4/25/09
First up, I'd like to ask for some feedback on this one. I have a lot of questions... sorry it's kind of a long post but...
Story.
Background knowledge: There is one Black kid on the distance team in track / cross country team.
The other day at practice, some of us were stretching after our run, and he says, "I'm not trying to sound racist but..."
This is when I kind of step in and say, "Jon, you can't be racist..." The comment is kind of brushed aside by him, but picked up by other people. But he finishes his thought and says "I've noticed that when it gets sunny outside or when it gets to be summer time, White people's hair gets blonder."
My friend (who took an Anthropology course last semester entitled "Race and Racism") proceeded to argue with me. "Joe CAN be a racist." I explained that because of the definition of racism (a system of advantage based on race), he can't be a racist, because since he's a person of color he is in the "oppressed" category, not the "oppressor" category. Sure, he can be prejudiced, but not racist.
Anyway, after having this conversation a second time (see earlier post), I've come to realize that racism is kind of contextual. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not sure if this makes sense. The same situation Aaron was talking about in class at the beginning of the semester (his argument: in East Saint Louis, Black people can be racist against White people) came up again.
Sooo, pretty much from these discussions with others, "-isms" all depend on the context of the situation. If you're in a location where women are the dominant sex (I'm not sure if this is true anywhere, but go with me on this one), then they can be sexist against men. Same with race. Any place where one race has power over other races - where there is a system of advantage based on race, it depends on who has the advantage.
My argument was that since we are in America, where White people are systematically advantaged, Joe cannot be racist. But, what I wonder - is could this be scaled down to a different societal level? Could this be at a community level where Aaron's example of East Saint Louis would be valid?
Another question arose during this argument (and as a result, I'd like to say neither of us backed down, but there are no hard feelings - we just dropped the subject). Who makes this definition of racism? My question is: is this a Psychological definition? Because my friend who took the Anthropology class Race and Racism was not exposed to this same definition. And she's not an ignorant person - she's really smart... so something tells me that different classes learn different definitions - or something. It just confused me so much - especially this coming from her because she has been educated on this subject, so she should know the definition of racism, assuming it's a universal definition, which it seems isn't. I'd really like some feedback on this. This is something that's been kind of bothering me for a couple of days now.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Being an Ally.
4/21/09
Allies. It's something that I most commonly heard when IWU Pride Alliance had posters around campus (that said LGBTA - or something of that nature). I never really had a definition of it, but I vaguely knew about what it entailed. It was someone from a dominant group who supported a minority or someone frequently discriminated against. After reading Ayvazian's "Interruption the Cycle of Oppression: The Role of Allies as Agents of Change," I realize how important allies are in fighting "-isms." She explains that it is when allies get together and say "No" is when real history starts to change.
"'When a critical mass of white people join together, rise up, and shout a thunderous 'No' to racism, we will actually alter the course of history" (600).
From a historical context, this is so true, and it's nothing I have ever even considered before. Take the right to vote, for example. The people who actually made the change had to be White men to allow people of African descent (and later, women) the right to vote.
People in the minority position, however active they may be in fighting racism, will only succeed so long as the people in power (Whites) support the view. Because, that just makes logical sense - those in power are the ones who make the changes in our country.
Although it is a very difficult task, I definitely think it is possible to make big changes to fight racism. The article showed the same results as our class earlier this year, when asked to name some prominent White anti-racists. Almost no one could name any (in our class, or in the example class in this article) (601). Maybe this says something about our education - that either students are not learning about White people who are actively anti-racist in history classes or, they are and it's more difficult to remember. I think it might have something to do with social psychology that the words "White" and "racist" go better together than "White" and "anti-racist." So White racists may be more easily remembered than White anti-racists such as Lucretia Mott or William Lloyd Garrison.
But, something I worry about, in my role as an ally is the difficult work. Ayvazian discusses that a lot of times you don't seen the effects of your hard work, or sometimes you lack a support system. Personally, I am more worried about the latter. Due to the responses I have received in the past semester, when I bring up these topics, it worries me that I will have no outlet (as I did in this class) to tell about my experiences and talk about how they have affected me.
A really great quote that the author brought up in this text that really stuck with me was:
"I will act as though what I do makes a difference." - William James.
Its a good quote to keep you motivated and keep you working toward a goal, even if you don't see the results right away. The more you work at something, the more likely you'll see results down the road. It's something I'm going to have to work on. I feel as though this class really did change me, and I would like to continue that into the future, but it's going to be hard.
Which makes me think of my action plan: I'm REALLY excited about it. I can't wait until we finally get to submit our proposal to Dr. Folse next fall. I really hope "Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?" gets chosen for the first year summer reading book. I think we have a good shot at it, but I don't want to get my hopes up too high. AND how flippin' cool would it be to have Dr. Tatum come to IWU to talk about this topic. It would be awesome.
