Tuesday, September 25, 2007
The Giddy Multitude
I did not understand what this article was about. It seemed like they were comparing black slaves to white slaves, and how the slaves rebeled.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Getting off the hook; Denial and Resistance
1. The thesis of Getting off the hook; Denial and Resistance is about people who are on the hook and they are always trying to get off the hook. There are a lot of ways to getting yourself off the hook and this article shows you a number of ways to get off the hook.
2. There are eight different ways of getting of the hook that this article talks about but I chose to summarize five of them.
Deny and minimize: This is when people deny that the problem exists in the first place or they make it sound like it could be worse. For example the article tells about a parent who tells their child who is in pain, that it does one hurt that bad, so they should stop crying. The parent does not know what the pain feels like to the child so they should not tell them that it does not hurt that bad.
Blame the victim is the next way of getting off the hook. In this approach we can see that bad things happen to people and they still get off the hook by blaming the victim. The example used most is when men and sometimes other women blame the women that were sexually assaulted. They do this by saying that the women was too sensitive or sent mixed signals or my favorite she asked for it because she was too nice or friendly to men. In this case oppression is blamed on people who suffer more and privilege is placed on the ones who remain invisible and untouched.
Call it something else is a subtle way of denying oppression and privilege, such as gender inequalities is called battle of the sexes.
Its better this way is a combination of denial and calling privilege and oppression something else to say people prefer things to be the way they are. They give the example of blacks wanting to live next to one another and not having a problem with it. Which is a lie, the article says that the people who like to live among themselves are white people.
The last way that I talked about was it doesn’t count if you don’t mean it. In this section people think they will get off the hook if they did not mean to have what they said come out in a negative way.
3. Do these really work to get people off the hook? Yes, think of the case of calling it something else. People get away with being dominated over another group of people because they call it battle of the sexes and they think of it as a game that people like to play, instead of saying it is a way to show men have power over women in one way or another.
4. I thought this was an interesting article because it showed me that my brother has a bit of male dominance. This is because ever since we were kids, I would be telling my dad a story about something that happened earlier that week and right in the middle of my story, my brother would start telling my dad something completely off topic. I later on after putting up with this for so many years called my brother out on this and would tell him to shut up and I would go on with my story.
2. There are eight different ways of getting of the hook that this article talks about but I chose to summarize five of them.
Deny and minimize: This is when people deny that the problem exists in the first place or they make it sound like it could be worse. For example the article tells about a parent who tells their child who is in pain, that it does one hurt that bad, so they should stop crying. The parent does not know what the pain feels like to the child so they should not tell them that it does not hurt that bad.
Blame the victim is the next way of getting off the hook. In this approach we can see that bad things happen to people and they still get off the hook by blaming the victim. The example used most is when men and sometimes other women blame the women that were sexually assaulted. They do this by saying that the women was too sensitive or sent mixed signals or my favorite she asked for it because she was too nice or friendly to men. In this case oppression is blamed on people who suffer more and privilege is placed on the ones who remain invisible and untouched.
Call it something else is a subtle way of denying oppression and privilege, such as gender inequalities is called battle of the sexes.
Its better this way is a combination of denial and calling privilege and oppression something else to say people prefer things to be the way they are. They give the example of blacks wanting to live next to one another and not having a problem with it. Which is a lie, the article says that the people who like to live among themselves are white people.
The last way that I talked about was it doesn’t count if you don’t mean it. In this section people think they will get off the hook if they did not mean to have what they said come out in a negative way.
3. Do these really work to get people off the hook? Yes, think of the case of calling it something else. People get away with being dominated over another group of people because they call it battle of the sexes and they think of it as a game that people like to play, instead of saying it is a way to show men have power over women in one way or another.
4. I thought this was an interesting article because it showed me that my brother has a bit of male dominance. This is because ever since we were kids, I would be telling my dad a story about something that happened earlier that week and right in the middle of my story, my brother would start telling my dad something completely off topic. I later on after putting up with this for so many years called my brother out on this and would tell him to shut up and I would go on with my story.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
What it all has to do with us
The article "What it all has to do with us" is about privilege and how people may not respond the way they really feel about something. In which case is known as the path of least resistance.
