When it Stops Being “Accidental” Racism…

Brad Paisley and LL Cool J recently collaborated on a song called “Accidental Racist”. If you haven’t heard the song, go check it out or at least read the lyrics here.

The basic premise is a “proud rebel son” who wants to explain that his Confederate flag t-shirt isn’t meant to be racist.

To the man that waited on me at the Starbucks down on Main,

I hope you understand

When I put on that t-shirt,

the only thing I meant to say is I’m a Skynyrd fan

The red flag on my chest somehow is like the

elephant in the corner of the south

And I just walked him right in the room

Just a proud rebel son with an ‘ol can of worms

Lookin’ like I got a lot to learn but from my point of view

So, here’s the deal. If I can say I don’t know the history of the confederate flag, I may be able to say I am an “accidental” racist. If I don’t understand it symbolizes the Confederacy, a group of states who fought a long and deadly war to maintain ownership over human beings, I can claim the “accidental” racist argument. If I am completely ignorant of this basic tenet of United States history, I get a pass and can say I’m an “accidental” racist. But only once. Because once we’ve had this conversation, I am no longer exempt. The argument that it stands for Lynyrd Skynyrd or southern pride or anything else, is deeply flawed. When someone told me it’s racist and I made a choice to say “huh…well, I think I’ll wear it anyway” I stopped being able to put the modifier “accidental” in front of the word racist.

Communication is a two-way street. It isn’t just about what a person means, it’s about others’ interpretations of what he/she means. And we are all accountable for the results of our words and actions, not just the intent. If I hit someone or something with my car, I may not have intended to do it. It doesn’t mean I’m not responsible for making things right. And if I willingly do something with the knowledge it may cause harm, it’s not an accident.

We all have to take responsibility for our words and our actions. No more excuses. No more “but I didn’t mean it”. No more. We have to do better.

Considering the Culture of Power in the Interview Process – Language

Last week I wrote two posts about the culture of power in higher education. The second (Considering the Culture of Power in the Interview Process – Attire) is the first of what I intend to be a short series about how we perpetuate systems of power and privilege in the interview process. Today I’m focusing on language.

Recently I was part of a mock interview program. We provided an opportunity for our undergraduate and graduate students who will be pursuing careers in higher education to do practice interviews with a variety of professionals from across campus. (If you’re interested in reading more about this process, check it out here.) As one student was leaving the interview room, he kind of laughed awkwardly and said “I guess dorm is a bad word…if I only learned one thing, I learned it’s called a residence hall.”

My mind was off and racing with a variety of thoughts about this.

1. I felt bad for the student, who seemed embarrassed by the situation.
2. I was glad someone had talked to him, because in our profession using a word like “dorm” (or cafeteria, or basement, or freshman) can truly affect your standing in some search processes. Better he learn in mock interviews than in the real thing.
3. I contemplated why we say we don’t use the word dorm, and how it serves as a litmus test for experience and a way to exclude some people and privilege others.

When I talk with people about the interview process, I always make sure to point out mistakes are inevitable. In the alphabet soup of RAs/CAs, Student Centers and Student Unions, Conduct Resolution and Rights and Responsibilities and Judicial Affairs; who can consistently keep it all straight? You do your best to remember which school uses what titles, and when you mix it up you keep going. If you interrupt someone to correct them, what are you really accomplishing? Have you significantly impacted their concept of a particular aspect of the university, or have you just embarrassed them? Are they going to learn and appreciate the nuance, or will they just feel defensive and annoyed? Have you missed out on the meaning of what they were saying because you wanted to point out the difference between the “Dirty Old Room of Mine” and a community where students live and learn?

In my opinion, it’s unfortunate we (as a profession) still have such a hangup about this. Do I think words have power? Yes. Do I think words can create lasting images and conjure up powerful memories? Yes. Do I think it’s important for professionals to be intentional about the language they choose? Yes. Do I think there are appropriate ways to have conversations with (certain) people about the language and the meaning behind it? Yes. Do I think it is my personal obligation to correct anyone who uses terms we don’t like, regardless of if they are a family member, prospective student, alumnus, or candidate? Nope.

In an interview setting, we can’t evaluate a candidate’s aptitude and potential based on their knowledge and use of coded language. If a candidate says “dorm”, it might be they have worked on a campus where this isn’t punishable with hot pokers. Perhaps they are nervous and slipped up. Maybe they don’t work in housing but have a wealth of related experiences and transferable skills. Can we say they don’t understand a modern concept of housing, or they don’t value the living learning experiences that can happen outside of the classroom, or they wouldn’t appropriately represent our department to outside constituents? I think it’s a stretch. I think at best we can say that in the particular instance they used the word dorm, and that’s about all we know from that isolated part of the interaction.

