Sometimes, you learn lessons the hard way

I haven’t posted here in quite some time. There’s a simple reason for that: the last six months of my life has been pretty hard. My cat died, then I had cancer, and then my father died. All in the last 6 months. It’s pretty mind boggling. The cancer was minor, and I’m recovered from it, but it still threw my world for a loop.

Naturally, my work has suffered from these constant shifts. So much so that I lost sight of what I was doing and started trying to do too much. I was trying to look at a book instead of a sentence.

Let me explain.

And so it begins

My exams are done and passed. My prospectus is all but done, awaiting only the official word of my committee. But while waiting for that official word, I did get the go ahead from my adviser to just keep going. He said that he is glad I learned not to wait around, and that I should continue to just forge ahead, and not worry about hearing the official word. I am taking that to mean that the prospectus has met his approval, meaning it will eventually get the official word.

That’s both liberating and terrifying. It’s liberating because I am finally able to start on my dissertation. It’s terrifying for exactly the same reason. I have to write a dissertation. This is a book, and a scholarly one.

Putting it all together: How to write a prospectus

No one ever did this for me. I wish someone had. I wish I’d known before I started. But I didn’t.

I started my prospectus with no idea what I was doing. I had two others I had seen, things to model after, but I didn’t know even the basic format, aside from what my colleagues had done before me.

So, I followed the model before me, and I put in a section describing the project, one about preliminary theory, one about research questions, and then a vague outline of the chapters in my dissertation. On top of that, I put in a literature review, which was largely taken from this blog. I ended up with a ‘draft’ of 52 pages.

I also ended up using the wrong tone, writing to the wrong audience, and generally doing everything wrong. That’s okay; it’s kind of how I work. I do it, I get told what’s wrong, and I do it again. Not very efficient, but it works. Still, there are a few things it would have been nice to know:

Wrapping it up… one more hoop to go

It’s official: I am now ABD. My oral exams went swimmingly, and I can now be considered a colleague by those with PhDs. All I have left to do is finish off my prospectus and write a dissertation.

Of course, saying that “all I have left” is my dissertation is much like saying that after Normandy, all the allies had left was to defeat Germany. Saying “just” a dissertation is tantamount to “just” an arctic expedition, or “just” a trip to the moon.

Okay, maybe it’s not THAT bad. But it isn’t something I should go into lightly. That, I think, is fair.

Literature Review: the purpose of this blog

I started this blog in October 2007. When I did it, it was because my advisor and friend Bradley Dilger suggested that it would be a good way to organize my thoughts and keep in mind what I glean from anything I read. He suggested that I write little reviews of everything I read, both as practice for writing reviews and just to keep my memory somewhere I can read it.

Seemed like a great idea at the time. And it was; the number of papers I have written with the help of my blog, the number of theories I have come to understand better, and the number of times I’ve turned here for inspiration is really pretty high. But recently, I’ve found another purpose.

I was asked by my current adviser to write a Literature Review for my prospectus. Not everything I’ve ever read, but a good grasp on the subject, enough to establish that I know the field. And that’s what I did. Putting it together helped me to organize my thoughts and to identify the main themes of my project, which in turn will help me finish off my prospectus.

At first, it was a daunting task. How could I do all that? How could I go through all the things I’ve read and synthesize them into a literature review? Then it hit me: I already have. That’s what this blog IS. Suddenly, the task of writing a Literature Review was less about a ton of writing and organizing and more about a synthesis and structuring of what I have already written. It’s not cheating: I wrote it to begin with. I didn’t write it for a publication, I wrote it for my own edification. That has always been pretty explicit, I think.

The end result was that in two days, I was able to put together about 30 pages of Literature Review. This blog has, once again, paid for itself. (Not that I pay for it)

Prospectus, a (sort of) outline

For the last few days, I’ve been approaching the prospectus in the “Throw it all, see what sticks” format. No attention really paid to structure beyond a few basic signposts, I’ve just been trying to get the ideas down on (electronic) paper. Thankfully, I’ve been collecting sources and doing little outlines for quite some time now. I’m already up to 52 sources, and still feel like I’m just getting started.

Anyway, I don’t know if the way I’m heading is the right way. There’s another way to do this. Actually, there are a lot of different ways, but for me, usually one of these two is the best one to use. So if not the scattershot format I’ve been doing, what do I do? An outline. First basic, then fleshed out, then more fleshed out, and eventually into a paper of significant length. So let’s start with the outline.

And so it begins

I’ve been dancing around the idea for a while, putting together quotes and finding sources, telling myself I was making progress even though I was afraid to actually move towards sitting down and doing it. But no longer; I’ve started working. On what, you ask? My prospectus.

School is a system of hoop jumping. Before college, you jump through hoops in order to GET to college. The more hoops you jump through, the better of a school you end up getting into. In college, you jump through hoops to either get a job or get into a good graduate program.

Eventually, though, you end up at the highest level you can get. For me, that’s the PhD program, where there were more hoops. First there was coursework. Then there were exams. Next comes the Prospectus, then the Dissertation and getting a job.

Well, I’m ready for that hoop. I’m in the air, trying to jump, and seeing what’s there on the other side. Hopefully it’s something I can land on without twisting anything.

Boxes, Boundaries, Intersexuality

First, a bit of unofficial news: I have been told that I have passed my exams, or at least that I should and should proceed as if I have. The other reader is out of town, so nothing is official, but I have gotten some assurance, which takes off a whole lot of pressure.

And then adds some. I need to get started on this prospectus thing. Which means more research. Which is good; I’m good at research.

This leads me to the article for today: “Building Boxes and Policing Boundaries: (De)Constructing Intersexuality, Transgender and Bisexuality” by Betsy Lucal.

Bockting, thrice

I’ve started working with Walter Bockting. He’s going to help me with this last exam, and he’s going to help me with my research afterwards. As a part of that, I need to get a few reviews here on the site. I want to make sure I have all the quotes I need right at hand.

To that end, I’m going to talk about three articles that involve Walter in some way: “Homosexual and Bisexual identity in Sex-Reassigned Female-To-Male Transexuals.” by Eli Coleman, Walter Bockting, and Louis Gooren; “A Further Assessment of Blanchard’s Typology of Homosexual Versus Non-Homosexual or Autogynephilic Gender Dysphoria.” by Larry Nuttbrok, Walter Bockting, Mona Mason, Sel Hwahng, Andrew Rosenblum, Monica Macri, and Jeffrey Becker; and “Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-To-Male Transexuals in North America: Emergence of a Transgender Sexuality.” by Walter Bockting, Autumn Benner, Eli Coleman. I’ll start from the top, and move to the article where Walter was the primary author.

Gender, Queerness, and Nonverbal Communication

I’ve discovered recently that the used book store is one of my primary places to find sources for my dissertation. I keep finding incredibly good books there. I’m guessing students who take classes on feminist theory or queer theory sell their books there, and then I can scoop them up. Works well for me. I’d like to talk today about parts of one of those sources. The book is called Genderqueer: voices from beyond the sexual binary, and it’s edited by Joan Nestle, Clare Howell, and Riki Wilchins. They open the book by each giving their own introduction, and Wilchins’ is where I’d like to start.

There will probably be more on this book at a later date, but for now, I’m just looking at Riki Wilchins’ contributions.