Fall 2014 applicants??

[Fishbucket]

someone please just tell me where to apply. I like, um, new stuff.

[smellybug]

Geography's important. Don't let people tell you otherwise. My husband was like, hell no, we are NOT going to the south. And the more I thought about it, he's right. You have to actually live there, after all. You can make some concessions (I was willing to live anywhere that had a food co-op, for example) but don't do anything that will make you or your S/O miserable for the next six years...

[smellybug]

Yup: if you like snowboarding and such (I do), it's a "top ten location." Also if you like the casino buffet scene.

... and for me it's basically hell on earth. It takes all kinds to drive this bus, I guess.

[smellybug]

someone please just tell me where to apply. I like, um, new stuff.

I hear there's a really great thread on gradcafe about what's "hot" right now... Maybe you should check it out.

[asleepawake]

Geography's important. Don't let people tell you otherwise. My husband was like, hell no, we are NOT going to the south. And the more I thought about it, he's right. You have to actually live there, after all. You can make some concessions (I was willing to live anywhere that had a food co-op, for example) but don't do anything that will make you or your S/O miserable for the next six years...

 

True, but please don't write off the entire South without checking out specific cities first! We have great weather, and plenty of places in Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Tennessee are awesome. Even red states are still like 40-something percent blue!

Edited March 24, 2013 by asleepawake

[toasterazzi]

So I was looking through schools and I saw that UC Santa Cruz's mascot is a banana slug. That has to be one of the most unique mascots I've ever come across hehe.

[thatjewishgirl]

Oklahoma and Texas are not so bad. I wouldn't trade my life here for anything. Looking forward to Baton Rouge, too.

[asleepawake]

So I was looking through schools and I saw that UC Santa Cruz's mascot is a banana slug. That has to be one of the most unique mascots I've ever come across hehe.

 

Whoa. He reads Plato, too.

 

[squire_western]

On 3/23/2013 at 10:17 PM, smellybug said:

Geography's important. Don't let people tell you otherwise. My husband was like, hell no, we are NOT going to the south.

 

Yeah, totally. Because lit faculties/grad students at UGA, Emory, Arkansas, LSU, Auburn, Tennessee, Vandy, South Carolina, Duke, UNC, Rice, UT-Austin, Chapel Hill, and Mississippi are full of right-wing Evangelical bigots and the college towns/metro areas have nothing to offer beyond the stereotypes propagated by people who have never been there.

[champagne]

So I was looking through schools and I saw that UC Santa Cruz's mascot is a banana slug. That has to be one of the most unique mascots I've ever come across hehe.

 

And the Banana Slug makes an appearance in one of the greatest films of all time.

 

[squire_western]

Of course, the other problem that comes to mind when being geographically selective is what the hell you plan to do when the one and only TT job offering you receive comes from Mississippi Valley State University and spouse is like, hell no, we are NOT moving to the wherever. I was sort of under the impression that going into English academia meant abandoning sexy real estate, no?

[champagne]

I was under that impression too, squire_western. Luckily, my S/O is super laid back about location, so I don't imagine having that much of an issue with what could be a pretty contentious issue for some couples in academia. This is a conversation that has to be had at the beginning of the process with complete communication and understanding about misgivings that might come from the non-academic half of the couple.

 

I think any couple going through the daunting task of finding a job in the academic marketplace would be absolutely obtuse to disregard a TT job just because of geographic reasons. I think finding a fit for a city/school is an entirely different process, but being completely closed to a certain area simply because of the reported makeup should not be happening.

 

Counselor Voice: It all starts with open communication.  

[Fishbucket]

Just give me a list of schools that are good to go to. Like 30 schools. Thanks

[toasterazzi]

Whoa. He reads Plato, too.

 

 

Haha I saw that. Who knew banana slugs were so scholarly?