Since I’m writing about social justice, I think it’s also worth considering the way we evaluate candidates based on their use of language related to identity. Again, I think language is important and powerful. I would always encourage people to use people-first language (like saying “a student with autism” rather than “an autistic student”) and be as inclusive and celebratory of differences as possible. However, language is fluid and dynamic and tricky. While we should always strive to be sensitive with our own language, what judgments can we really make about others based on the language they use? If a candidate uses a word which we would not personally choose, does this mean they are wrong? Do they have experiences in contexts where this language would be considered perfectly appropriate? Is it simply a lack of exposure or education in a particular area? Certain types of language are valued over others, and knowing how to use language to fit a situation is a privilege. You have to dig a little deeper to determine if it’s an indication of conflicting values, rather than the result of privileges they have not yet been afforded.

Considering the Culture of Power in the Interview Process – Attire

Previously I wrote about how systems of power are perpetuated through writing (and our assessment of writing based on our understanding of what is “proper”). It’s hard for me to think about power in higher education without reflecting on the interview process. The Placement Exchange is going on as I write in Orlando, and soon after schools will bring candidates to their campuses for the next step in the interview and hiring process. For many of us, this is an annual ritual. We have recruitment and selection down to a science. So I’m going to take a few posts to consider recruitment routines and processes.

To start, below are five aspects of power Lisa Delpit outlines in her book, Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom (p.24).

1. Issues of power are enacted in classrooms. For the purpose of this post, we’ll expand classrooms to mean educational settings, and include interviews for graduate assistantships and professional positions.
2. There are codes or rules for participating in power; that is, there is a “culture of power.”
3. The rules of the culture of power are a reflection of the rules of the culture of those who have power.
4. If you are not already a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier.
5. Those with power are frequently least aware of – or least willing to acknowledge – its existence. Those with less power are often most aware of its existence.

There have been many conversations about interview attire on #sachat and, I’m confident, in other venues. The opposing viewpoints seem to be: 1) “Professional” attire is based on privilege. Interview clothes are expensive, and there may be people who are penalized because they can’t afford to meet expectations or choose not to for a variety of reasons (gender expression, culture, ability, etc.). 2) “Professional” attire is an expectation. If we don’t clearly communicate this to students and new professionals, we are doing them a disservice and may ultimately impede their career.

I agree with both perspectives, and I don’t think they necessarily come from opposite sides of the spectrum. Both viewpoints represent people who care about student affairs as a profession, and the individuals who aspire to work in the field. For me, the difference is context. When I’m talking with students who are preparing for their search processes, I reflect on Delpit’s fourth aspect of power. I can explain the system to the student, let her know I may not agree with it, but share that she may be judged by others based on her appearance. I can encourage him to consider interview attire as a way we separate people who share our culture and expectations from those who don’t, to think about whether or not he thinks it’s a valid measure of a person’s ability to be successful, and to revisit these ideas down the road when he is in the position to make hiring recommendations. If the people excluded from the culture of power never get hired for the positions, the status quo can never really change. We have to work to help students and professionals navigate these systems, without convincing them to accept the system and continue the cycle.

Around colleagues, I think about aspect #5. Perhaps they haven’t thought of attire as a function of privilege. By having these conversations we can disrupt the “normal routine” and spark some reflection and critical thinking about our processes. One thing I appreciate about our community is we have conversations like the one on #sachat. But reducing discussions to a simple issue of money brings about solutions like going to thrift shops, looking for deals, borrowing clothes from colleagues, etc. It ignores issues of comfort and authenticity, of gender expression, of the value of different cultures and how these cultures are represented by the clothes we choose. It overlooks the problem of discounting someone, not based on their skills and dispositions, but based on how they look.

Telling candidates “The system is biased. Your appearance isn’t a reflection of your abilities. Wear whatever you want!” isn’t going to help them succeed in today’s job market. Accepting standards of dress without question as indications a person is “professional”, “committed”, and “serious about the interview process and his/her career”; perpetuates a system of privilege and discrimination. Fortunately, by having intentional conversations with both candidates and employers, we can begin to interrupt the system while still helping those who would be excluded from the culture of power.

White Privilege/Write Privilege

I haven’t blogged in a while. I’ve been doing a lot of writing – for a class I’m taking, for work projects, etc. – I just haven’t been blogging. The class I’m taking is Education and Culture, and we’ve read some really great books and articles so far. I love being in the classroom, and I particularly love the way this instructor challenges us to critically think and reflect. I’m getting so much out of it, I thought I would share some of my reflections. This post is a modified version of a reflection paper I wrote for class. The assignment was to reflect on our own experiences with privilege. For a great introduction to privilege, check out White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack by Peggy McIntosh.