2. An example of this was used in the article to show this was a group of people get in an elevator and eventually turn around to face the doors. If you were to walk into the elevator and stay facing the back wall, you would not be following the path of least resistance. However if you were to turn around and face the doors you would be following the path of least resistance, because no one would say anything to you, because you are doing the same thing as everyone else. But if you go against the norms then you might get a strange look or someone will say something to you. Also if you hear a sexist joke and feel uncompelled to object in someway. But the path of least resistance is to go along and smile or laugh or not say anything. So people don't know that you did not like what you just heard. Making you feel less uncomfortable then you would had you said something to your friend about the joke being sexist.
3. If someone doesn't like what is going on, then why don't they speak up and say that, that joke wasn't funny. Chapter six says people could take another path, however they stick to the path of least resistance because they are afraid of what will happen if they do not chose the path of least resistance (p.81)
4. I feel this is true. If we do not want to explain ourselves we will go along with what people say and take the path of least resistance. If I do not like a joke that was being told, instead of saying I find that to be offense, I would just smile and do a little fake laugh, so my coworkers do not know that I really did not like what they just said and so I would not have to explain which part of the joke I felt was offense. This helps the person who's offended feel less uncomfortable and keeps the person telling the joke from feeling like a jerk.
2. An example of this was used in the article to show this was a group of people get in an elevator and eventually turn around to face the doors. If you were to walk into the elevator and stay facing the back wall, you would not be following the path of least resistance. However if you were to turn around and face the doors you would be following the path of least resistance, because no one would say anything to you, because you are doing the same thing as everyone else. But if you go against the norms then you might get a strange look or someone will say something to you. Also if you hear a sexist joke and feel uncompelled to object in someway. But the path of least resistance is to go along and smile or laugh or not say anything. So people don't know that you did not like what you just heard. Making you feel less uncomfortable then you would had you said something to your friend about the joke being sexist.
3. If someone doesn't like what is going on, then why don't they speak up and say that, that joke wasn't funny. Chapter six says people could take another path, however they stick to the path of least resistance because they are afraid of what will happen if they do not chose the path of least resistance (p.81)
4. I feel this is true. If we do not want to explain ourselves we will go along with what people say and take the path of least resistance. If I do not like a joke that was being told, instead of saying I find that to be offense, I would just smile and do a little fake laugh, so my coworkers do not know that I really did not like what they just said and so I would not have to explain which part of the joke I felt was offense. This helps the person who's offended feel less uncomfortable and keeps the person telling the joke from feeling like a jerk.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination
1. Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination is about race being socially constructed and made up along with people being privileged without knowing it. The section about Capitalism, difference and privilege: race and gender tells us that capitalist used racism to control their workers. If the white workers complained about wages or the working conditions the capitalist kept the workers worried that they were going to lose their jobs. So in order to keep their jobs the white workers just kept their unhappiness to themselves.
2. On page 47 it says “other capitalist connections to racism have been less direct, capitalist, often used racism as a strategy to control white workers and thereby keep low wages and productivity high.” I think this is saying white workers did not want to be considered to be on the same class level as African Americans, so the white workers did what ever they were told to do because it made them more superior to African Americans and raised their class status. This article shows that capitalism does not just target African Americans, it also says that “capitalism exploits people with disabilities…the 1938 minimum wage law allowed managers to hire people with disabilities at less then minimum wage.” Even If people with disabilities, may do a task at a little slower rate then others, and does not give someone the rights to pay someone a less wage do to the fact that they have a disability. If someone did that in this day an age, that manager would be taken to court for discriminate. This article shows that African Americans are not the only group being oppressed.
