RACE THE POWER OF AN ILLUSION- THIRD EPISODE

This is the conclusion of a series of three episodes. In this episode, the narrator starts by pointing out that race is all around us. It is one of the things we first perceive in early childhood, i.e. different color, eyes, hair, etc. even at an early stage, children are subjected to racial stereotypes which they reinforce as they grow up. Some people deny any existence of stereotypes, but according to this film, those who deny the stereotypes end up reciting them. There is somehow very limited room to escape these stereotypes because they surround us in everyday life.
One other issue that was raised in this episode is the construction of race and privilege. The narrator states that “being classified Black, Latino, means less privilege than being classified white” (ethnic notions). In this point, we see that there is some form of advantage that comes with being labeled white and this advantage is what Johnson calls ‘white privilege.’ In the film, it was also stated that what makes race are the laws and practices assorted to different physical features e.g. slavery of blacks, conquest of Native Indians affects immigration up to date.
Further, the film points out that immigrants in history times came seeking opportunity in America. Yet they were made to labor in dangerous jobs. They were made to stay in slums due to class difference. Again, the stereotypes were reinforced. Italians were seen as prostitutes, lazy. These poor conditions of immigrants led to disease out breaks among them. However, disease and poor conditions were explained as a result of the immigrants’ racial affiliation.
Laws in the courts were also race biased. For example, an African American man was hung for allegedly killing a white girl without proper investigation. The courts had to play a role in giving citizenship to the immigrants. But according to the courts, citizenship was based on whiteness. This led to a lot of debate of whether Jews were white. It was then ruled that Jews were not white as whiteness was what the white man said it was. In this case, only Caucasians were considered white. Whiteness also played a role in who acquired land. Land was apportioned according to race and citizenship. Only citizens could acquire land. And if only Caucasians were granted citizenship, then it meant that they were the only ones to be land owners. Hence by the way land was apportioned; white privilege was reinforced in the long run. Land was seized from all those who owned it but were not citizens.
Race was also seen in the allocation of houses by the housing administration. Houses were allocated according to different rates that were given colors. I.e. those houses given the color green were of high rate, color red was for the lowest rate houses. The green colored houses were allocated to whites while the red colored ones were allocated to people of color. Therefore, we see that color also played a role in public services.
At the end of the film, the narrator calls for us to be color blind and live as one.
As I watched this film, I was amazed at how the definition of whiteness was twisted around to always narrow it down to Caucasians.

FACEBOOK

The page I analyzed on facebook is of a Caucasian female who comes from Chicago. She is nineteen years of age and is in her sophomore year in college. She states that she is interested in men. When I looked at her photos, I picked some when she was in Florida for spring break with her friends. The pictures show her and friends having fun on the beach. All her friends on the pictures are Caucasian females showing that she usually is found around Caucasian friends hence restricting her friends to one particular race. This is one way in which race is constructed on facebook because it allows you to invite friends to your page thereby narrowing the people that can view your profile to only those you consider friends.
Other pictures on the same spring break trip shows her and friends in a hotel they used to live in. by looking at the nature of the hotel pictures, one can tell that this person and her friends are of an upper middle class social economic status. I reached at this conclusion by also analyzing the types of clothes that she wore with her friends. This is another way in which facebook encourages people of the same social economic status to be found together and share their pages. I say so because the pictures of friends you put on your facebook kind of tell what type of a person you are and so most people mind to put only pictures of people that are their true friends and those that give a correct representation of different aspects of their lives. Therefore, facebook constructs social economic status by restricting people’s invitations to mostly those that are at the same social economic status as that of the person inviting others.
Finally, my analysis of this page made me see how gender and sexuality is constructed on facebook. One of the things asked for on your profile is gender but it also asks for your interests. Even though this person indicates that she is interested in men, you can see from her pictures and friends that she is more oriented around her female friends. Again female that indicate to have interest in men are generally thought to eventually end up in a heterosexual relationships, while those that indicate that they are interested in people of their gender may be thought to eventually end up in either gay or lesbian relationships. I.e. a female interested in females may be thought to be lesbian while a male interested in males may be thought to be gay.
It was really interesting to look at people’s pages and not only look at them for the sake of doing so. But looking at the pages in an analytical way made me see things that I would ordinarily not see. This was a wonderful exercise.

