In chapter 3 Johnson talks about capitalism developed white privilege. Capitalism, race, gender, and privilege are all interconnected in a way. Capitalism connects to racism in direct and indirect ways.
Johnson talks about how capitalism works. Capitalists sell the goods and services that the workers produce, meaning they are not the ones who are really working. Some people have no choice but to work for little money that the capitalists offer. Although white racism has not been around forever some people are sill confused of how it came about. Land and raw materials have also been incorporated into the capitalists’ connection to white racism. Capitalists have used racism as a way to keep their workers wages low, and their productivity high. Workers did not ask for higher wages for the simple fact that they would be fired for asking such questions. Being privileged can also be complicated in a way. People who may be privileged in one category, ant then not privileged because he or she may fit into a different category.
Privilege can serve as dominating over others. For example when a woman challenges a man and he calls her a lesbian or the women just gets quiet and may not say much. People take these insults seriously because it does hurt a woman’s reputation, and there is not much she can say to the man for calling her that because the men are perceived as dominant. Why is it that men make more money than women on average? Why do women have to be considered a lower status compared to men? No mater how times change these issues will still seem to be present.
I think this was an interesting chapter in how capitalism and class are related, but also how he gives examples of why people feel the way they do if they are privileged or not. Sometimes I do not understand peoples’ greed to succeed and be powerful is done at the expense of others. People should not be afraid to ask for a bonus or any kind of pay increase if they have been hard workers and have held a superior job title for many years. Johnson states that part of the misconception is that privilege is all about individuals and I agree with him. Sometimes I just do not understand why people put others in categories that make them feel “less like a man” or how women are the weaker sex compared to men.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Monday, January 29, 2007
chapter 2
In chapter 2 of Privilege, Power, and Difference it first discusses how difference is not the problem. People may think that being different is what we are all afraid of. It then goes on to discuss a diversity wheel that demonstrates our characteristics that we show to others, and how others see us. Privilege is defined as one group having something of value that is denied of all other groups. Most people are unaware of being privileged. People experience being privileged or not based on the jobs they have, income housing, and even healthcare. Oppression then comes into effect with people of color and different races.
In order to understand these terms we need to know what they mean. For example being privileged but having an oppressive relationship does not mean that your behavior is oppressive too. The author is trying to define these terms and clarify examples of what people may think they mean. The relationship with these terms can go hand in hand with each other, but for the most part it all depends on what people think they mean. Some people do get offended when talking about these issues, but overall they are present in society and they will always be discussed.
I agree with the author when he says there are 2 types of privileges. One being unearned entitlements, and the other being conferred dominance. The first privilege talks about things everyone should value such as security. But this isn’t provided to everyone. For example inner city schools need more security compared to wealthy public schools in the suburbs. All public places should be safe but, are not because of where people are located. The second privilege talks about giving a group power over another group. The perfect example of this is that men should dominate over women. It is almost as if being privileged in one way or another makes you seem better than everyone else, or at least those who are not privileged.
I thought this chapter was interesting and is a good way of understanding what privilege, oppression, and difference really mean in today’s society. I do not know whether things will get better in the future or not, but for now we have to deal with these issues and talk about them, whether people want to or not. It is sad how so many people think they are better than others because they have a good job or make good money, when in reality someone else could possibly have the same qualifications for the same job but aren’t privileged.
In order to understand these terms we need to know what they mean. For example being privileged but having an oppressive relationship does not mean that your behavior is oppressive too. The author is trying to define these terms and clarify examples of what people may think they mean. The relationship with these terms can go hand in hand with each other, but for the most part it all depends on what people think they mean. Some people do get offended when talking about these issues, but overall they are present in society and they will always be discussed.
I agree with the author when he says there are 2 types of privileges. One being unearned entitlements, and the other being conferred dominance. The first privilege talks about things everyone should value such as security. But this isn’t provided to everyone. For example inner city schools need more security compared to wealthy public schools in the suburbs. All public places should be safe but, are not because of where people are located. The second privilege talks about giving a group power over another group. The perfect example of this is that men should dominate over women. It is almost as if being privileged in one way or another makes you seem better than everyone else, or at least those who are not privileged.
I thought this chapter was interesting and is a good way of understanding what privilege, oppression, and difference really mean in today’s society. I do not know whether things will get better in the future or not, but for now we have to deal with these issues and talk about them, whether people want to or not. It is sad how so many people think they are better than others because they have a good job or make good money, when in reality someone else could possibly have the same qualifications for the same job but aren’t privileged.