 

As for the location discussion, my fiancee is willing to go wherever I land, though he would prefer to avoid the South because he's anti heat, especially when there's humidity involved. That being said, he'd suck it up if I asked him to. And I do plan on applying to a few different segments of the country. However, there are some states that I will not be considering even though I'm sure they contain a fair amount of good people and awesome academics. For example, I'm not especially keen on going to a city and/or state that thinks it's reasonable to ban ethnic studies or one that's trying to get in my uterus or one that doesn't have protections in place people who might be discriminated against based on gender identity or expression or one that actively attempts to block certain groups of people from being able to vote. These issues, and various others, directly impact the quality of life for my family. Ultimately, stuff like rural vs. city or weather (though I am fairly anti-winter after nearly 26 years in the midwest) isn't make or break for me, but the laws and legislation, along with availability of advocacy groups if needed, are huge. I'm just not really willing to put my family in jeopardy for 5-6 years just to go to a certain school.

 

I do think adequate research is key though. Like I said before in this thread I think, some places really can surprise you even when it seems like you already know everything about them. As it stands right now, my tentative list of schools to apply to has four west coast schools, four midwestern schools, one northeast school, one southern school, and two pacific northwest schools. That'll obviously fluctuate and change as I become more committed to my application decisions, but I feel pretty good about the spread at this point.

[practical cat]

Haha I saw that. Who knew banana slugs were so scholarly?

 

As for the location discussion, my fiancee is willing to go wherever I land, though he would prefer to avoid the South because he's anti heat, especially when there's humidity involved. That being said, he'd suck it up if I asked him to. And I do plan on applying to a few different segments of the country. However, there are some states that I will not be considering even though I'm sure they contain a fair amount of good people and awesome academics. For example, I'm not especially keen on going to a city and/or state that thinks it's reasonable to ban ethnic studies or one that's trying to get in my uterus or one that doesn't have protections in place people who might be discriminated against based on gender identity or expression or one that actively attempts to block certain groups of people from being able to vote. These issues, and various others, directly impact the quality of life for my family. Ultimately, stuff like rural vs. city or weather (though I am fairly anti-winter after nearly 26 years in the midwest) isn't make or break for me, but the laws and legislation, along with availability of advocacy groups if needed, are huge. I'm just not really willing to put my family in jeopardy for 5-6 years just to go to a certain school.

 

I do think adequate research is key though. Like I said before in this thread I think, some places really can surprise you even when it seems like you already know everything about them. As it stands right now, my tentative list of schools to apply to has four west coast schools, four midwestern schools, one northeast school, one southern school, and two pacific northwest schools. That'll obviously fluctuate and change as I become more committed to my application decisions, but I feel pretty good about the spread at this point.

Yes. Thank you. When politics have an impact on your life on a daily basis, it is not narrow-minded to take something like that into consideration when applying.

Superficially, though, there were very few schools great enough for me to even consider giving up snow. Warm weather is tough on me long term.

[squire_western]

I didn't say it was narrow minded, I just don't understand why someone would go into the field knowing that most of the few jobs available will be in red states at land grant or regional institutions. And speaking as an ethnic minority living in south (and one who has lived elsewhere in the US), I find the implications of this kind of regionalism disturbing. I don't think there is a person alive who isn't affected by politics on a daily basis, and assuming that issues like voter suppression only happen in the south is ridiculous. The most notable instances of voter suppression in the last election occurred in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania. Who has tried to ban ethnic studies? Arizona comes to mind, but it is not in the south. I'm fairly sure that most state legislatures (while they might like to believe otherwise) have little to no impact on university curricula. Have you also crossed Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Arizona off your list? And, of course, it may surprise you to know that states are subject to federal law. So while my own state legislature is embarrassing and regularly tries to undermine the rights of women, they never actually succeed. That may be cold comfort, but that is reality in probably 30/50 US states. You should probably also know that advocacy groups in conservative states are often well-funded and provide strong community and political networks.

 

I would love to live in a blue state where I feel that my politics and ethnic identity are well-represented. But communities can be forged anywhere (especially in academia), and it seems crazy to go into the profession believing that you can be so selective. But that's fine-- more prospects for me!