RACE IN CYBERSPACE

RACE IN CYBERSPACE
This is an article by Tara McPherson where she writes about race in cyberspace. She highlights how “cyberwhitening” takes place via the creation of new regional identities that refigure white southern masculinity by borrowing from the language of the civil rights struggle” (120). She starts by stating that she ended up with many outposts of Dixie in cyberspace one summer when she opened up the site of the Confederate Embassy in Washington, D.C. while working on a manuscript about race and Southern femininity. She writes that there are new media theories which cannot be reconciled to old theories. “Such theories often maintain that cyberspace functions as a kind of public theater, ‘a base for the cybog’ [who rewrite] the standard of bounded, embodied individual” (118). This shows that “prosthetic communication enables computer users to overcome the self/body binary” (118). Hence the conclusion thus far is that “prolonged exposure to cyberspace irrevocably produces multiple selves, or at least more selves than one entered the Net with” (118). Then she addresses what happens to this transformed embodied identity. She quotes Turkle who states that “life on the screen is also without origins and foundation” (118). Most especially uprooted is one’s rootedness to place. Though it may be seen as a positive part of internet on the other hand, this loss of rootedness to place is as a result of the “internet’s ability to overcome geographical boundaries, envisioning it as a kind of yellow brick road leading to a harmonious global village” (118). McPherson states that the neo-Confederates guarding the portals of the Confederate embassy in cyberspace seem to pay no much attention to the prosthetic nature of cyberspace. They do not pay attention to the internet’s capability to “many selves too inhabit one body” (119). She further states that the work of the neo-confederate in cyberspace reveals a very sincere attempt to make self in the world and to articulate a very particular and racially naturalized presence. This she calls “a very serious battle over the demands of place, race, and identity [in which] the cyber-rebels are reconstructing Dixie and its citizens. Then she states how cyber communities, like those of neo- confederates invoke a specific register of place which “evade precise discussion about race or racism” (119). Race is one of the focal points through which public discourse has turned on in this nation, especially in the south. She cites historical images of the first half twentieth century which insisted upon racial differences. Some of these differences included labeling “whiteness as independent and separate from blackness” (119).To illustrate these differences, she uses the ‘Overt’ versus ‘covert' labels. The difference between the two is that the overt “brings together figurations of racial difference in order to fix the categories while the [covert] enacts a separation that nonetheless achieves a similar end” (119). She further states that “this separation is very much in evidence in the neo-Dixie of cyberspace, a place which is nothing if not white” (119). The sole purpose of Dixie cyberspace is to preserve the Southern heritage. To preserve southern heritage however, “means one must be racist” even though this is denied by those that uphold the purpose. They abandon any overt imaging of blackness or explicit expression of racism, therefore, denying any labels on them as racist.
As I read through this chapter, my eyes were opened to see the internet in a different way. I have never thought much about it being used as a race media because so much racism is hidden in it that you cannot easily see it. This leads me to ask whether racism has truly ended. Most people say there is no more racism because they do not see such things as slavery that directly depicted racism. However, through reading such articles, I have seen that racism is still there though it is in what I would call a ‘diplomatic form.’ I say it is diplomatic in the sense that it cannot be easily seen unless you dig deeper for the diplomacy that was used behind the scenes. Therefore, we should all take it as a challenge upon us to educate others of the knowledge we have acquired in this class.

CYBERTYPES

CYBERTYPES- Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet
In this article, Lisa Nakamura writes how cybernetic tourism, the internet and transnationality com in play with issues of race, ethnicity and identity. She starts by quoting the television commercial “Anthem” which “claims that on the internet, there are no infirmities, no gender, no age- only minds” (87). Such a form of communication she calls “utopia, a place uninfluenced by the rest of it” (87). In this commercial, the word race is written on the chalkboard and crossed out by an Indian girl. But Nakamura argues that the ‘rest of it’ cannot be easily crossed out as the word race is crossed on the chalkboard. In the rest of this chapter, Nakamura focuses on pointing out how “the rest of it, the spectator of racial and ethnic difference and its visual and textual representation in print and television advertisements that appeared in 1997 for Compaq, IBM, and Origin, has not been easily erased but rather reinforced by these advertisements. These ads she says, “Sell networking and communications technologies that depict racial differences, ‘the rest of it’ as a visual marker. The spectacles of race in these advertising images are designed to stabilize contemporary anxieties that networking technology and access to cyberspace may break down ethnic and racial differences” (87). In these adverts, the viewer is placed in the position of a tourist, and sketch out a future in which difference is either elided or put in its proper place. Some advertisements like that of MCI for instance, not only sell internet services but also a particular kind of content: the idea that getting online and becoming part of a global network will liberate the user from the body with its inconvenient and limiting attributes such as race, gender, disability, and age” (88). At this point, Nakamura states that the aspect of the body and identity come into play with telecommunication. Telecommunication however, claims to change the nature of identity (88). Further, Nakamura states that this advertisement claims to produce a radical form of democracy that refers to and extends an American model of social equality and equal access. To the visual images of diversity, the advertisement claims that the ‘MCI products will reduce the different bodies that we see to just minds. Nakamura’s

