Yongho Kim

Category: anthropology

  • notes, seminar. anthro in a nutshell

    handout:
    http://wiki.adelantemac.org/Anthropology_in_a_Nutshell

    british don’t like “culture” -> colonial mission, maintaining
    french -> things inside the head, rationalism

    foucault, levi strats -> like comets! they come and go
    LTAM new anthro, no impact

    school training is system-adaptive,
    thoughts extensions

    notes on the handout:
    culture -> cultivate
    ethnography=cultural anthro
    ethnology=comparative cross-cultural study of human cultures
    fight against racism: culture over race, public sphere

  • anth380 sexual networks in jefferson school article

    Medical Anthropology class,

    this is the coverage on the study of high school romantic and sexual networks that I mentioned today in class. This is the link to the paper:

    Chains of Affection: The Structure of Adolescent Romantic and Sexual Networks
    Peter S. Bearman, Columbia University
    James Moody, Ohio State University
    Katherine Stovel, University of Washington
    www.sociology.ohio-state.edu/jwm/chains.pdf

    Ohio State University has a press release summarizing the findings:

    RESEARCHERS MAP THE SEXUAL NETWORK OF AN ENTIRE HIGH SCHOOL
    researchnews.osu.edu/archive/chains.htm

    as I explained in class, the paper studies sexual behavior of jefferson high school students and how they form a network of sorts, that sprawls fairly uniformly compared to adult sexual behavior. They do so via a number of confidential surveys conducted in 1995. Researchers concluded that

    unlike many adult networks, there was no core group of very sexually active people at the high school. There were not many students who had many partners and who provided links to the rest of the community. (Grabmeier citing Moody’s conclusion, in the press release above)

    I saw this paper mentioned in zamzzi.com, a south corean blog loosely linked to an online sex toys/supplies store maintained by the same person. The posting, in turn, was referring to a news article in NaverNews [네이버뉴스] and originally developed by Chosun.com [조선일보].

    This is how it was intially portrayed in the south corean press:


    Caption: Sexual Relationship Strucutre of Jefferson High Students. Blue=male students, Red=female students. “2건” stands for “2 cases”. “63쌍” stands for “63 couples”.
    Source: 윤희영, chosun.com 25/01/05. 288명이 性관계로 연결: 미국고교생 실태 표본조사 832명중 126명만 ‘1대1’
    [Heeyung, Yoon. 288 people were sexualy networked: only 126 out of 832 high school students were in a “1 on 1 relationship” in a U.S. high school students sample research.]
    article: www.chosun.com/international/news/200501/200501250338.html
    same artice: news.naver.com/news/read.php?mode=LSD&office_id=023&article_id=0000109820

    It is of interest how this chart was initially pictured in the paper:


    From the American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 100, No. 1. “Chains of affection: The structure of adolescent romantic and sexual networks,” Bearman PS, Moody J, Stovel K.

    south corean blog entry commenting on the story: zzamzi.com/tt/index.php?pl=195
    another blog entry: Roland Piquepaille. The Sexual Network of a High School primidi.com/2005/01/27.html

    It struck me how several reactions to the coverage at naver.com (which caters to a young readership, mostly in their late 20’s) were expressing “disappointment” (huh?) at how far “sexually perverted” the U.S. society was from what they had imagined it to be. There was abundant attack on the existence of homosexuals and “cheap girls” as portrayed by the chart. In part, I think, this has to do with how the study was portrayed (the subtitle was emphasizing how “only” 13% of the population was in a single relationship) The more conservative chosun.com did not receive any readership reaction.

    zamzzi.com’s article gave it a more positive spin, focusing on the fact that the research suggested a honest solution to the realities of high schools in the u.s. Readership reaction were on a similar tone as well.

    anyway, I wanted to point out that the professor’s observation that “when you engage in sexual intercourse with a person, STD-wise this implies engaging in sexual intercourse with every single person that that person has had an intercourse with, and in turn with every person that those people have had an intercourse with, and so forth” was portrayed in a dramatically more graphic fashion with the blue dots/red dots chart. Ah, this has nothing to do with the elections (I think)

  • anth490 sample letter to prospective employer

    Assignment: Write a one-page introduction of yourself to a specific, prospective employer or graduate school.

    (more…)

  • anth490 negoatiating the course

    Assignment: Bring in a list of at least 5 topics or skills you would like covered in the course.

    • spotting statistical exaggerations and issues of overinterpretation

    as a student who had at most two weeks of training doing linear regressions, I want to learn the basics of faulty statistical analyses.

    • macro phenomenoms

    as anthropologists mainly trained to study the observable, how do we deal with the big stuff? is there a big stuff? when can we say that the NYT is “wrong” in this and that?

    • simplifying anthro

    when people ask me what anthropology is, I usually give them the british social functionalist definition, because it sounds most “social scientific”. what could be a non biased explanation of what anthropology is for nonanthros?

    • is there a way to deal with workplace stress that doesn’t sound like another bourgeios urban advice?
    • i’ll improvise #5

  • [Jack Weatherford] ANTH490 Checklist for Invited Speakers

    Checklist for Invited Speakers: Anthropology 490

    Before the Class:

    1. Explain to the speaker carefully what you want the speaker to do.

    2. Find out if any special equipment or handouts are needed.

    3. Decide on the format with the speaker. How long will the speaker speak? Is the speaker one member of a panel? Or will it be all question and answer, slide presentation, or what?

    4. E-mail or write a confirmation restating the time, place, topic and other relevant information.

    5. Send directions to the speaker or precise instructions on the location of the class. If the speaker is coming from off campus you might arrange to meet outside the building. Show the speaker where the washroom is located, and escort the speaker to the class.

    The Day of the Class:

    6. Have water for the speaker — but also offer tea or coffee in addition to the water.

    7. Introduce the speaker to the class in three to five minutes. Give the background of the speaker and re-state the topic or purpose of the talk.

    8. Have questions prepared and have other students who are prepared to ask them.

    9. At the end of the class, escort the speaker out of the building.

    After the Class:

    Within 24-hours, have the thank-you letter in the mail. Even if you send an electronic version, you must send a paper one for the speaker’s file. The letter must contain at least three paragraphs of at least two-sentences each, as follows:

    Paragraph 1: The General thanks in which you summarize the entire event. E.g, “Thank you for speaking to our anthropology seminar on your work educating homeless children in the …..” Always begin the letter with “Thank you.” Never begin with a phrase such as

    I want to thank you…. I wish to thank you….. I would like to thank you…

    I am writing to thank you… or I am Joan who invited you…..

    Paragraph 2: Specific thanks in which you single out one part of the presentation.
    “E.g, “The class particularly appreciated the description of how you entered this work
    and applied the skills that you had……”
    “I very much enjoyed hearing about the individuals whom you described because….”

    Paragraphs: Looking to the future. Repeat one phrase of thanks and offer good luck or success for something else. E.g,

  • Strategic repositioning within academia

    arguing for the statement that Cultural Anthropology belongs to the humanities and not to the social sciences

    December 20, 2004
    History of Anthropological Ideas
    Yongho Kim

    This paper defends the position that Cultural Anthropology, as a field of study, belongs (and should belong) to the humanities division. In so doing, I argue along two main points: 1) that anthropological work, as well as any others, engages with the humanities at a more fundamental level than the social sciences, and 2) that the field of anthropology would benefit from positioning itself within the humanities division rather than in the social sciences.
    (more…)