I didn't, I'm a postdoc and it was painfully obvious.
I only skimmed your post, I'm sorry. I couldn't do more, there were so many verbosely presented "insights" such as: "Identity in the real world is full of a humongous mixture of traits and hallmarks..." Or the groan inducingly condescending explanation of complexities of black identity. "Even within America, blackness is deeply geographical, gendered, and class-divided." I think even undergrads fresh in college wouldn't be impressed by this level of observation. And I'm obviously not a social scientist so I don't have particularly high expectations.
I didn't know about Jason Whitlock, that was sort of informative. So thank you for that one. But in general don't they teach you in whatever you do to write for conciseness and clarity when you're trying to impress, as you appear to be? Especially people outside of your area. I'm not even talking about tone, that is probably intentionally antagonistic, and understandably so for having fun on the internets.
(I'm assuming you're a grad student, feel free to correct me)
Couldn't be arsed to read a respectful, coherent, in-depth reply to your own admonishment of not being elaborate enough?
Laaaame.





Retour en haut