[practical cat]

I didn't say it was narrow minded, I just don't understand why someone would go into the field knowing that most of the few jobs available will be in red states at land grant or regional institutions. And speaking as an ethnic minority living in south (and one who has lived elsewhere in the US), I find the implications of this kind of regionalism disturbing. I don't think there is a person alive who isn't affected by politics on a daily basis, and assuming that issues like voter suppression only happen in the south is ridiculous. The most notable instances of voter suppression in the last election occurred in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania. Who has tried to ban ethnic studies? Arizona comes to mind, but it is not in the south. I'm fairly sure that most state legislatures (while they might like to believe otherwise) have little to no impact on university curricula. Have you also crossed Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Arizona off your list? And, of course, it may surprise you to know that states are subject to federal law. So while my own state legislature is embarrassing and regularly tries to undermine the rights of women, they never actually succeed. That may be cold comfort, but that is reality in probably 30/50 US states. You should probably also know that advocacy groups in conservative states are often well-funded and provide strong community and political networks.

 

I would love to live in a blue state where I feel that my politics and ethnic identity are well-represented. But communities can be forged anywhere (especially in academia), and it seems crazy to go into the profession believing that you can be so selective. But that's fine-- more prospects for me!

Lol, wow. Ok, first of all, there is no need for rudeness. I am willing to accept that there are plenty of good qualities about everywhere and that there are plenty of people happy to live everywhere. I have also, somewhat clearly given the list of schools I applied to, found some schools that I am willing to move to certain places for. But, frankly, grad school is one of the few times in my career where I will have some say in location so to deny that my feelings of safety had some say in determining where I applied would be just a lie. (I also recognize, as someone who has been a victim of a hate crime in a super liberal pocket of a blue state, that this is not necessarily logical but, having experienced what I did, feeling safe matters to me a lot more when I know I can't actually control being safe.)

Yes, as a political science major, I have a fairly extensive understanding of state/federal law. Enough to know, too, that federal anti-hate crime legislation is virtually non-existent and poorly enforced at the state level when it does exist. Don't be snide.

We are all weighing different things in different ways. For some of us, location matters a great deal. I'm not judging or attacking anyone for NOT caring about location, please extend the same courtesy.

[squire_western]

Lol, wow. Ok, first of all, there is no need for rudeness. I am willing to accept that there are plenty of good qualities about everywhere and that there are plenty of people happy to live everywhere. I have also, somewhat clearly given the list of schools I applied to, found some schools that I am willing to move to certain places for. But, frankly, grad school is one of the few times in my career where I will have some say in location so to deny that my feelings of safety had some say in determining where I applied would be just a lie. (I also recognize, as someone who has been a victim of a hate crime in a super liberal pocket of a blue state, that this is not necessarily logical but, having experienced what I did, feeling safe matters to me a lot more when I know I can't actually control being safe.)

Yes, as a political science major, I have a fairly extensive understanding of state/federal law. Enough to know, too, that federal anti-hate crime legislation is virtually non-existent and poorly enforced at the state level when it does exist. Don't be snide.

We are all weighing different things in different ways. For some of us, location matters a great deal. I'm not judging or attacking anyone for NOT caring about location, please extend the same courtesy.

 

Oh come on, I am not being rude, I was merely opining on the futility of being geographically selective in a field with dismal job prospects. You guys are acting like some nut job tea party politicians are representative of universities and their academics as well as the college towns that aren't demographically representative of the states in which they're located. I didn't say anything to you to warrant this kind of response.

[planesandtrains]

what? how was squire_western being rude? i thought the point was politely articulated. i understand the concern and think location is a perfectly legitimate thing to let weigh in to your decision, but i really do think the blanket bias against entire regions - which is largely based on stereotypes - is a problem. some of the bluest populations in the country are in the south, and they have local laws and cultures to match. here's a map of voting patterns from 2012 by county (and in one of them, shaded by population density) to illustrate the point.

[nhswrestle]

And the Banana Slug makes an appearance in one of the greatest films of all time.

 

 

"Say what again!"

[bluecheese]

I won't go anywhere with an oppressive for-profit prison system or segregated schools. I have no where to go.

[toasterazzi]

I didn't say it was narrow minded, I just don't understand why someone would go into the field knowing that most of the few jobs available will be in red states at land grant or regional institutions. And speaking as an ethnic minority living in south (and one who has lived elsewhere in the US), I find the implications of this kind of regionalism disturbing. I don't think there is a person alive who isn't affected by politics on a daily basis, and assuming that issues like voter suppression only happen in the south is ridiculous. The most notable instances of voter suppression in the last election occurred in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania. Who has tried to ban ethnic studies? Arizona comes to mind, but it is not in the south. I'm fairly sure that most state legislatures (while they might like to believe otherwise) have little to no impact on university curricula. Have you also crossed Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Arizona off your list? And, of course, it may surprise you to know that states are subject to federal law. So while my own state legislature is embarrassing and regularly tries to undermine the rights of women, they never actually succeed. That may be cold comfort, but that is reality in probably 30/50 US states. You should probably also know that advocacy groups in conservative states are often well-funded and provide strong community and political networks.