3. Is everyone privileged and oppressed? It sounds like if you working class, white male, as it says in the text that you are 2/3 privileged, because white males have some kind of advantage when it comes to claiming the corporate latter. If you are a white male you can be promoted and promoted and keep going higher up. Where if you are a white woman and have the same skills as the white male, you will be promoted but at a certain point there becomes this glass ceiling. Where the male will keep going up the latter the women stops dead in her tracks. For this reason I agree that everyone is privileged and oppressed in one way or another.
4. When I started to read this I thought it was going to talk about race and how one race was superior to other. As I was reading this however I found that it was talking about how privilege and oppression did not just deal with race it also involved gender, class and sexually orientation, and ability. What I mean by this is, someone can be oppressed because they are male, or female, low, middle or high class. As well as being homosexual or header sexual, or have a disability or not have a disability. I knew that all of these people are discriminate against in one way or another, but it did not occur to me that they're oppressed. I thought being oppressed means that a group of people are treated so badly that they do not feel like they deserve any respect. I do not see how this is different to discrimination.
2. On page 47 it says “other capitalist connections to racism have been less direct, capitalist, often used racism as a strategy to control white workers and thereby keep low wages and productivity high.” I think this is saying white workers did not want to be considered to be on the same class level as African Americans, so the white workers did what ever they were told to do because it made them more superior to African Americans and raised their class status. This article shows that capitalism does not just target African Americans, it also says that “capitalism exploits people with disabilities…the 1938 minimum wage law allowed managers to hire people with disabilities at less then minimum wage.” Even If people with disabilities, may do a task at a little slower rate then others, and does not give someone the rights to pay someone a less wage do to the fact that they have a disability. If someone did that in this day an age, that manager would be taken to court for discriminate. This article shows that African Americans are not the only group being oppressed.
3. Is everyone privileged and oppressed? It sounds like if you working class, white male, as it says in the text that you are 2/3 privileged, because white males have some kind of advantage when it comes to claiming the corporate latter. If you are a white male you can be promoted and promoted and keep going higher up. Where if you are a white woman and have the same skills as the white male, you will be promoted but at a certain point there becomes this glass ceiling. Where the male will keep going up the latter the women stops dead in her tracks. For this reason I agree that everyone is privileged and oppressed in one way or another.
4. When I started to read this I thought it was going to talk about race and how one race was superior to other. As I was reading this however I found that it was talking about how privilege and oppression did not just deal with race it also involved gender, class and sexually orientation, and ability. What I mean by this is, someone can be oppressed because they are male, or female, low, middle or high class. As well as being homosexual or header sexual, or have a disability or not have a disability. I knew that all of these people are discriminate against in one way or another, but it did not occur to me that they're oppressed. I thought being oppressed means that a group of people are treated so badly that they do not feel like they deserve any respect. I do not see how this is different to discrimination.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Privilege, Oppression, and Difference
Privilege, Oppression, and Difference
1. An article about privilege. By privilege I mean the dominate group in society gets this special treatment that they are not even aware of. For example the article talks about people who have a disability being considered not normal, because they do not think the same way people with out a disability think. In this instance the Dominate group (people without disabilities) has the power to define what is considered normal. The article also gives examples of one race being dominated over another race, or males being dominate over women.
2. This article says that one group of people are dominate over another group of people. However this did not happen over night. “It took generation and a vast amount of coercion, before this becomes a white country.” In other words the article says that what we see as real is just made up, and we take it to mean something. Take race for example, the way you look does not change you, but if you look differently from someone else, we autumnally pass judgments onto that person, wither those judgments are true or not.
3. If most of what we experience as real, is there a way not to teach our children about who we perceive to be the dominate group, or is it in our nature to view each other as being dominant or inferior? Children are always asking questions and wanting to know why something is the way it is. So we have to explain to them why someone is sitting in a wheel chair and why someone is not. We have this unstoppable reaction to ask why something is the way it is and we don’t stop asking until we know. Most things are learned but teaching children about privilege and being the domoite group is something that is ingrained in all of us.