In reflecting upon my own experiences with privilege, I continue to return to the subject of writing skills. There are many ways dominant groups discredit subordinated groups, but judging someone based on his/her writing ability seems to be subtle, pervasive, and (on the surface) justifiable. I’ve been told I write well, and I always thought of this as a combination of hard work, strong education, and natural talent. Over time I’ve come to question how much “hard work” ever really factored into this, and the combination of education and talent probably has more to do with privilege I’ve absently carried with me since I was very young.

Reflecting on my own role in perpetuating these systems, I think about when I served as a Hall Director. In this role, I was responsible for hiring, supervising, and evaluating student employees: office assistants, desk assistants, and resident assistants (RAs). Students in each of these positions were required to write as part of their job responsibilities. RAs and desk assistants write incident reports, office assistants take notes and assist with other clerical tasks as needed, and all three are expected to effectively communicate via email. Because writing was a part of each position, it seemed reasonable to assess a candidate’s writing skills during the application phase. I can remember discarding any number of applications based on my immediate reaction to the writing. Without speaking to these candidates or assessing any of their other skills, I determined they would not be successful in this role. Often, I made judgments based on the style and structure without even focusing on the content of the application. Many of these students were in their first semester or year at SIU, so their writing skills were a product of their previous education, which varies much more from person to person than the education they are provided once they arrive on our campus. I remember wondering “Why isn’t “proper English” important to these students? Why don’t they know to put their best foot forward on a job application? Is it laziness? Do they just not care? If they only put a little time into editing the application, I’m sure they would have done better. They just don’t pay attention to details.” I may have occasionally placed blame on the school systems, but I don’t recall ever shifting the focus enough to genuinely consider the student for the position. And I never questioned why “my way” of writing is correct and this student’s way of writing is not.

I have considered myself an advocate for diversity and social justice for a long time, and I intentionally hired (relatively) diverse staffs of RAs and student employees. I remember having ongoing challenges with students of color who submitted reports and paperwork in a manner I deemed unacceptable. Only recently have I begun to consider how my own privilege shaped my supervision of these students. I often returned reports and asked the student to re-write them. Sometimes I included edits and feedback; sometimes I just assumed they would know what was wrong (if only they were more careful and attentive to details). I remember telling students to try reading the report out loud, because if they heard it they would realize it didn’t “sound right”. All this is based on the underlying assumption the knowledge was there, and the problem was a deficit of effort. I don’t think I ever considered how not just my schooling, but also my home life, shaped the way I speak and write. I was privileged to grow up in a household where everyone spoke a dialect normalized and accepted by society. I grew up in a household where English was the only language spoken. Regardless of any amount of time or hard work, my ability to conform to the verbal standards of most academic institutions was formed by the environment where I spent most of my time. I also wonder now about the emotional impact on those staff members. How could any of them develop self-efficacy while constantly being asked to re-do tasks and receiving negative (albeit constructive) feedback?

In addition to abilities, there are a lot of coded “rules” when it comes to written and spoken language. Dominant groups understand the rules, because they have been raised with them. Because I speak and write using a commonly accepted dialect and vocabulary, I don’t have to change much in order to follow the rules. I may adopt a slightly more formal tone in professional or academic situations, but generally I don’t have to worry about it too much. If I slip out of the formal tone, most people probably won’t notice. As a member of the SIU Carbondale Class of 2016 Facebook group, I often read student comments reflecting the privilege of those who speak and write in an accepted way, and demeaning or discrediting those students who speak and write differently. There does not seem to be an understanding or appreciation for the use of Facebook as an extremely casual and informal medium. Or, in some contexts, certain types of informal language are accepted (and thereby ignored) versus other types which are openly criticized. It’s interesting (and at times, heartbreaking) to read the hurtful things students will say when they are voicing opinions from behind a computer screen, to an audience of people they mostly don’t know. While I don’t think most students would walk up to one of their peers and say “You never should have been accepted here” or “You are the problem with SIU”, many of them will write these things on Facebook with seemingly little consideration for the person on the receiving end.

Attending an institution of higher learning is by nature a privilege. As a “university of access”, SIU opens its doors to students who may not be able to attend other institutions in the state. However, providing access does not inherently mean we provide students with a meaningful opportunity to succeed, any more than providing a ramp ensures a student who uses a wheelchair will be able to navigate the building. If we as an institution want to truly promote the success of all our students, we have to examine the way privilege affects our population, even privilege masked as talent. As educators, how can we critically examine and affect the way constructs like writing perpetuate systems of privilege and exclusivity?

