The Bullsheet

Dear Mr. Nogay,

There are many things that are misguided about your submission from yesterday regarding the J requirement and sociology. They are too numerous to deal with comprehensively in this format, however I will respond to several of your points that, as a soc/anth major, I found to be just plain wrong.

"Wouldn't we be adding the requirement in an attempt to force a viewpoint onto people, instilling that mindset so deeply into them that they don't regard other positions as viable?"

You don't seem to recognize the fact that we all arrive at Denison with varying viewpoints and mindsets that have been forced upon us and deeply instilled in us through cultural learning. Soc/anth classes, in fact, encourage us to think critically about those mindsets and viewpoints that have been deeply instilled in us by our parents, our home communities, and the media. If you are not comfortable critically examining your own ideas about issues, then yes, sociology is not for you. We have ideas and viewpoints forced down our throats all the time from various sources, so why are you singling out sociology as the problem?

Also, what classes don't tell you how or what to think? If I raise my hand in a chemistry class and express the viewpoint that NaCl is not salt, no one is going to be very receptive. If I argue against evolution in a biology class, the professor will shoot the debate down because it directly contradicts the material presented in class. If you think that you can debunk a well-established theory on the basis of reading one or two articles and having a gut reaction, then you would be wrong. There are legitimate criticisms to be made of many of the ideas to be taught in sociology classes, however your assumption that the point that you brought forward in class was a step toward 'legitimate debate,' to me, is suspect. You are unqualified, as a chemistry major, to dictate unilaterally what does and does not contribute to legitimate debate in a sociology classroom. There is such a thing as an unproductive line of thought in sociology and even though you may not think you are wrong in relation to the world, you might be wrong in relation to the material being discussed.

"some folks can't be 'taught' to be tolerant and socially responsible or to care about being so"

The argument that you present here is actually a favorite of segregationists: the idea that because a segment of the population is not receptive to being exposed to (gasp!) black people, we shouldn't try to desegregate. Obviously, reinstating the J requirement isn't going to solve all the problems on this campus, that is not what anyone is arguing. But just because a few people (like you, apparently) are not receptive to learning about and trying to understand the experiences of others does not mean that it is a futile exercise. You are correct to think that you can never completely inhabit others' perspectives, however this does not mean that learning about others' experiences, hearing their stories, and critically examining structures of oppression in society is useless.

"Here, an anecdote to illustrate [implied: prove] my point"

One of the main things that sociology teaches us: you can't make generalizations about a population based solely on the biased opinions and experiences of one or two people. While no one can tell you that your experience is wrong for yourself, you cannot assume that your experience applies to other people.

"Then, I met gay people. They tended to be nice, relatively normal, and a few of them were actually pretty cool"

When I read this, I nearly cried when I realized that Harvey Milk did not live to see his dream come true.

Relatively normal? One of the most disturbing things about your submission is that it seems to be masking a deeply-seeded set of prejudices about others. Your definition of "normal" is entirely socially dictated by your position as a white mostly straight male in the United States, which you would have learned had you been receptive in your soc/anth classes. Question: Why are you not attacking women's studies, black studies and queer studies classes directly? Would that be too controversial for you, too overtly racist/sexist/homophobic? It might seem, to a careful reader, that while you are attacking an academic discipline (sociology), you perhaps really intend to attack groups of people on this campus.

"I'm fairly confident that had I come here and been forced to take a queer studies course, I would have grown to resent gays, partially because their existence had caused such a course to exist"

This logic, if followed to its extreme conclusion indicates that we should try to not take any classes about anything because we will inevitably resent the thing we are learning about. You win, let's just give up on this whole 'education' thing. What does it matter anyway?

If you did not want to take classes that expand your horizons, then why are you at a liberal arts institution? It is sad to me that there are people here who did not come to Denison to have their worldviews challenged and their perspectives broadened. That there are people who think that our classes shouldn't challenge us to think in new and different ways about ourselves, others, and the world we live in.

Michelle Oyakawa
Class of 2009
oyakaw_m@denison.edu

With contributions from: Kim Lewis, Todd Callais, Megan Nitzsche, Trish Brauer, and Menphasis (Men for Sociological Solidarity): Chris Becken, Tom Mitchell, John Murphy, Xander Acheson, James Davis