 

I would love to live in a blue state where I feel that my politics and ethnic identity are well-represented. But communities can be forged anywhere (especially in academia), and it seems crazy to go into the profession believing that you can be so selective. But that's fine-- more prospects for me!

 

Ok, let me just say this first. I am an educated human who is fully capable of reading and researching. I have visited several states in my life, interacted from people from all over the country and such. I don't especially appreciate the tone as though this is all brand new information or I'm incapable little girl or I'm just living life on some arbitrary stereotypes.

 

No. Just no.

 

I realize that at some point I might have to take a job in a less than desirable location. I've done that before for employment. However, that knowledge doesn't make me inclined to try to put myself in a less than desirable location for the PhD. And I'm not specifically anti-South. And I never said the voting issues were specifically in the South, nor did I indicate that any of the other issues I mentioned were specifically in the South. As it stands, the are only 10 or so states that provide protections against employment discrimination for gender identity/expression. Trust me, I'm well aware of how messed up most of the country can be. I've grown up in a conservative midwestern state for my entire life as a lower middle class racial minority with political beliefs that are divergent from most of the state's agenda. Are there great people here? Yes. Are the college towns fairly progressive? Yes. But the rest of the state is a damn mess and the people in charge are trying to push all sorts of legislation that gives me no interest in continuing to build a life here. To me, it's completely reasonable to want to exit this situation. I may apply to one school in this state that happens to be a great school, but the idea of being chained here for another five or six years makes me sick.

 

The issues that I have with states or cities have nothing to do with the universities. I know the universities can still be great and be in ridiculous locations, but I still have to be able to live. I'm not just going to be wrapped up and protected in some university bubble.

 

Yes, I do, in fact, know about Pennsylvania and Ohio. There are maybe two schools between those first two that I'm considering. As for Arizona, again, never said it was in the South. There's no way on Earth that I will ever, at any point, have any interest whatsoever in going to Arizona unless some radical shift in the political agenda there occurs. Arizona, to me, is the apex of pretty much everything I don't want in a state regardless of how good some of the schools are there. 

 

And let's not pretend that the existence of federal law's ability to override the state makes everything nice and cozy. For one thing, the federal government doesn't even have all the necessary laws and protections in place, and even when it does, it often doesn't come in as expected. If it did, a hell of a lot more people wouldn't get off so easily when they commit blatant hate crimes.

 

And your state may never succeed in impeding on women's rights, but several states do. Every single day. It only takes a cursory glance through the news to find the legislation coming down in various states all over the country. And while some of it may/will eventually be overturned, that doesn't change the fact that those that vote in favor of those laws have made it clear to the women in their states that they have little to no value. Why would any woman, who has something of an option, want to live in a place that regards her in that manner?

 

And finally, yes I am aware of advocacy groups in conservative states, which is why I noted their importance in the first place. One in my state helped my fiancee after he faced employment discrimination at work in our state which has no protections in place. However, they aren't existent in every state and they aren't always as strong or well-funded. And I know that because I've discussed this, at length, with the people in that organization and I've done research of my own. 

 

Lol, wow. Ok, first of all, there is no need for rudeness. I am willing to accept that there are plenty of good qualities about everywhere and that there are plenty of people happy to live everywhere. I have also, somewhat clearly given the list of schools I applied to, found some schools that I am willing to move to certain places for. But, frankly, grad school is one of the few times in my career where I will have some say in location so to deny that my feelings of safety had some say in determining where I applied would be just a lie. (I also recognize, as someone who has been a victim of a hate crime in a super liberal pocket of a blue state, that this is not necessarily logical but, having experienced what I did, feeling safe matters to me a lot more when I know I can't actually control being safe.)

Yes, as a political science major, I have a fairly extensive understanding of state/federal law. Enough to know, too, that federal anti-hate crime legislation is virtually non-existent and poorly enforced at the state level when it does exist. Don't be snide.