Readings that influenced this post include:

Delpit, Lisa (2006). Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York, NY: The New Press.

Johnson, Allan G. (2006). Privilege, Power, and Difference (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Sensoy, Ozlem and DiAngelo, Robin. (2012). Is Everyone Really Equal?: An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Masculinity & Violence

A good friend of mine brought up the issue of people being desensitized to violence because of the presence of violence in so much of our culture (music, television, movies, video games), and how she does not believe that’s the issue. While I agree with several points she makes in her post, I wanted to provide another (additional, not necessarily counter) perspective. To avoid hijacking her Facebook page, I decided to go ahead and write a blog post about it. So, here you go!

I don’t believe we can bring up the issue of violence in society (and our desensitization to it) without incorporating a discussion about masculinity and how we (society) raise boys into men. My friend is absolutely right that her two daughters are “compassionate, sympathetic, and can have great empathy”. She’s also correct that this is not a result of them having been sheltered from violence their entire lives. However, as girls, her two daughters have been raised with a different set of standards and ideals.

Over time we have come to recognize the damaging effects of gendered language and stereotypes on women. The world has changed and we now embrace tomboys, female athletes, and women who stand up for themselves. There have been women in space, women in the Cabinet, and women on the Supreme Court. We tell girls they can be anything they want and for the most part, without criticism. Many women are lauded and praised for aiming outside of traditionally “feminine” roles. I’m not saying women don’t still face plenty of discrimination and bias, but we can at least openly acknowledge and talk about the issues and generally agree it’s a problem. We don’t have the same conversations about gendered language and stereotypes about men.

“Real men” don’t cry, or get upset, or talk about things that are bothering them. Men who do have their very masculinity questioned – “Stop being a whiny b*tch.” “Man up.” “Don’t be such a girl.” (There are inherent problems in associating negative characteristics with women, but that’s a topic for another post.) We don’t teach boys to work through their feelings and express them in a healthy manner. Boys are taught to stand up for themselves (even to the degree of violence). Boys are taught not to snitch (preventing adults from intervening in situations where violence may result). Praise is given for being tough, which in many cases means not demonstrating emotion at all. Check out 6 Ways To Talk To Your Son About Male Violence and Healthy Masculinity for a great post about this topic.

In men, we value quick, decisive responses to situations. We value action over thought and consideration. Most violent video games feed into this; successful players respond instinctively. They aren’t as much about thinking through scenarios as they are about responding to stimuli. After long periods of rote training in the “stimulus-response, stimulus-response” pattern, how can we break that cycle and insert periods of thought and feeling before the ingrained response takes over?

We acknowledge girls are more likely to consider careers in traditionally male-dominated fields (such as science, technology, engineering, mathematics) when they are exposed to female examples, both in their lives and in the media. Why then, can we not connect that boys are more likely to exhibit compassion, peaceful conflict resolution, and empathy if they are presented with male examples, both in their lives and in the media? Movies and TV have come a long way in showing women in career roles, but do we see men in parenting or maternal roles? I’m not talking about the slapstick caricature dads who muddle through – I’m talking about real dads. Dads who talk to their kids, who nurture them, who don’t threaten violence in response to conflict or bad behavior. Men who treat women, and other men, with love and respect. Men who are real about their own feelings, and encourage their kids to express their feelings in safe and healthy ways. Where are those male characters?

While shootings make the biggest headlines, the incidence of violence is far more widespread and far more insidious. We have all been exposed to it in one way or another. Gun violence, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, road rage, physical fights, and then there are the subtle incidents of violence, the ones we don’t necessarily identify as violence, but those incidents that contribute to the desensitization of civility and peaceful conflict management: a glass gets thrown against the wall, someone’s home is vandalized with hate speech, a fist goes through a wall, an online post laced with threats, yelling, name calling, even a lot of jokes. We don’t encourage boys to talk about things that make them feel uncomfortable, or scared, or angry, or sad. So how can we expect them to know what to do with those feelings?

I don’t believe shootings like last week’s tragedy in Sandy Hook happen only because of violence in the media. However, I think violent images in the media are a symptom of a larger issue with our culture, what we expect from men, and what men believe is expected of them. Media plays a subtle yet significant role in shaping our ideals, morals, and instincts. If we don’t stop to critically think about what we’re consciously and unconsciously taking in, how can we ever hope to make change in the world?

