Potential sensitive/heavy topics: discussion of mental health, quotation regarding people experiencing mental health conditions.
“For example, ex-mental patients…are similar in that their failing is not readily visible.” (Goffman, 1963). I gasped and blinked rapidly to erase my confusion. “Surely I didn’t read that?” I asked myself. I felt the familiar pressure settle onto my chest as I read the sentence again. The pressure got heavier and tighter as I tried to reason out what I had read. The anxiety continued to build and soon I was swimming in questions. “When was this piece written again? What was the main purpose of using that language? Why am I reading this?” I felt hurt and sad, but I took several breaths in an attempt to continue reading to finish the assignment for class. As a person with Generalized Anxiety Disorder, reading that people with mental health conditions have “fail[ed]” was upsetting. This situation kept pulling my attention during later class discussion of the book, and I had lingering questions – have other students experienced this?
I argue that students’ experiences with problematic literature in the sociological canon are under discussed, understudied, and often fail to acknowledge the complexities of embodied experiences like the one I shared above. Echoing Irving Kenneth Zola’s argument in an autoethnographic work, I have noticed a “structured silence of personal bodily experience” (Zola, 1991: 1). With this piece, I aim to push back against that silence and the lack of embodied discussions of encountering harmful and/or problematic readings.
Embodiment can be defined as “the manifestation of knowing and feeling, located through one’s physical body” (Estes & DiCarlo, 2019:111). Feminist embodiment theory, situated knowledges, and the concept of intersectionality offer lenses to better understand confrontations with problematic literature in the sociological canon. Not only do these theories tell us that our unique lived experiences are valid, important, and meaningful, but they describe ways of knowing through our bodily experiences. Many scholars discuss a feminist view of the body as a site of experiential knowledge, and call for more interdisciplinary approaches to topics in sociology.
These approaches also help us understand healing in the act of writing itself. A large body of literature suggests that writing about one’s experiences can be cathartic and restorative, and even a form of self-care. Though research notes the positive benefits of writing, much research also explains that people may experience pain or distress upon initially reflecting on difficult experiences. Henriksen et al. note that the sometimes “painful relationship between writer and text should be awarded more attention in scholarship on writing, and that a way of doing so is through the framework of feminist theory on vulnerability, [and] embodiment” (Henriksen et al., 2021: 561).
In writing this particular blog post, I too experienced the duality of pain and catharsis. I found it difficult to reflect on harmful experiences with sociological literature as it brought to light more sadness and vulnerability than I had anticipated. However, allowing myself to feel those emotions and utilize this writing as a form of healing gave me a way to process, an outlet to express myself, and highlighted critical questions about academia . Writing about my reaction to reading harmful literature through a feminist embodiment lens allowed me to look at my particular experience and ask questions about the discipline of sociology and how classroom facilitators and other students respond to these situations. As we work to decolonize the canon, how do we handle harmful and problematic literature in a way that centers restorative justice and healing? How can classroom facilitators and other students support intersectional and embodied experiences of reading such literature?
Though I have no clear answers to these questions, I suggest first acknowledging the ways in which confronting harmful language that is racist, sexist, classist, imperialist, and more can evoke negative mental and physical reactions for students like the one I shared above. I would urge classroom facilitators to give students a disclaimer before engaging with such readings, as well as create space for discussing reactions, feelings, and thoughts in class. Additionally, critically examining the purpose behind “classical” works to remove and further contextualize such harmful pieces of literature is important in this process. There are many resources for facilitators regarding engaging in difficult discussions, such as resources from Vanderbilt’s Center for Teaching, confronting settler colonialism, and decolonizing the sociological canon.
My purpose here, though, is to bring to light my own lived experiences as a student in order to break the silence of students’ embodied experiences with problematic literature and hopefully aid in changing how these works are presented to students and processed after reading. For students, I would encourage writing about your experiences in an embodied way, discussing in safe spaces, and accessing resources for mental health support such as Mental Health America and National Alliance on Mental Illness.
I wanted to share my lived experience of confronting harmful language in the sociological canon and to offer helpful theoretical lenses to process and heal from the experience, as well as to encourage students and facilitators alike to acknowledge these experiences, support folks grappling with these encounters, and promote healing for all.
References
- Estes, Carroll with DiCarlo, Nicholas. Aging A-Z: Concepts Toward Emancipatory Gerontology. Routledge: 2019.
- Goffman, E. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Simon & Schuster Inc.: 1963.
- Henriksen, Line et al. “Writing Bodies and Bodies of Text: Thinking Vulnerability through Monsters.” Gender, work, and organization 29.2 (2022): 561–574.
- Zola, Irving Kenneth. 1991. “Bringing our bodies and ourselves back in: reflections on a past, present, and future ‘medical sociology.’” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 32(1): 1- 16.
Brittney Pond is a co-Assistant Director of the Emancipatory Sciences Lab and a doctoral student in the Department of Social & Behavioral Sciences at UCSF.
This blog is part of the series called Inquiring Minds: On Decolonizing the Sociological Canon. Students came together to write this series on harmful literature in the sociological canon, which features 5 blog posts.
- Confronting Canon and Empire by Kourtney Nham
- What Does the Writer Owe the Reader? by Kate LaForge
- Embodied Experiences Navigating Harmful Literature by Brittney Pond
- Institutions of Higher Learning Must Do More by Berty Arreguin
- Whose Class is it, Anyways? by Selam Kidane