We are all weighing different things in different ways. For some of us, location matters a great deal. I'm not judging or attacking anyone for NOT caring about location, please extend the same courtesy.

 

^THIS, THIS, and THIS.

 

Oh come on, I am not being rude, I was merely opining on the futility of being geographically selective in a field with dismal job prospects. You guys are acting like some nut job tea party politicians are representative of universities and their academics as well as the college towns that aren't demographically representative of the states in which they're located. I didn't say anything to you to warrant this kind of response.

 

Actually, we're not acting like that. In fact, I don't recall ever saying that the legislators in the states I'm not interested in had any control over or representation of the universities and their academics (though Mitch Daniels is in charge of Purdue now, which is terrible, but whatevs). I also didn't discount the fact that college towns are often enclaves within in state. In fact, I believe multiple people have noted that reality in this thread. But a great college town doesn't make a great state. A great college town doesn't provide the necessary legislative protections. A great college town doesn't mean rights won't be impeded upon. The issue of choosing where to move for half a decade is about much more than the metro area where the school is located. 

 

Frankly, location is a factor for me. I don't feel bad about that. Nor am I wiling to be made out to be some idealistic kid just because I'm not giving consideration to places that I know would not be adequate for me and my family. If location isn't/wasn't a factor for you and your applications, then awesome. That's great for you. It has nothing to do with me or anyone else who does consider that to be an issue of the utmost importance.

[squire_western]

The only reason this is worth responding to is that I'm so sick of being treated like an asshole by you and girlwhowearsglasses for claiming that geographical selectivity is occupationally imprudent. If you can't respond to an internet forum conversation without whining about me being a big ole meanie and name calling, then God help you.

 

Ok, let me just say this first. I am an educated human who is fully capable of reading and researching. I have visited several states in my life, interacted from people from all over the country and such. I don't especially appreciate the tone as though this is all brand new information or I'm incapable little girl or I'm just living life on some arbitrary stereotypes.

 

I didn't say or indicate that any of this isn't true, nor did I refer to you as an "incapable little girl." Is this your way of suggesting that someone who disagrees with you is sexist? Lame.

 

 

No. Just no.

 

I don't understand.

 

I realize that at some point I might have to take a job in a less than desirable location. I've done that before for employment. However, that knowledge doesn't make me inclined to try to put myself in a less than desirable location for the PhD. And I'm not specifically anti-South. And I never said the voting issues were specifically in the South, nor did I indicate that any of the other issues I mentioned were specifically in the South.

 

No, but you did indicate that you would absolutely not be willing to move to the south and then immediately afterward you pointed to a variety of political abuses that warrant your geographical selectivity. I assumed those complementary statements were meant to relate to each other, and I sincerely apologize if they weren't.

 

 

Yes, I do, in fact, know about Pennsylvania and Ohio. There are maybe two schools between those first two that I'm considering. As for Arizona, again, never said it was in the South. There's no way on Earth that I will ever, at any point, have any interest whatsoever in going to Arizona unless some radical shift in the political agenda there occurs. Arizona, to me, is the apex of pretty much everything I don't want in a state regardless of how good some of the schools are there. 

 

I know you didn't say Arizona was in the south. However, you did raise the issue of states influencing ethnic studies curricula. I brought up the case of Arizona because I know that has been an issue in secondary education there. Again, this was based on the idea that your statements concerning political abuses and your refusal to go to the south were related. I apologize again if those seemingly complementary statements were not, in fact, related.

 

And let's not pretend that the existence of federal law's ability to override the state makes everything nice and cozy. For one thing, the federal government doesn't even have all the necessary laws and protections in place, and even when it does, it often doesn't come in as expected. If it did, a hell of a lot more people wouldn't get off so easily when they commit blatant hate crimes.

 

You're absolutely right. However, there is not a state in the US that is exempted from hate crimes, nor is there any location where one is absolutely safe from hate crimes.

 

And your state may never succeed in impeding on women's rights, but several states do. Every single day. It only takes a cursory glance through the news to find the legislation coming down in various states all over the country. And while some of it may/will eventually be overturned, that doesn't change the fact that those that vote in favor of those laws have made it clear to the women in their states that they have little to no value.