What I’ve Learned from Supervisors: A Reflection on Boss’s Day

It’s been a while since I blogged…have to admit, Meghan Hembrough blogging was a bit of a kick in the pants to get going again…

October 16 is Boss’s Day, and I’ve been doing quite a bit of reflecting today. I’ve been fortunate to have some amazing supervisors in the past, and I wanted to take this opportunity to thank them and share some of the lessons I’ve learned from them.

Barbara Carraway – Barbara hired me to be an Assistant Resident Advisor at Bradley. As someone who currently works in higher education, this is where my career path really began. Babs (calling her Babs is a privilege of being a Bradley alumna) was always quite fond of saying that she could be a “shoulder to cry on or a kick in the pants” (she didn’t always say pants), depending on what you needed. The trick to this is that she got to decide what you needed. You didn’t always get what you wanted, but you usually got what was best for you. As Barbara looks to retire, I’m glad I can continue her legacy of providing the appropriate balance of compassion and accountability.

Mike Murphy – It’s hard to pinpoint the best lesson I ever learned from Murph. Earlier this year Murph was diagnosed with lung cancer, and it’s hard to believe he left us this past June. I’ve spent a lot of time this year reflecting on Murph. One of my favorite memories of Murph was the day he hired me to oversee the student work crew. I remember saying to him that I didn’t have any experience with work crew and didn’t think I could do the job. His response “It’s not brain surgery, Kiddo – it’s paint. I’m pretty sure you can handle it.” In his own way, Murph was really one of the first feminists in my life – pushing me to step outside of the box I had created for myself. I can’t talk about lessons I learned from Murph without mentioning a particularly impactful Hall Director meeting my senior year of college. Many of us on the HD team were struggling with students making bad decisions that were harming them (drinking too much, mixing alcohol with medications, self-harm, etc.). We were tired, we were overwhelmed, we were feeling helpless. In his strong but kind way, Murph reminded us that students don’t ask for their problems. They don’t ask to come to college as the only diabetic who can’t drink like everyone else, and they don’t ask to struggle with depression, anxiety, or mood disorders. To this day, the empathy he showed that day has stuck with me, and is something I always consider when working with a student with a problem. Hard to believe that feminism and empathy are two of the biggest things I took away from the guy whose favorite thing to tell Hall Directors was “go to hell!” but it’s true. Murph believed that people will only work so hard to meet expectations and avoid trouble, but if you show them you care and get them to like (or even love) you, that’s when you get really fantastic things out of them. Murph was pretty successful at getting people to love him, and I hope that big Irish man is kicking back with Jack Kenny and smiling down at us over a glass of Jameson…

Nathan Thomas – If Barbara hiring me for an ARA position was the entrance ramp to my highway of student affairs, Nathan was the ROAD CLOSED sign blocking the exit I was trying to take and keeping me on the path. If you don’t know, it wasn’t until February of my second year of grad school (and a blunt conversation with NT) that I admitted to myself that higher ed was a better fit for me than teaching kindergarten. I’m so grateful to Nathan for listening to me, having countless conversations with me, and ultimately knowing me better than I knew myself. In the time since then, NT has continued to be an amazing friend and source of support. If there’s one thing I’ve learned from him, I believe it’s authenticity. Nathan is very true to himself, and you can get on knowing exactly where he stands on things. He doesn’t buy into hype and sees very quickly through schmooze. He’s seen me at times when I am far from my best, and I appreciate his willingness to call me out, laugh with me, cause trouble with me, or challenge me.

Julie Payne Kirchmeier – It’s funny to write a blog about great supervisors, get to JPK, and have already used feminism to describe a grouchy Irish guy who called me Kiddo. However, I think a broader (and ultimately, more important) skill I learned from Julie is critical thinking. Before I met Julie, I didn’t think about gender issues the way that I do now, and in considering gender I’m also more cognizant of other forms of oppression out there. I don’t know how many times I’ve said “Okay, I’m having a JPK moment here but have you ever considered…” Julie is an inspiring person to be around – her ambition, energy, and laugh bring a new dynamic to any space that she occupies (real space or cyber). I’m grateful to have her in my life as a role model and a friend, and love that she has forever impacted the way that I perceive and consider things.

