This week’s readings were very interesting. Starting off with ‘Identity Terms’. I learned that language is always evolving, and deeply personal to each person who chooses the terms with which to describe themselves. When discussing race we discover that the term, people of color, is utilized to allude to anybody nonwhite, and the term, black, is utilized to allude to individuals who comes from Africa or are African American. When conversing with, or about individuals who are debilitated, consistently express an individual first stating, except if told in any case by the individual themselves.This is because an inability doesn’t characterize you. Furthermore, sexuality goes is many different flavor and an individual can identify themselves as any of the following “Queer,” “Bisexual,” “Pansexual,” “Polyamorous,” “Asexual,” or all term for all LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) individuals. The outer influence of an individual should not define no body’s sexuality, but from within. For example a transgender person is a person born of a specific sex and grows older to discover that they feel like the opposite sex. When this happens, the person chooses to operate and physically become how they feel inside and that is how a person should pick their sex.
One of the theories in the “Feminist Philosophy of Language” was “ 2.5 Generics” it really caught my attention. For example “Generic statements are ones such as “cats are furry”, or “a cat has fur”, which are neither universal generalizations (there are furless cats) nor existential generalization (the claim being made is clearly stronger)”. This demonstrate that we as individuals speculate or even categorize individuals or things creating an illusion that because humans have hair all human need to have hair. This exclude those that does not have hair is creating the illustion that everyone need to have hair and if you don’t there is something wrong with you.
Also “Sex Marking” is very evident in our everyday lifes. It is clearly that there is too emphasis placed on gender when there doesn’t need to be. For example, male dominance requires the belief that men and women are importantly different from each other, so anything that contributes to the impression that sex differences are important is therefore a contributor to male dominance. That is why words such as congressman or businessman tries to reinforces the “male dominance”
Furthermore, some cultures dress and tell their kids that a boy has to dress like a man, with hats, dark neutral colors, that pink is for girls and blue for boys. Yet those are standers and requirements created by society and is delivered by how we communicate. In reality, what you wear does not define who you are or your gender. As the community continues to study gender and communication, we can continue to progress and have a better understanding of human sexuality and gender.
