CageFree

It depends on why you're emailing. If you're trying to up your chances, bad idea, but if you're trying to determine whether that person is taking any students, it's a must. Emailing professors saved me $400 on applications that would have been wasted because I did not know the profs had decided to retire.

Okay, thanks so much. That is very helpful!

Riotbeard, if you're interested in actually continuing a real conversation about feminist theory I'd be happy to continue over PM. This thread is about conferences and if you don't mind, I'd like to get back to the topic. Thanks.

From Ch. 1 of "Racism: a Short History." (Friedrickson): "The aim of this book is to present in a concise fashion the story of racism's rise and decline (although not yet, unfortunately, its fall) from the Middle Ages to the present. To achieve this, I have tried to give racism a more precise definition than mere ethnocentric dislike and distrust of the Other. [...] Somewhere between the view that racism is a peculiar modern idea without much historical precedent and the notion that it is simply a manifestation of the ancient phenomenon of tribalism or xenophobia may lie a working definition that covers more than scientific or biological racism but less than the kind of group prejudice based on culture, religion, or simply a sense of family or kinship." "But racism as I conceive it is not merely an attitude or set of beliefs; it also expresses itself in the practices, institutions, and structures that a sense of deep difference justifies or validates. Racism, therefore, is more than theorizing about human differences or thinking badly of a group over which one has no control. It either directly sustains or proposes to establish a racial order, a permanent group hierarchy that is believed to reflect the laws of nature or the decrees of God." "My theory or conception of racism, therefore, has two components: difference and power. It originates from a mind-set that regards "them" as different from "us" in ways that are permanent and unbridgeable. This sense of difference provides a motive or rationale for using our power advantage to treat the ethnoracial Other in ways that we would regard as cruel or unjust if applied to members of our own group. The possible consequences of this nexus of attitude and action range from unofficial but pervasive social discrimination at one end of the spectrum to genocide at the other, with government-sanctioned segregation, colonial subjugation, exclusion, forced deportation (or "ethnic cleansing"), and enslavement among the other variations on the theme. In all manifestations of racism from the mildest to the most severe, what is being denied is the possibility that the racializers and the racialized can coexist in the same society, except perhaps on the basis of domination and subordination. Also rejected is any notion that individuals can obliterate ethnoracial difference by changing their identities." Also, I would recommend reading Eduardo Bonilla-Silva's "Rethinking Racism: Toward a Structural Interpretation." American Sociological Review, Vol. 62, No. 3 (Jun., 1997), pp. 465-480 Regarding MY statement, I clearly prefaced it with "I find this statement...," which indicates an opinion about a SPECIFIC statement to which I objected. I stand by my opinion. I did not jump down anyone's throat... you, however, have. Twice. The second time around, you even resorted to namecalling and mockery, neither of which are necessary or productive. Now, can we get back to talking about conferences?

1. Women can and do wear ties when they wear menswear-inspired styles. 2. Sexism is an institution based on categories of privilege (in this case, gender-based). In the United States, you cannot be sexist against men anymore than you can be racist against whites. Prejudice =/= sexism. 3. Ties don't (to my knowledge) cause body parts to be deformed, or make people prone to accidents. Wearing high heels is harmful to women's bodies. 4. If you're asking whether I think it's wrong to single out men as having to wear ties, the answer is yes. Ties are not considered formal or even business wear in all cultural contexts... it's simply western convention.

Does your identity pose any relevance to your research? If not, how did you tie the two things together?

In my opinion, telling women to wear heels (as advice in order to gain respect in academia or to be considered acceptably dressed) is sexist. It's sexist because it isn't a general statement like, wear smart clothes, be well groomed... it singles out WOMEN. The poster stated that for WOMEN appear confident and be taken seriously, they must wear an item that is both gendered and sexualized, and that isn't healthy for people to wear to begin with. High heels are not like other business attire (ties, jackets, blouses) because they cause physical damage to women's bodies. They are also not required for anyone to be presentable. Statements such as those promote the idea that women only inspire respect when conforming to harmful gender norms.

It's quite likely that people email POIs about things that are better directed to administrators... deadlines, where to send transcripts, etc.., so I totally get that and it seems to me that the websites are trying to discourage such emails. But trying to suss out whether an adviser might be a good match intellectually, or whether they plan to be around are perfectly legitimate reasons to contact them. Is it mandatory? No, of course not, and it also is unlikely to influence an admission. If you're writing to gush about a POI in the hopes of getting in, that's a terrible idea. Also, admins are not all-knowing. They don't always know, for example, whether a prof plans on being gone for a while... if someone is planning to be super busy with a book and has to travel abroad in the next two-three years (right as you're defining your dissertation), the person who processes papers will NOT know that.

You're not likely to get much out of it from selling it as gold scrap. Resizing it would be a better idea unless you really just don't want it anymore.

I agree with most of what TMP said. However, I find the "heels" comment to be rather sexist. Women do not need heels to appear confident... if that makes YOU feel that way, great... but women are under no obligation to wear heels (or dresses, or make-up). Besides, teetering around in heels when you're not used to them would have the opposite effect.

I don't think it had anything to do with my background. When I said 'experience" I meant what happened during my application season. The professor sent me an email back using another student's name AND information, and said she didn't really take students because she "traveled back to ____" (country of research) every year and "didn't have the time" to do that. It was like she was actively trying to discourage me from applying. I later found out that this particular professor has NEVER had a graduate student because she doesn't like to mentor. So... it would have been a wasted application. Had I been admitted, it would have been awkward... I would have expected to work with her only to find myself passed around to other people. So... I'm very glad I emailed... that saved me $90.

Hey, whatever it takes so I can put off reading for comps or working on fellowship apps.

I am sorry, but based on my experience I would say this is poor advice. If I had not contacted any POIs I would have ended up applying to at least 4-5 programs where the people I wanted to work with turned out not to be accepting students because they were close to retirement, and one program where the exchange with the POI was so awkward I decided not apply... I later found out I dodged a HUGE bullet there. At the same time, I would not have applied to the program I am in now because I didn't think it was a match based on the website... turns out it really was. The websites, furthermore, tend to be out of date, and they rarely list who is working with whom. You wouldn't know what project a prof might be working on next, for example, because profs often forget or don't care to update their profiles.

It seems to me that this thread has gone wayyyyyy off the OP's original question. Just sayin'....

I find myself struggling to write the personal statement portion for my Fulbright application (this is the one for US students going abroad to conduct research). I'm trying to avoid talking about my project directly, since that's what the Statement of Grant Purpose is supposed to do. I am a historian. My parents were born in the country I study, and we moved there when I was young, though I have been back in the United States since I was a teenager. My research is not in any way connected to any family relations. I am not sure whether I should focus more on a) how I became interested in what I'm researching, or b )how my connection to the country in question makes me a potentially good 'ambassador,' so to speak. I have what I would call a binational identity, and I think that would be an interesting angle/theme, but my research is not at all about that. Ideally, I'd combine the two, but we only have one page to write. My question is whether I should focus on a) or b ), or whether I'm just approaching this the wrong way altogether.