Tina Horvath – Tina has been my supervisor longer than any of the others, and it’s hard to be around Tina without constantly learning and growing. I could create a really lengthy list of all the personal and professional lessons I’ve learned from her, but I’ll summarize by saying that no supervisor has ever challenged me, pushed me, supported me, trusted me, and believed in me quite like Tina has. I’ve gotten some of the most memorable and meaningful feedback from her, and she has shaped who I have become as a professional. When I try to encapsulate my lessons from Tina into one word (it’s difficult), I have to say integrity. When I first started at SIU, Tina was really fond of saying “There’s no right way to do a wrong thing.” I think one of the most dangerous habits we can fall into is rationalizing our own weaknesses and faults. With Tina, that’s not really an option. That’s not to say that she expects perfection – she is one of the most compassionate and developmental professionals I know. But she challenges people to really examine the issues and be honest about them – with others and especially with themselves. You can make plenty of mistakes with Tina; what you can’t make are excuses. Integrity isn’t just a core part of who she is at work, either. Her children can tell you that “we don’t get in trouble for telling the truth in this family” is something she doesn’t just say, but takes very seriously. Honesty and integrity are values she instills in her children, along with kindness, compassion, openness, and understanding. I deeply respect and appreciate Tina and all I (and others) have learned from her along the way.

So THANK YOU to all my bosses and please know how much I value you and the role you have played in my life.

Finding meaning in social media

Usually when I blog, it’s because I have something to say. This post, however, is because I don’t know the answers. I’m feeling at a bit of a loss, and am hoping to get some dialogue going. And while I love #sachat and Twitter, part of the issue I’m having revolves around the challenges of communication via social media. [I started this post several weeks ago, and I continue to struggle with the fact that I don’t have the answers. I guess that’s kind of the point – so I should just go live, right?]

Here are my questions: As we use social media more and more to engage with our students, how do we ensure that these interactions are meaningful? How do we make sure that opportunities to connect, challenge, and support (which we would never pass up if interacting face to face with a student) aren’t missed? How do we talk about sensitive and personal subjects in a public forum? How do we question and challenge a person’s beliefs without embarrassing him/her in front of the entire community? How do we create meaningful (if temporary) relationships with students who don’t know anything more about us than what is in our public profile?

This all stems from a few interactions I’ve had with students on our Class of 2015 Facebook page. Obviously when students say things that are threatening, overtly biased/hate-based, or obscene we can report them and remove the content. But what do we do in the gray area? When students make broad generalizations, perpetuate stereotypes, or say things that are skewed or untrue – how do we respond? I know how I would have the conversation if I were face-to-face with the student in my University 101 class or at a program, but how do you challenge and support via the Internet? And (what may be the more important issue at play here) how do you challenge and support a student when you don’t have a relationship with him/her? When my sole connection to the student is that we are both members of the same group on Facebook (of which there are more than 1,000 members) – how appropriate is it for me to engage in that type of conversation?

Interested in thoughts…

What we could all learn from Duck Dynasty (or, Why this is my new favorite show)

Yep, I’m going there (here?). If you haven’t caught A&E’s latest gem, Duck Dynasty, you need to check it out. If you’ve seen Duck Dynasty and can’t imagine why I would write a blog post about it…well, bear with me. I’ve talked to quite a few people about this show. Responses are about half and half: 50% or so think it’s really funny, and 50% or so couldn’t get through an entire episode. A few seem mystified by it and have watched an entire episode but do not in any way seem inclined to watch it again. I think most that I have talked to would agree that their appreciation for the show doesn’t come close to matching mine.

If you haven’t seen the show, here’s a brief overview of the premise. The show is reality TV about Phil Robertson, a man from Louisiana who “revolutionized” the duck call. [Duck calls are little whistle-like instruments. When a person blows into a duck call, it makes a sound like a duck. Duck calls are used by hunters to lure ducks to their demise.] Phil’s company “Duck Commander” is a multi-million dollar business that has since been taken over by his son, Willie. Other people on the show include Phil’s brother, Si; Phil’s wife, Miss Kay; Willie’s wife, Korie; Willie’s brother Jase; and Phil and Miss Kay’s other sons, their wives, and all the grandchildren.

So what is it about this show that I enjoy so much? And why in the world do I think it’s beneficial as anything more than entertainment? Here’s what I think:

Authenticity: The Robertsons are very clear about who they are. They make no bones about their identity as a family that hunts, fishes, wears camouflage, eats squirrels, builds duck blinds, and loves one another. There is nothing about this family that says nouveau riche. They still do all the same things they did before they had lots of money. They just do them bigger. How many other reality shows focus on people staying true to their roots, rather than trying to be something they’re not? The Robertsons have grown and learned along the way, but they don’t hide where they come from (and in truth, they haven’t ever left). How many of us can say that we genuinely own our background, even the parts that aren’t pretty? How often do you pretend to be something you’re not because it’s what others expect of you?