WHY I HATE ABERCROMBIE & FITCH

WHY I HATE ABERCROMBIE & FITCH
In this chapter, Dwight McBride writes why he hates Abercrombie and Fitch. In reaching at this conclusion, he begins “with a brief history of the company and the label of Abercrombie & Fitch itself.” Secondly, he spends some time “discussing the ‘A&F look,’ especially as it is exemplified in the A&F Quarterly- the sexy quarterly catalog/ magazine that has been the source of much controversy among the decency police.” Thirdly, he “considers some aspects of the corporate culture of Abercrombie as it is represented by its stores, managers, and brand reps.” Finally he refers back to these three points in his analysis of how ‘Abercrombie’ functions as an idea, in order to justify the title claims of this essay in putting for the why it is [he] hates Abercrombie & Fitch” (62).

TAKAKI CHAPTER 12

TAKAKI CHAPTER 12
EL NORTE-The Borderland of Chicano America
In this chapter Takaki writes about how the Mexicans came to the United States of America. He states how America was viewed as a land of promise by many people from other nations. But he says “to the immigrants from Mexico, it was ‘El Norte,’ a land across the river, this country became the stuff of boundless dreams for Mexican migrants” (311). To this land of many boundless dreams, many Mexicans came with a lot of high hopes. As they crossed the northern border, they had vivid images of success. There were several reasons why the Mexicans moved in numbers to America.
Those that managed to get to America told their friends in Mexican about the joy they had in America. This led to “a chain reaction that brought others and others” (312). One of the reasons for this chain reaction in who came was that it was easier for Mexicans than any other immigrants to cross the border. “Unlike the immigrants from Asia and Europe, Mexicans could enter and leave without passports whenever they wished” (312).
Part of the reason for this El Norte migration was that it was an extension of population movements already under way within Mexico. Rural workers and their families had begun migrating to urban centers” (312). On top of this were the declining industries and the non cultivation of land. This led to competition in employment and so most Mexicans migrated to America in search of jobs. The frustration caused in the economy of Mexico led to the 1910 Mexican revolution. By 1911, a “civil war spread across Mexico” (314). To find refuge most Mexicans fled to El Norte with the view to come back once the war ended. “But the civil war seemed endless, forcing tens of thousands of refugees to flee northward in search of safety” (314). In other words, most of them were forced to move northward due to the poverty and the horror of the war. Most of them left with the view that they will get better jobs and better wages. The American “wages [were] two to three times higher than the wages in Mexico” (315). This hope of better wages also drew Mexicans towards the north.
Another major factor that facilitated the migration of Mexicans to America “was the development of transportation” (316). In 1895 the Mexican international railway had extended into Texas thereby facilitating the movement. Most of the Mexicans who moved were from the agricultural class. “During the early twentieth centaury, Mexicans [Chicanos] were encouraged to cross the border because their labor was needed” (317).Yet it was clear that race was being used as a weapon by the American Federation was of Labor. When Mexican tried to attain citizenship, the Americans denied them citizenship for the fear that Mexican would not easily assimilate the American culture. Those who were American by birth were still reminded that they were still Mexicans.
As I read this article, I saw the same things that happened to other immigrants in other articles we read happening to Mexicans as well. This made me realize the fact that Americans at this time were only interested in cheap labor from the immigrants. And once this purpose was fulfilled, and then the immigrants had no other use. Its as though all that mattered to white Americans at this time was maximizing profit by taking advantage of cheap labor.

TAKAKI CHAPTER 7

TAKAKI CHAPTER 7- FOREIGNERS IN THEIR NATIVE LAND
In this chapter, Takaki writes about how the Market Revolution propelled American expansion towards the Pacific. To achieve their goal of expansion, the United States armed forces needed to recruit more people. At this time, there were a lot of Iris people in America who ran away from British colonization. Hence they “found themselves becoming Americans by participating in the conquest of the Southwest- an American expansionist thrust celebrated as manifest destiny” (167). The state of interest at this time was California. In order to add California to the United States, the armed force had to go to war against Mexicans who were the inhabitants at that time. The war began in a small town called Sonoma. The aim here was to get Don Vallejo, a Californian by birth and a general, into captive because “he represented a long history of Spanish and Mexican efforts to secure the Californian territory against America and Russian expansion” (168). Therefore, he and his brother and brother in law were taken captive though Don Vallejo was later released.