Allies. It's something that I most commonly heard when IWU Pride Alliance had posters around campus (that said LGBTA - or something of that nature). I never really had a definition of it, but I vaguely knew about what it entailed. It was someone from a dominant group who supported a minority or someone frequently discriminated against. After reading Ayvazian's "Interruption the Cycle of Oppression: The Role of Allies as Agents of Change," I realize how important allies are in fighting "-isms." She explains that it is when allies get together and say "No" is when real history starts to change.
"'When a critical mass of white people join together, rise up, and shout a thunderous 'No' to racism, we will actually alter the course of history" (600).
From a historical context, this is so true, and it's nothing I have ever even considered before. Take the right to vote, for example. The people who actually made the change had to be White men to allow people of African descent (and later, women) the right to vote.
People in the minority position, however active they may be in fighting racism, will only succeed so long as the people in power (Whites) support the view. Because, that just makes logical sense - those in power are the ones who make the changes in our country.
Although it is a very difficult task, I definitely think it is possible to make big changes to fight racism. The article showed the same results as our class earlier this year, when asked to name some prominent White anti-racists. Almost no one could name any (in our class, or in the example class in this article) (601). Maybe this says something about our education - that either students are not learning about White people who are actively anti-racist in history classes or, they are and it's more difficult to remember. I think it might have something to do with social psychology that the words "White" and "racist" go better together than "White" and "anti-racist." So White racists may be more easily remembered than White anti-racists such as Lucretia Mott or William Lloyd Garrison.
But, something I worry about, in my role as an ally is the difficult work. Ayvazian discusses that a lot of times you don't seen the effects of your hard work, or sometimes you lack a support system. Personally, I am more worried about the latter. Due to the responses I have received in the past semester, when I bring up these topics, it worries me that I will have no outlet (as I did in this class) to tell about my experiences and talk about how they have affected me.
A really great quote that the author brought up in this text that really stuck with me was:
"I will act as though what I do makes a difference." - William James.
Its a good quote to keep you motivated and keep you working toward a goal, even if you don't see the results right away. The more you work at something, the more likely you'll see results down the road. It's something I'm going to have to work on. I feel as though this class really did change me, and I would like to continue that into the future, but it's going to be hard.
Which makes me think of my action plan: I'm REALLY excited about it. I can't wait until we finally get to submit our proposal to Dr. Folse next fall. I really hope "Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?" gets chosen for the first year summer reading book. I think we have a good shot at it, but I don't want to get my hopes up too high. AND how flippin' cool would it be to have Dr. Tatum come to IWU to talk about this topic. It would be awesome.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Going Home.
4/12/09
It happens every time I go home. Well, maybe not EVERY time. But enough for me to notice it. My dad brings race into some conversation where it's not even relevant. Friday night, I had dinner with my parents at this sports bar / tavern place where ESPN was on.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4055343
This story came on the TV. Nick Adenhart, LA Angels' pitcher was killed by a drunk driver. This guy was charged with murder. Anyway, they showed the drunk driver's picture on the TV.
My dad said something like, he looks Hispanic, doesn't he?
Completely irrelevant. I brought this up - I told him that it had nothing to do with anything - so what if he was Hispanic, White, Black Arabic, Asian, etc?
My dad agreed that it had nothing to do with the story, but just said, well, he's a murderer, that's all. Kind of this passive-aggressive tone. Really frustrating.
But, that's not all. Saturday night, we were eating dinner again, and my dad brings up this news story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090412/ap_on_re_af/piracy
Pirates took a ship's captain hostage (Today - Sunday, he was freed). This story really has absolutely nothing to do with race.
But he claims that this guy wouldn't have been captured when Bush was president because of Bush's active military. Okay. Whatever. My dad is conservative.
Next, he says that this guy is being held hostage and Obama isn't going to try to get him released because he is White.
WHAT?!?!?!? That doesn't even make sense.
And I couldn't take it. I finally said it. "Why do you make everything about race? This has nothing to do with race. And you did the same thing last night at dinner. The fact that the drunk driver was Latino has nothing to do with anything. It could have been anyone. And why do you have such a problem with Obama as a president?" It was not a pretty dinner table conversation.
The subject was dropped thereafter, and race hasn't been made an issue since. At least not in front of me. Maybe he'll realize not to say things like that in front of me. Who knows. It's so frustrating.
It happens every time I go home. Well, maybe not EVERY time. But enough for me to notice it. My dad brings race into some conversation where it's not even relevant. Friday night, I had dinner with my parents at this sports bar / tavern place where ESPN was on.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4055343
This story came on the TV. Nick Adenhart, LA Angels' pitcher was killed by a drunk driver. This guy was charged with murder. Anyway, they showed the drunk driver's picture on the TV.