Audacity: Admittedly, it is easy to be audacious when you have tons and tons of money. The Robertsons never hesitate to be audacious and put a new spin on something. Just this season, Miss Kay made a cooking DVD and attempted to open a restaurant. Willie bought a vineyard. Jase (Willie’s brother) constructed the world’s largest duck call (Guinness was there – they set the record). They took an old RV and made a duck blind out of it and stuck it 20 feet up in a tree. Their ideas may not always pan out, and they typically don’t make much sense, but the family never ceases to try. I’m sure one of those audacious ideas was the one that made them millionaires. How often do you go out on a limb and embrace a truly audacious idea that could revolutionize your field?

Loyalty: The Robertsons are truly a family that is loyal to one another. They bicker and argue and drive one another crazy, like any family. However, at the end of the day it’s clear that they love one another and nothing will ever change that. There is nothing you can do that will get you thrown out of the Robertson family, and there’s something old-fashioned and charming about that. While many talk about “family values”, I think the Robertsons are living it in a way many would overlook. Who are your family members? Are you loyal to them no matter what? Who are the people that you would go to bat for regardless of what you had to gain or lose from the situation?

Joy: Again, I’m sure this is easier to do when you have tons of money, but WOW do they all have fun on this show. When they are at work, they are doing something that they love. When they are out hunting or fishing, they are doing something that they love. They don’t let work interfere with the things that they love. I just really love watching people that are out there having a good time. When was the last time you did something just for the fun of it? Not because of an obligation, or to get ahead at work, or to make someone else happy – but just because it was fun?

So that’s why I love Duck Dynasty, and why I’m going to keep watching it (at least until they cease to be authentic, audacious, loyal, and fun-loving.) 🙂

#oneword2012 – Reach

For those who may not know, there is a movement on Twitter (fitting for a medium that limits you to 140 characters) to choose one word to serve as your resolution for the year. I believe it began last year, and many that I’m following on Twitter are participating this year. I decided to join in.

I love the flexibility of the word “reach”, and that’s part of the reason I’ve chosen it as my #oneword2012 resolution. There are so many different uses and nuances of the word, and that was important to me as I reflected on my goals for 2012. It can mean the impetus or the beginning (reaching for a new opportunity) or the culmination of the effort (reaching a goal). One can reach out to others and one can reach for an answer within. You can reach out to help someone else, or you can reach for support during a time of need.

Reach out – I’m not terribly great about keeping in touch. I don’t mind talking on the phone, but I have a tendency to fall into habits and call the same people regularly instead of touching base with a broader base of people. The past two years have taught me the value of maintaining relationships with those people that are important to me. I’m a firm believer that not everyone is meant to be a long-term friend, but I don’t want to lose relationships I truly value just because I don’t make the effort to reach out to them. In addition to maintaining existing relationships, I want to challenge myself to reach out to new social and professional connections. Again, I have a tendency to get stuck in a routine with people I’m comfortable with, but it’s good for me to reach out and make new connections too.

Reach in – I struggle with getting caught up in my head. Two of my strengths (for you StrengthsQuest folks) are Input and Learner, so my brain is constantly seeking out, synthesizing and analyzing information. When I’m not taking in actual new information, I fixate on things until I’ve created something new. It’s enough to make a person crazy, so I have a tendency to limit my “quiet time”. I read, play games on my phone, talk to others, watch TV, and engage in all kinds of other tasks to keep from getting caught up in my head. This means my time for reflection is (intentionally) limited. Blogging has helped with that, and I want to spend more time thinking, reflecting, planning, dreaming, and creating.

Reach up – Can you tell that “resting on my laurels” is a bit of a theme I’m attempting to address? I’ve gotten comfortable in a few areas of my life and need to push myself. I need to “reach for the stars” and find some ways to challenge myself. I don’t know yet what I want to accomplish with this goal, but I know that when it’s 2013 I want to feel as though I’ve made some changes and pushed myself. Maybe that means I will still be reaching for something, and maybe that means I will have reached a new milestone.

Reach one – A few years ago staff at SIU were given the challenge “Each one, reach one”. While I haven’t heard it repeated of late, it stuck with me as a simple reminder of one of our most basic functions as professionals in higher education. It’s always good to keep in mind the impact we can have on individual students just by taking time, giving attention, and making small efforts and gestures. I had some amazing opportunities to interact with students last semester through my University 101 class and the new Future Leaders in Student Affairs program, and I want to continue those efforts to make one on one contacts.

So that’s my #oneword2012 – reach. What’s yours?

My Life as a Mixed Tape

I recently read a book (Sing Me Home by Jodi Picoult) where one of the lead characters was a music therapist. She regularly asked people in her life (patients, friends, dates) to compile a list of the songs that would be on a mixed tape about them. I loved this idea and decided I needed to blog about it. As a note, these are more songs that mean a lot to me or signify a particular part of my life. Sometimes that’s because of the music itself or the lyrics but sometimes it’s just a strong memory so it’s not always a literal translation of me or my life at the time.