Monday, January 22, 2007
A Different Mirror-The Tempest
Ronald Takaki explains “In a Different Mirror” that Indians were not the only ones that had to deal with the English settlers taking over their land and killing them by the hundreds. It all had to deal with being racialized. The Irish were treated like the Indians and were considered savages, but the difference between the Indians and the Irish was skin color. The English settlers viewed the Irish as “different” because although they had the same skin tone they did not have the religious views and beliefs of the Englishmen.
According to the colonists the Irish people did not have the knowledge of God or good manners. The “Tempest” was actually referring to the new world, and was referring to the English settlers moving to America. As more and more people arrived from England problems started occurring such as starvation, and numerous Indians dying from diseases from the colonists. Soon the need for tobacco really forced the Indians away from their lands. The Irish were to be forced off their lands and denied of marriages between the Irish and colonists and forced to learn Christianity as the English viewed it.
There was a quote in the reading that stated God was “making room” for the colonists. A plague had killed a large amount of the Indians which was believed to be a sign also. Since the Indians and Irish were being racialized why did it have such an affect today? It could possibly be because of the numerous races and cultures that are present now, and everyone is not going to get along because that issue is among the inevitable. Overall the cultures are so different that most people may not fully understand how they function.
I thought the reading was interesting and I feel that what was done to the Indians and the Irish was unacceptable. The one part that really disturbed me was when it said a man killed his wife and cut out their unborn child and used his dead wife as a source for food. It makes me sick to my stomach that people actually to these things to one another. It is one thing to starve to death, but it is a completely different issue to kill another human being for food. In the end I think that race should have nothing to do with judging a person for who they are, but then again we all judge people.
According to the colonists the Irish people did not have the knowledge of God or good manners. The “Tempest” was actually referring to the new world, and was referring to the English settlers moving to America. As more and more people arrived from England problems started occurring such as starvation, and numerous Indians dying from diseases from the colonists. Soon the need for tobacco really forced the Indians away from their lands. The Irish were to be forced off their lands and denied of marriages between the Irish and colonists and forced to learn Christianity as the English viewed it.
There was a quote in the reading that stated God was “making room” for the colonists. A plague had killed a large amount of the Indians which was believed to be a sign also. Since the Indians and Irish were being racialized why did it have such an affect today? It could possibly be because of the numerous races and cultures that are present now, and everyone is not going to get along because that issue is among the inevitable. Overall the cultures are so different that most people may not fully understand how they function.
I thought the reading was interesting and I feel that what was done to the Indians and the Irish was unacceptable. The one part that really disturbed me was when it said a man killed his wife and cut out their unborn child and used his dead wife as a source for food. It makes me sick to my stomach that people actually to these things to one another. It is one thing to starve to death, but it is a completely different issue to kill another human being for food. In the end I think that race should have nothing to do with judging a person for who they are, but then again we all judge people.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Rosenblum and Travis "framework essay"
In the Rosenblum and Travis essay the American society is depicted as being very different in the eyes of different people. Everyone interprets individuals differently because of various backgrounds and ethnicities, which can sometimes lead to discrimination. People who go against the norms, or considered to be different, are actually being stigmatized, or marked as worthless or a bad person because of their race, sexual orientation, or even social class. Overall the author makes a point that these stigmatized people are seen as a problem and are unfairly put in this category even though they may not deserve to be treated in this way.
When people make judgments and assumptions about others just because they simply do not like them or because of their status it makes people unaware that the person that they do not like could actually be just like them. For example someone who looks good and dresses well could actually be a murderer, but all people focus on is what is on the outside. Hate crimes have surfaced because of people making judgments about others that are not of the same background as them, or from what they were taught growing up. People are also subject to objectification or devaluation. Women and the poor are good examples of this. Women are seen as objects and not people because they had to work to get respect, and to this day women still fight for executive jobs or to make as much money or mare than what men make.
The one issue that continues throughout society is stereotypes. Why do people continue to put people in certain stereotypes just because of how they look? It seems that as long as people will be stigmatized and put into different categories of good and bad people will make these assumptions because society somewhat enforces it. People think they know others because of who they associate with and that’s when the stereotyping begins. For example some stereotypes may be that Asians are really smart or black people like being on welfare. When it comes to the poor people most people see them as not even being citizens. I have to agree with the author because when you see a poor person on the street corner most people ignore them or do not even give them the time of day. They are being stereotypes as being lazy or worthless.
I thought the reading was a reality check. Some people may not think of stereotyping someone, but in all actuality it goes on everyday. I have even been put into stereotypes myself and I was shocked when I found out what people were saying about me just because of how I looked. Stigmatized people should be seen as the blemish on America’s face. Society will always have problems, and with the problems the stereotyping will continue.