My dad said something like, he looks Hispanic, doesn't he?
Completely irrelevant. I brought this up - I told him that it had nothing to do with anything - so what if he was Hispanic, White, Black Arabic, Asian, etc?
My dad agreed that it had nothing to do with the story, but just said, well, he's a murderer, that's all. Kind of this passive-aggressive tone. Really frustrating.
But, that's not all. Saturday night, we were eating dinner again, and my dad brings up this news story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090412/ap_on_re_af/piracy
Pirates took a ship's captain hostage (Today - Sunday, he was freed). This story really has absolutely nothing to do with race.
But he claims that this guy wouldn't have been captured when Bush was president because of Bush's active military. Okay. Whatever. My dad is conservative.
Next, he says that this guy is being held hostage and Obama isn't going to try to get him released because he is White.
WHAT?!?!?!? That doesn't even make sense.
And I couldn't take it. I finally said it. "Why do you make everything about race? This has nothing to do with race. And you did the same thing last night at dinner. The fact that the drunk driver was Latino has nothing to do with anything. It could have been anyone. And why do you have such a problem with Obama as a president?" It was not a pretty dinner table conversation.
The subject was dropped thereafter, and race hasn't been made an issue since. At least not in front of me. Maybe he'll realize not to say things like that in front of me. Who knows. It's so frustrating.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Affirmative Action & Group Dialogue
Thinking about our class discussion this past week, it makes me really sad to realize that that session was our last class discussion. I have really enjoyed the open atmosphere that our class has on the topic of racism. I felt that my opinion varied from the class as a whole, but I felt like my opinions were still respected.
I thought Steele had brought up some good points in his article: shocking statistics that show that affirmative action isn't working (the income gap - for every $1.00 the White American family earns, a Latino family earns $0.12, and a Black family earns $0.10. Or the fact that only 26% of Black students are graduating from a four year college in SIX years compared to the national average of 54% graduating in FOUR years).
Affirmative action isn't working, and we really need to focus on our failing education system.
But part of my stance that I made in my paper changed since our class discussion. Steele argued that affirmative action may cause lower self esteem in those receiving special treatment. Upon reading this article - I agreed with this statement. But then I read Kivel (after I finished my paper).
He forced me to think about putting myself in a similar position:
Have I ever received something based on the fact that (I'll use personal examples):
1. My father is a Vietnam Veteran (I've probably received something because of this)
2. My mother is a University of Illinois alum (I was accepted there - maybe that's why I got in?)
3. I am a Wesleyan student (my boss at the hospital is an IWU alum)
4. I am a female (maybe that helped me get into college?)
I could go on. But do I feel like I didn't deserve some of these things? Did I even think that the reason I got accepted to a university or for a job was because of one of these things? No. I felt like I deserved it. And my self-esteem was not harmed in the process. So, putting myself into this perspective makes me disagree with Steele's opinion on this section.
I really appreciate how a single group discussion can give different insights to an opinion other than your own. Discussing topics, such as racism and affirmative action, with other people can really allow you to branch out and think in different ways. I'm really going to miss this class.
But, I think I am more comfortable bringing up this topic with others since I have had the dialogue that we had in this class. I'm getting to nostalgic. I'm finished.
I thought Steele had brought up some good points in his article: shocking statistics that show that affirmative action isn't working (the income gap - for every $1.00 the White American family earns, a Latino family earns $0.12, and a Black family earns $0.10. Or the fact that only 26% of Black students are graduating from a four year college in SIX years compared to the national average of 54% graduating in FOUR years).
Affirmative action isn't working, and we really need to focus on our failing education system.
But part of my stance that I made in my paper changed since our class discussion. Steele argued that affirmative action may cause lower self esteem in those receiving special treatment. Upon reading this article - I agreed with this statement. But then I read Kivel (after I finished my paper).
He forced me to think about putting myself in a similar position:
Have I ever received something based on the fact that (I'll use personal examples):
1. My father is a Vietnam Veteran (I've probably received something because of this)
2. My mother is a University of Illinois alum (I was accepted there - maybe that's why I got in?)
3. I am a Wesleyan student (my boss at the hospital is an IWU alum)
4. I am a female (maybe that helped me get into college?)
I could go on. But do I feel like I didn't deserve some of these things? Did I even think that the reason I got accepted to a university or for a job was because of one of these things? No. I felt like I deserved it. And my self-esteem was not harmed in the process. So, putting myself into this perspective makes me disagree with Steele's opinion on this section.
I really appreciate how a single group discussion can give different insights to an opinion other than your own. Discussing topics, such as racism and affirmative action, with other people can really allow you to branch out and think in different ways. I'm really going to miss this class.
But, I think I am more comfortable bringing up this topic with others since I have had the dialogue that we had in this class. I'm getting to nostalgic. I'm finished.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)