1. Michael Jackson “Billie Jean” – I have loved MJ for as long as I can remember. During my childhood my music selection was based on cassettes my parents had. Thriller was one, and “Billie Jean” was one of my favorites from this album.

2. Billy Joel “This Night” – Again, my early musical tastes were based largely on my parents. This is not one of Billy Joel’s more famous songs, but it was on one of the tapes we had. I love this song. The chorus uses part of Beethoven’s Pathetique Sonata and I remember hearing that piece in a grade school music class and being thrilled that I recognized the notes (I do not share the musical talent that my brother and sister have). To me, this song sounds like a lullaby. I will sing it to my children when they are babies. It’s just really beautiful.

3. Garth Brooks “Unanswered Prayers” – I had a pretty big Garth Brooks phase in junior high and this is one of my favorites of his. I also love the message. I strongly believe that things happen for a reason, and there have been many times in my life where I’ve tried to keep this in mind when things aren’t going the way I think they should be. Sometimes you have to let go and understand that in the larger scheme of life, it will all turn out the way it is supposed to.

4. Elvis “I Can’t Help Falling in Love” – I loved this song when UB40 remade it in the early ’90s. When I heard the original version by Elvis, it was just the beginning of my love for The King. I have long said that you can’t go to Memphis without becoming an Elvis fan, and a trip in college sealed the deal for me.

5. U2 “With or Without You” – I could put just about any/all U2 songs on here, but this one has always been my favorite. I’ve seen them in concert three times and was told after one concert that being there with me was like watching someone have a religious experience. I love what they stand for, and how long they’ve been socially and politically active (much longer than it’s been trendy). I love U2.

6. Kansas “Carry on Wayward Son” – This song, to me, is my best friend Scott. I can’t hear it without thinking of him. Scott helped me develop my love of classic rock, and this is definitely one of my favorites from that genre. It can get me pumped up or bring me to tears but it always elicits a deep emotional reaction. It reminds me of my friends.

7. Nickelback “This Afternoon” – Speaking of songs that remind me of my friends, this song (while it was not out while I was in high school) takes me back. It’s light, fun, and makes me think of some of the best times of my life.

8. Paul McCartney & Wings “Band on the Run” – This song is so bizarre. There are basically three parts to it, and each sounds completely different from the other two. My favorite college bar, Jimmy’s, used to have a terrible jukebox, but this song was on there. It always makes me think of my senior year of college, Meghan, Jon, and Jen. We had some amazing times and that was the last point that we were all in college and without full-time jobs, families, and other obligations. “Piano Man” is another iconic song from this point in my life, but the rationale would basically be the same (except “Piano Man” was NOT on the jukebox at Jimmy’s) so I didn’t feel the need to dedicate an entire track on my mixed tape. And besides, Billy Joel already got one.

9. Dispatch “The General” – I have always claimed to have a “hippie” side, and I think this song does a great job of representing that part of my life. My friend Greg introduced me to Dispatch, and they’re a group I’ve come to love. This is a great example of a song where the lyrics aren’t really the important part; it’s about the sound and about taking a losing situation and making the best of it.

10. Journey “Don’t Stop Believing” – This song really is about the lyrics. To me, it’s about hope, encouragement, love, and not giving up. What’s not to love?

So those are the ten tracks that, as of right now, make up the mixed tape of my life. Others that could be added “Have a Little Faith in Me” by John Hiatt, anything else by U2, Elvis, or Cowboy Mouth. “And So It Goes” by Billy Joel was a close contender as well. I find it interesting that there aren’t any women artists on my mixed tape. There are many female groups and individuals that I love, but when I made the list, none of them came to mind. I even spent some time thinking about women who could make the list (Adele, The Dixie Chicks, Sarah McLachlan, Carrie Underwood)…but couldn’t come up with individual songs that seemed to fit. Sorry ladies.

Also, I think it’s important to note some artists that would NEVER make it to any mixed tape of mine, regardless of how amazing of a song they could come up with. The banned list includes Stevie Nicks (and any Fleetwood Mac songs that include her on vocals), Hanson, Mariah Carey, Kenny G, and anything done by the cast of Glee. There is an episode of South Park where the kids smuggle a goat to their pen pals in Afghanistan by putting a shawl around it and telling everyone it’s Stevie Nicks arriving for a USO show. Enough said. Unfortunately the others (Hanson, Mariah Carey, Kenny G, and Glee are all favorites of my mom and/or sister. Erin and Mom, I apologize, but I’m sure you aren’t surprised! 🙂