4. As I was reading this article I did not feel I was affected by what they were saying about privilege. However when I got to the section where they talk about people with disabilities being labeled different. I suddenly realized that this article did speak to me. I am a person who has a learning disability. I do not tell a lot of people about this because I have found that they start to look at me differently, esp. when they are a friend of mine who realizes that I have a hard time comprening something that I read. They are not sure how to act around me and what is ok to say or ask me. But later on they find out that they d not need to ask a certain way, I just want them to be their self’s, and they can ask me what ever they want. As I was reading this part of the article I noticed that they person who wrote this might not of known what first person language is, they kept saying the disabled person, which made me a litter upset because the disability does not define a person. The person is in fact a person first and the disability comes second. Meaning the person with a disability. This makes me a little uncomfortable when people are referred as the disabled person, because your disability does not make you who you are, you are John with a learning disability, Person first, Disability second.
1. An article about privilege. By privilege I mean the dominate group in society gets this special treatment that they are not even aware of. For example the article talks about people who have a disability being considered not normal, because they do not think the same way people with out a disability think. In this instance the Dominate group (people without disabilities) has the power to define what is considered normal. The article also gives examples of one race being dominated over another race, or males being dominate over women.
2. This article says that one group of people are dominate over another group of people. However this did not happen over night. “It took generation and a vast amount of coercion, before this becomes a white country.” In other words the article says that what we see as real is just made up, and we take it to mean something. Take race for example, the way you look does not change you, but if you look differently from someone else, we autumnally pass judgments onto that person, wither those judgments are true or not.
3. If most of what we experience as real, is there a way not to teach our children about who we perceive to be the dominate group, or is it in our nature to view each other as being dominant or inferior? Children are always asking questions and wanting to know why something is the way it is. So we have to explain to them why someone is sitting in a wheel chair and why someone is not. We have this unstoppable reaction to ask why something is the way it is and we don’t stop asking until we know. Most things are learned but teaching children about privilege and being the domoite group is something that is ingrained in all of us.
4. As I was reading this article I did not feel I was affected by what they were saying about privilege. However when I got to the section where they talk about people with disabilities being labeled different. I suddenly realized that this article did speak to me. I am a person who has a learning disability. I do not tell a lot of people about this because I have found that they start to look at me differently, esp. when they are a friend of mine who realizes that I have a hard time comprening something that I read. They are not sure how to act around me and what is ok to say or ask me. But later on they find out that they d not need to ask a certain way, I just want them to be their self’s, and they can ask me what ever they want. As I was reading this part of the article I noticed that they person who wrote this might not of known what first person language is, they kept saying the disabled person, which made me a litter upset because the disability does not define a person. The person is in fact a person first and the disability comes second. Meaning the person with a disability. This makes me a little uncomfortable when people are referred as the disabled person, because your disability does not make you who you are, you are John with a learning disability, Person first, Disability second.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Race:the power of an illusion: Differences between us
Race the power of an illusion: Differences between us is a movie about the biological factors of race. In the movie we see a group of students that are participating in an experiment to find out what makes one person like another person, genetically, in the different races. When the movie said the students were going to make predictions about who they felt they were going to be the most like, they all said that they were going to be the most like with someone who was of the same skin color as they were. I found this to be a little strange, but when the narrator said, lets see if this is true, I knew that they were going to find out that it did not matter what color your skin was, that did not have any effect on being genetically like someone else. Why is it that the students believe that they would be the same as someone who is the same races they are? I know that this is not true, but it makes me wonder if I thought this way when I was a little kid. i also thought it was interesting that years ago people would measure other's facial features and the size of their skulls to determine who was the same as someone else. I thought it was funny when the students were trying to find out what skin color they were based on the skin test. This was particularly funny because some of the colors were far from a lot of people's skin color. There was one that looked some what orange, I do not know of anyone who is orange, unless if they were to put the wrong shade of make up on. I also did not believe anyone was exactly one color on this skin test. I feel that the students skin were only close to one shade or another. Overall I thought this was a good movie because it shows how we believe just because we look similar to someone does not mean that we are like them, and the color of our skin does not have anything to do with how fast we run or what job we have, all it means is that we do not all look the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)