 

I did not suggest that this was not the case except in reference to my particular state. Plenty of state legislatures have made it perfectly clear that women in their states have little to no value. So what's the answer? Or rather, where is the utopia to which you plan to move?

 

And finally, yes I am aware of advocacy groups in conservative states, which is why I noted their importance in the first place. One in my state helped my fiancee after he faced employment discrimination at work in our state which has no protections in place. However, they aren't existent in every state and they aren't always as strong or well-funded. And I know that because I've discussed this, at length, with the people in that organization and I've done research of my own. 

 

That's great news.

^THIS, THIS, and THIS.

 

Sigh.

Actually, we're not acting like that. In fact, I don't recall ever saying that the legislators in the states I'm not interested in had any control over or representation of the universities and their academics (though Mitch Daniels is in charge of Purdue now, which is terrible, but whatevs).

 

Actually, you are. You are writing off entire areas of the country based on your perception of a political climate that in many cases does not exist "on the ground," so to speak. Do you think that what an Arizona state representative says about Native American studies in the classroom matters at ASU? Do you think that you will be discriminated against based on race at your job at the flagship research university of Alabama? Do you believe that the administrative decisions at UNC-Chapel Hill are made by rampant sexists? Do you think Mitch Daniels' being charge of Purdue has altered its focus on ethnic studies in the literature program?

 

 A great college town doesn't mean rights won't be impeded upon.

 

And neither does a great New England metropolis.

 

Frankly, location is a factor for me. I don't feel bad about that.

 

Good for you.

 

Nor am I wiling to be made out to be some idealistic kid just because I'm not giving consideration to places that I know would not be adequate for me and my family.

 

The idealistic thing is assuming you have a choice in the matter when it comes to the market. I'm not making a value judgment, I'm simply spelling out an issue (that hasn't been addressed for all the posturing) that I don't know what the point is in being geographically selective in a market with bad prospects. This isn't a value judgment, it's simple economics. What will you do when the tt offering comes from a state that you're not willing to live in as a phd student, which presumably for a much shorter period of time? Is it worth it to you to relocate your family then? And if not, why pursue humanities academia in the first place?

 

If location isn't/wasn't a factor for you and your applications, then awesome. That's great for you.

 

As I stated earlier, I would love to live in a place where I'm not the minority. But I gave that up to take a stab at English academia.

 

It has nothing to do with me or anyone else who does consider that to be an issue of the utmost importance.

 

Again, because I'm not the asshole you would prefer me to be, I wasn't suggesting that MY OPINION has anything to do with you or anyone else who is concerned about location. I would have thought, however, that the job market DOES have something to do with you.

 

That's all I've been saying in my posts. I don't appreciate you and gwwg being so disrespectful simply because it is easier to portray someone else as an asshole than to engage them. If you want to adopt an elitist attitude toward half the country, I don't care. But, once again, I don't think I said anything that warrants either of you acting like I'm a playground bully while the two of you are condescending and disparaging.

[practical cat]

what? how was squire_western being rude? i thought the point was politely articulated. i understand the concern and think location is a perfectly legitimate thing to let weigh in to your decision, but i really do think the blanket bias against entire regions - which is largely based on stereotypes - is a problem. some of the bluest populations in the country are in the south, and they have local laws and cultures to match. here's a map of voting patterns from 2012 by county (and in one of them, shaded by population density) to illustrate the point.

It's a tone that suggests that, as the reluctantmidwesterner put it, we're incapable of coming to these conclusions on our own. It's totally snide and condescending to pretend like we can't understand law and politics without the help of someone on the Internet. And it's not about voting patterns, trust me, my entire undergrad department is speckled with these really cute hippie maps of the US that are totally purple and it's lovely and everyone is happy. Like, I get it. There are some people everywhere who are great and some who are not so great. And that is independent of red and blue too. But there are entire states that have laws that mean I can't even count on any sort of response/protection if I am attacked again. That's a factor, it just is. I'm NOT making decisions based on stereotypes, I'm basing them on well-researched understandings of law and law enforcement (which, again, I DO actually know some stuff about) and accusing me of being biased isn't really productive. We're all being selective in different ways, like I have already said. I don't have anything against the south or ANYWHERE (and I'm not offended by people who don't want to live in the Midwest either!) but location is a factor for me and, because I hate warm climates, the south has been largely crossed out for me even before I started thinking about laws. (Though, like I said above, there are some schools that I applied to in spite of location and there will likely be a couple of those next year too. Nashville seems great even if it doesn't really snow.)