When people make judgments and assumptions about others just because they simply do not like them or because of their status it makes people unaware that the person that they do not like could actually be just like them. For example someone who looks good and dresses well could actually be a murderer, but all people focus on is what is on the outside. Hate crimes have surfaced because of people making judgments about others that are not of the same background as them, or from what they were taught growing up. People are also subject to objectification or devaluation. Women and the poor are good examples of this. Women are seen as objects and not people because they had to work to get respect, and to this day women still fight for executive jobs or to make as much money or mare than what men make.
The one issue that continues throughout society is stereotypes. Why do people continue to put people in certain stereotypes just because of how they look? It seems that as long as people will be stigmatized and put into different categories of good and bad people will make these assumptions because society somewhat enforces it. People think they know others because of who they associate with and that’s when the stereotyping begins. For example some stereotypes may be that Asians are really smart or black people like being on welfare. When it comes to the poor people most people see them as not even being citizens. I have to agree with the author because when you see a poor person on the street corner most people ignore them or do not even give them the time of day. They are being stereotypes as being lazy or worthless.
I thought the reading was a reality check. Some people may not think of stereotyping someone, but in all actuality it goes on everyday. I have even been put into stereotypes myself and I was shocked when I found out what people were saying about me just because of how I looked. Stigmatized people should be seen as the blemish on America’s face. Society will always have problems, and with the problems the stereotyping will continue.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Zinn
In the article “Columbus, the Indians, and Human progress”, by Howard Zinn, Christopher Columbus is emphasized as this victorious explorer who discovered America. History shouldn’t focus all the attention on the glorious aspects of wars and the courageous people who truly made a difference. People like to focus their attention on who won the battle or the war. What we really aren’t focusing on are the people that were slaughtered or people that also tried to make a difference but weren’t as well known as Christopher Columbus. Christopher Columbus was the one who first “discovered” the Americas, but I all actuality all he contributed to was the killing of thousands of people. There is no reason why his encounter with the Arawak Indians should be ignored.
In 1492 Columbus supposedly found the Americas after trying to make a voyage to Asia. Columbus was in search of gold and apparently he wanted nothing to stop him in his path. Once his ship reached the Americas he saw the Indians wearing gold earrings. Columbus could have easily searched the land himself for the gold but instead he took the Arawaks as prisoners and as things got out of hand, one by one the Arawks were murdered. Soon enough they were taken as prisoners and were being sold as slaves. The entire Arawak tribe was killed all for the love of gold and Christopher Columbus’s greed. Yet history doesn’t tell the story in such a manner. How the history books are written today, the story of the Arawak Indians would be considered such a minuscule story considering they are not credited for being the ones who truly found the Americas first.
I agree with Zinn’s argument and I feel that so many issues and stories are covered up in history all because someone feels it may not be important to know or learn. The Arawak Indians didn’t even get credit for living on the land first. Christopher Columbus took all the credit just because he didn’t want to disappoint his king and queen because they funded his expeditions. Reading like this make me upset when people succumb to genocide all because of wealth, greed, or power. When will people learn that money or power is not worth taking someone’s life? Even though history puts more emphasis on such wars and powerful movements, we still should not forget about the people who made somewhat of a difference and didn’t sit around waiting for change.
In 1492 Columbus supposedly found the Americas after trying to make a voyage to Asia. Columbus was in search of gold and apparently he wanted nothing to stop him in his path. Once his ship reached the Americas he saw the Indians wearing gold earrings. Columbus could have easily searched the land himself for the gold but instead he took the Arawaks as prisoners and as things got out of hand, one by one the Arawks were murdered. Soon enough they were taken as prisoners and were being sold as slaves. The entire Arawak tribe was killed all for the love of gold and Christopher Columbus’s greed. Yet history doesn’t tell the story in such a manner. How the history books are written today, the story of the Arawak Indians would be considered such a minuscule story considering they are not credited for being the ones who truly found the Americas first.
I agree with Zinn’s argument and I feel that so many issues and stories are covered up in history all because someone feels it may not be important to know or learn. The Arawak Indians didn’t even get credit for living on the land first. Christopher Columbus took all the credit just because he didn’t want to disappoint his king and queen because they funded his expeditions. Reading like this make me upset when people succumb to genocide all because of wealth, greed, or power. When will people learn that money or power is not worth taking someone’s life? Even though history puts more emphasis on such wars and powerful movements, we still should not forget about the people who made somewhat of a difference and didn’t sit around waiting for change.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Introduction
My name is Tiara Wiley! I'm a freshmen and I live in McDonald. I'm undecided with my major right now, but I'll be deciding before the end of this year. I love playing volleyball and watching movies. I wanted to tak this class because it sounded interesting, and because I dropped a class and needed another one.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)