Vulnerability

I looked up the word vulnerability in the dictionary and the definition it provided was: Capable of being physically or emotionally wounded or hurt. The video we watch in class today was called The Power of Vulnerability. As I was trying to understand what Brene Brown was talking about and relate it to my life, I came up with the idea that in order to live life to the fullest, I need to be open to vulnerability. I need to take chances; believe in myself; and not pretend to be anything I'm not. I have to realize that sometimes life is going to hurt and sometimes I will be let down; while also realizing that by not taking chances, I may just be putting off the inevitable hurt. Relating this to relationships, by having the courage to say 'I love you' first, you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position, and there's the possibility that they won't say it back. Of course this will hurt, but from my understanding of the video I think that it would be better to have put yourself into this vulnerable position and be let down now, than to merely continue pretending that your partner loves you back while you fall further into love, because later on down the road the topic is going to have to come up eventually and it will just hurt more when you realize your love isn't mutual. This kind of happened to me in a relationship I had just outside of high school. My boyfriend said I love you, but I was young and not ready for that. He kept saying it, and I kept. . . not saying it, and we both pretended like I might eventually say I loved him. We eventually broke up, and now that I am older and know how it feels to be in love with someone, I know how hard that must have been for him. He laid his emotions completely out on the table, and I can only imagine how much pain that caused him to never hear me say it. Brene Brown talked in her video about not pretending; just being yourself; and having the courage to let go of who you should be by embracing who you are. I think this means that it doesn't matter what other people expect of you; live in the moment and be able to express yourself; you shouldn't back away from positions of vulnerability, because in order to find out who we are, every once in a while we need to be "physically or emotionally wounded or hurt."

The Medium is More Important than the Content of the Actual Message

In class we watched The Vagina Monologues; the particular play we watched was called "When I Was Twelve," which was basically just a bunch of stories about women getting their first periods. Honestly, I wasn't a fan of the video; it was hard to follow and the women in it seemed almost angry as they told their stories. From what I understood, it seemed as though they were trying to get across a message that women should feel like they can talk about getting their periods, yet in the way the play was set out, the women portrayed feelings of bitterness, which I thought contrasted the point they were trying to make. I understand that they were just trying to bring humour to the subject to make people feel more comfortable talking about it, however maybe I am just conservative, but I thought the play was kind of vulgar. I believe that women should be able to talk openly about their bodies and ask questions without men or even other women cringing, but I don't think that women should make it into an obnoxious joke completely opposite to the reality many women feel, because I doubt I am alone in thinking this, but personally that won't make me feel anymore comfortable talking about my period. The next day in class we watched Private Dicks: Men Exposed, which was very open and the men in it seemed real, honest, and willing to talk about their sexuality. For me, this just furthered the idea that men are able to talk openly about their bodies, while women are discouraged from it. Therefore the way a message is portrayed, is often more important than what is actually discussed in the message.

Habermas' Paradigms

Habermas' paradigms consist of three different ways of looking at the world which include Empirical-analytic, Critical-theoretic and Situational interpretive. A situation that I came up with to relate to each of these paradigms is dating.  Using the Empirical-analytic perspective, justification is made through observations, measurement, and prediction. In relation to dating, people may find that it is the male role to ask out the female, to pick her up, and to pay for the meal, because this is generally the norm for how dating relationships take place, and this is how dating is portrayed often in real life and the media. This is a very objective way of looking at dating. Using the Situational interpretive method, people base their opinions on a subject upon their previous experiences and feelings. Therefore, in a dating relationship, the female may feel like they shouldn't or can't ask out the male, because that is not how their past relationships have taken place. They may feel like it is not their responsibility, because it is generally acknowledged to be the males place. This is more of a subjective way of looking at dating. In the Critical-theoretic model, we find more of a fault-finding approach. People using this approach may look further into a situation for deeper or hidden meanings. Therefore using this approach in a dating relationship, one may find that either the male or female can take the first step, as males can be just as shy as females. When it comes to paying for the date, which tends to fall under the responsibility of the male too, a critical theorist might suggest that in modern times, males and females are considered equal. Females are able to earn equal or higher salaries than men, so they should alternate paying for dates.