i’m a what?

19 09 2003

dude. vileone is right. the rate-the-gender-of-your-language livejournal tool DOES think i’m a boy. 59/41, even. hey, antikate, i’m more of a boy than you!

and i use a lot of questions and non-linear (or at least not straightforward-in-their-progression) constructions, too. which might have nothing to do w/what these people are looking for… hmmm.

i wonder if there’s a correlation btw. how long you’ve been in school and how you score? like, the more edumukashun you’ve had, the more dead-white-men have influenced your prose? how curious.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

13 responses

22 09 2003
cheshirrrecat

“the more edumukashun you’ve had, the more dead-white-men have influenced your prose?”
those bastards! i never thought about that! (leave it to you, madame doctoral student, to think of that!)
im more of a boy than you ;p

22 09 2003
tyra

now, now. probably almost NONE of them were bastards. bastards had no social standing, so they didn’t get patrons and publication. and we probably really shouldn’t blame the dead white men themselves. they were just lying around being creative and articulate and doing the best they could to live useful lives since the women were at home having fascinating parlour-meetings that the men weren’t invited to. 🙂

22 09 2003
cheshirrrecat

alright there, ms. being-fair…. ;}

22 09 2003
tyra

i’m just thinking if we had the little scraps of paper the women were writing recipes and love-notes and parlour-poetry on, they’d probably be a LOT more entertaining. and we’d all have different prose to boot! 🙂

22 09 2003
cheshirrrecat

true–and what an interesting thought/project that could be! 🙂

22 09 2003
tyra

see, if i were still in “english,” i could make a thesis of it. but that’s a lit. project. they do that over in that big, cool, tall building w/great windows that i’m not in. >sigh< i'd have to analyze their rhetorical imitations of newspaper articles or something… couldn't do anything w/their POETRY.
i’ll just teach the freshmen. if they ever let me have them back… >sigh<

23 09 2003
cheshirrrecat

so… what is it exactly that you are in? im confuddled–i thought it was “english.” i think you should take whatever classes have the coolest buildings with the most windows. 🙂

23 09 2003
tyra

yeah, i’m on the lookout for good english classes, hoping for one of those rooms… they’re big rooms, though, and grad. classes are usually tiny, so i’m not holding my breath.
“composition and cultural rhetoric” is the name of this particular program. others say comp/rhet in some form or another and leave “cultural” out of it. basically that means we study writing, the field of teaching writing, the ways people use words and systems of words to communicate–the writing part of english rather than the reading part.
the reading part is left in the english department, where the focus is on literature, literary criticism, creative writing (b/c that’s creating literature).
apparently english departments have had ugly fights since the dawn of time about funding and faculty and all things along the split of writing people vs. lit people, and so syracuse and a few other schools have simplified the issue by seperating the departments.
my masters was in english. b/c at tech it was all one department. i took a comp class (they only offered one) and wrote my thesis in comp and so applied to comp programs–some in english departments and some freestanding. the one i got into is of the latter kind.
so i had to read and learn a lot of literature in my master’s program, and now i’ll never have to read literature again. which is kind of depressing, b/c sometimes i like literature, and kind of freeing, b/c a lot of the literature they wanted me to like was boring and stodgy and awful, and i’d rather read sci-fi/fantasy, which only a very few literary geeks (and sometimes i wish i’d thrown my lot in w/them instead!) know how to take seriously.
does that make more sense now?

23 09 2003
cheshirrrecat

yes’m it does–thank you 🙂 i had no idea one could break “english” down so far. its almost philosophical. sheesh! regardless, im impressed 🙂

23 09 2003
tyra

i can philomosophicalize anything you want me to, baby. it’s what they train me for!
and yes, there’s a LOT of philosophy involved. maybe it’s all philosophy. or maybe it ought to be. maybe everything ought to be, really… if we thought more about what we believed things meant, and then acted on those understandings, rather than trying to accumulate knowledge about how things work NOW and then make money off that knowledge… well, the world would be a very different place indeed.

23 09 2003
cheshirrrecat

yes, yes it would. but then again, youre philosophizing again….. ;}

22 09 2003
susanmarie

That was my thought,too…that what is valued as “male” in this study is assertive prose…

22 09 2003
tyra

did it tell you you were a boy too?
i don’t know anyone it’s tested as “female”–closest we’ve come is my friend julie who got a flat 50/50.
the real shortcoming of the device is that, b/c it analyzes type, it can’t tell whether or not all us girls are out here drawing hearts to dot our “i”s. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: