What it *did* provoke was a short statement from the Rector of Students, followed by assurances from the doctoral students' representative, that we would try to find out what the criteria were for creating this ranking system so that we could pinpoint exactly what the committee was looking for and ensure our higher rank next year. This just makes me so deflated. The goal seems not to be an analysis of the actual feedback we got from doctoral students, but rather an analysis of the committee's standards to see just how we can adjust the data we give them so that they match. Ugh.

When I think about this I can't help but recall the feedback-hungry Koreans, who are eager to hear how they are failing so that they can change and improve.

The only time I ever am exposed to morning television is when I donate blood (only ever in the morning, and they have TV's set up to distract our attention while they drain us of vital fluid). So yesterday I watched a segment targeted at men about "how to wear colourful socks".

It is funny how I want R to admire me for everything anyone has ever admired me for. But he just admires me for the things he admires me for. Funny.

Wow, this has not been a very blog-heavy year so far.

But today one of my TA's said that the other TA had said that I was "cool", which, she explained, in this culture should be understood as the opposite of "girly", which, she assured me, is a very good thing.

I went to an LGBTQ workshop this morning. A few thoughts.

1. Key quote regarding terminology about how the majority treats the minority: "Traffic jams are to be tolerated; people are to be accepted and celebrated."
• This fits with W's dissertation research about "tolerance" of others not leading to anything good. People, stop thinking "tolerance" is a goal we should strive towards. It really isn't.
• As cheesy as it sounds, I really like the idea of celebrating people. I like it. So there.
2. I found the atmosphere, which was so supportive and inclusive and mindful of our individual unique experiences (the facilitator repeated quite a few times that we should "take care of ourselves" to make sure that what we are doing is authentic and feels good to us), to be a misrepresentation of actual interactions with people whom we might have to confront about homophobia/transphobia/etc. People do not respond with interest and an open heart when You tell them that what they just said or did is not cool. Even if You target their behavior and not their identity. They are resistant and they are quick to defend their own intent and dismiss the impact their behavior might have on others (especially when those others are absent). I think this workshop should have recognized that most contexts do not provide such security of expression.
• Regardless, I think people do not take care of themselves enough. People, take care of Yourselves. Mind Your own emotions and act accordingly.
3. I am going to write an email now to someone reacting more explicitly to a comment made by that someone yesterday that I reacted to but probably not explicitly enough to make that someone think about what I was reacting to.
4. When I am lecturing I usually limit my examples to family relationships that have nothing to do with romantic relationships. So, I use my brothers rather than "my husband/boyfriend/girlfriend" when I talk about communication or whatever. Partly this is due to the fact that I never have a romantic partner. Partly it is because I am aware that embracing my own heteronormativity in front of them would not be neutral to some students. But I am thinking about how to navigate these examples in a way that makes it clear that what I identify as is irrelevant, but also that what they identify as should be "celebrated".
5. I appreciated the way the guy emphasized that "identify as" is a subjectively more agentic term than "am". I buy that.

I was going to spend today writing about everyone else's awesomeness, but I have too much to do, too many awesome people to spend in-person time with, to actually write about it. Rest assured, I probably think You are awesome. If You are someone and would like to know why I think You are awesome, ask, and I'll articulate it. :-)

Today I'll write about my nieces. I haven’t really known them for very long, so I have less experience with their awesomeness than with other family members', but man, their awesomeness is sssoooooooooo monumental that it’s conspicuous. 

B is the sweetest thing on two legs. She is so free with smiles, and so willing to approach people, and come into contact. She is not anxious. She will make friends easily. She is open and spontaneous in her emotional communication. She loves stories, and remembers them well. Her memory in general is amazing. She is comfortable communicating in at least 2 languages. She yearns for knowledge, and will happily listen to lengthy explanations about complex issues, and then ask follow-up questions. She's a thinker. She has a clear, personal sense of aesthetics that drives her wardrobe decisions. Ha. 

Z, meanwhile, has a singularity of focus that I truly find astonishing. She will take on tasks that require fine-grained, meticulous movements, and pursue them until they are complete. Things I never would expect she could do, she does. And enjoys it. She has inner determination. She is tough. She is very aware of others' emotions, and is considerate of them. She is calm, mostly. She does not externalize her emotions as easily as her sister, but she communicates them in subtle, meaningful ways. She loves dancing and will sometimes spontaneously begin to sway and twirl, she's so graceful.

Their awesomeness as a unit should also be mentioned. Their amazing sync. They sound alike, and when they speak or sing or yell or move in unison, it’s like a single superawesome extrapowerful entity. Their love of and attunement to each other is wonderful.