Also, all of the well-thought-out stuff that reluctantmidwesterner said. I think some of you are responding to things that we just aren't saying and I think rm has a great response to that.

Eta, didn't really mean to up vote pepper or whatever their username is now (especially since they're clearly not actually responding to what I'm saying but rather the arguments they want me to be making) but bygones. I need to stop reading these boards on my phone.

Edited March 24, 2013 by girl who wears glasses

[toasterazzi]

The only reason this is worth responding to is that I'm so sick of being treated like an asshole by you and girlwhowearsglasses for claiming that geographical selectivity is occupationally imprudent. If you can't respond to an internet forum conversation without whining about me being a big ole meanie and name calling, then God help you.

 

 

I didn't say or indicate that any of this isn't true, nor did I refer to you as an "incapable little girl." Is this your way of suggesting that someone who disagrees with you is sexist? Lame.

 

 

 

I don't understand.

 

 

No, but you did indicate that you would absolutely not be willing to move to the south and then immediately afterward you pointed to a variety of political abuses that warrant your geographical selectivity. I assumed those complementary statements were meant to relate to each other, and I sincerely apologize if they weren't.

 

 

 

I know you didn't say Arizona was in the south. However, you did raise the issue of states influencing ethnic studies curricula. I brought up the case of Arizona because I know that has been an issue in secondary education there. Again, this was based on the idea that your statements concerning political abuses and your refusal to go to the south were related. I apologize again if those seemingly complementary statements were not, in fact, related.

 

 

You're absolutely right. However, there is not a state in the US that is exempted from hate crimes, nor is there any location where one is absolutely safe from hate crimes.

 

 

I did not suggest that this was not the case except in reference to my particular state. Plenty of state legislatures have made it perfectly clear that women in their states have little to no value. So what's the answer? Or rather, where is the utopia to which you plan to move?

 

 

That's great news.

 

Sigh.

 

Actually, you are. You are writing off entire areas of the country based on your perception of a political climate that in many cases does not exist "on the ground," so to speak. Do you think that what an Arizona state representative says about Native American studies in the classroom matters at ASU? Do you think that you will be discriminated against based on race at your job at the flagship research university of Alabama? Do you believe that the administrative decisions at UNC-Chapel Hill are made by rampant sexists? Do you think Mitch Daniels' being charge of Purdue has altered its focus on ethnic studies in the literature program?

 

 

And neither does a great New England metropolis.

 

 

Good for you.

 

 

The idealistic thing is assuming you have a choice in the matter when it comes to the market. I'm not making a value judgment, I'm simply spelling out an issue (that hasn't been addressed for all the posturing) that I don't know what the point is in being geographically selective in a market with bad prospects. This isn't a value judgment, it's simple economics. What will you do when the tt offering comes from a state that you're not willing to live in as a phd student, which presumably for a much shorter period of time? Is it worth it to you to relocate your family then? And if not, why pursue humanities academia in the first place?

 

 

As I stated earlier, I would love to live in a place where I'm not the minority. But I gave that up to take a stab at English academia.

 

 

Again, because I'm not the asshole you would prefer me to be, I wasn't suggesting that MY OPINION has anything to do with you or anyone else who is concerned about location. I would have thought, however, that the job market DOES have something to do with you.

 

That's all I've been saying in my posts. I don't appreciate you and gwwg being so disrespectful simply because it is easier to portray someone else as an asshole than to engage them. If you want to adopt an elitist attitude toward half the country, I don't care. But, once again, I don't think I said anything that warrants either of you acting like I'm a playground bully while the two of you are condescending and disparaging.

 

*sigh*

 

Ya know what? We could keep arguing about this point by point, but I have the strong inclination that neither of us will be able to convince the other. I think we'd better just agree to disagree because this is derailing the thread and we clearly aren't understanding each other.

 

Ultimately, location is going to be a factor in my application choices. That's the long and short of it for me.