HOW JEWS BECAME WHITE FOLKS

HOW JEWS BECAME WHITE FOLKS
In this chapter, Paula S. Rothenberg writes how the Jews became to be considered white. He starts out by quoting Kenneth Roberts who states that “the American nation was founded and developed by the Nordic race” (38). At that time, anti-Semitism was a part of daily life when America did not regard immigrant European workers as white. The author states that he grew up at a time when “were simply one kind of white folks and where ethnicity meant little more to [his] generation than food and family heritage” (38). This is evident that at this time, Jews were members of an inferior race. His main body of this chapter focuses on the processes that led Jews to be where they are now.
Most Jews believe they attained their status today by their “hard work and a high value placed on education” (41). But Paula points out that this could not be true due to what he calls ‘scientific racism’ which had the notion that “real Americans were white and that real whites came from northwest Europe” (41). This initiated racism which spread into education, housing and employment. For example, “Jews were excluded from mainstream corporate management and corporately employed professions, except in the garment and movie industries” (42). Jews strived to get themselves to middle class levels. And the two main questions the author asks are whether the Jews and other Euro-ethnics became white because they became middle class or did being incorporated into an expanded version of whiteness open up the economic doors to middle class status? (43). He concludes that both tendencies are at play here.
The government had set certain changes during the war that led to a more inclusive version of whiteness. In other words, they were changes on who was made white. For example, “the census of 1940 no longer distinguished native whites of native parentage from those of immigrant parentage” (43). Therefore, this allowed for Jews and other Euro- ethnics to assimilate into mainstream and ascend the ladder to middle class. Hence with time, they would have equal opportunities to prosper into the middle class majority as did those considered native whites.
Furthermore, “economic prosperity also played a very powerful role in the whitening process” (43). The postwar period saw America emerging with the strongest economy in the world. This led to an enormous need for professional, technical, and managerial labor. Therefore, more Jews and Euro ethnics were included in the labor force that was initially considered only for real whites. This was made possible through the GI Bill of Rights. Paula however, calls this act an affirmative action because it was aimed at and disproportionately helped male Euro- origins GIs” (44). These GI benefits led to an exposure of racism especially in education and occupation and proved why Paula calls them an affirmative action for white males. He states that he calls them so “because they were decidedly not extended to African Americans or to women of any race” (45). This is one example of white male privilege.
Suburbanization is another process that played a role in the whitening process. This was a policy that showed a lot of discrimination and segregation in terms of housing. Whites were only allocated to white neighborhoods. No one of another race could be allocated a house or allowed to buy a house in the white neighborhood if they weren’t even if they had the money to buy it. “The result of these policies was that African Americans were totally shut out of the suburban boom” (48). One article stated how there could be half a dozen vacant houses yet, none available for Negroes. Redlining is another process that ensured that people of other races would not “buy or repair their homes in the neighborhoods in which they were allowed to live. Urban renewal was the other side of the process by which Jews and other working class Euro- immigrants became middle class” (48}. Therefore, these processes show that “it took federal programs to create the conditions whereby the abilities of Jews and other European immigrants could be recognized and rewarded rather than denigrated and denied” (49), hence eliminating the belief that Jews made it up to where they are now by their hard work.
As I read this chapter, I was amazed at how not every white was considered white. All along, my thinking has been that whites have all been white as long as their skin is white regardless of where they come from.

TAKAKI CHAPTER 6

EMIGRANTS FROM ERIN
In this chapter, Takaki writes about the “massive influx of a new group of immigrants” (139) that came to America following Indian removal and slavery expansion by English settlers. He states that “suddenly, blacks in the north were competing with Irish workers” (139). The coming of the Irish brought a lot of competition to the labor force and led to a lot of people of other races to lose employment. People of other races could clearly see at that time that the Irish were given better opportunities to employment because of their color. One of the employees complained that the “hunger and color [of the Iris] are thought to give them a title to special favor” (139). But people of other races also wondered why ‘whites’ were taking vocations of people of color. They stated that by taking on the vacations of colored people, whites had also assumed the ‘degradation’ of people of color.
Most Irish however, saw their coming to America as a necessity. They felt that they were being driven away from their homeland by the ‘English tyranny,’ the British yoke enslaving Ireland (140). They complained that they were being forced out of their country by foul British laws and oppression. At this point, the “English conquest led to the abolition of traditional Irish laws and obligations and confiscation of Irish lands (140). One of the changes the English settlers introduced was commercialization of agriculture which meant more export of agricultural produce. This led into the famine year of 1846. Takaki states that “half the people of Ireland could have been fed with the livestock exported in 1846” (144). With a view to get to a better land and escape all this misery, most Irish decided to migrate to the new world where they felt things would be much better.
In the new world, Irish people sought for labor and were assigned mainly to do the hazardous jobs, therefore, increasing the rate of accidents among them. “They had crossed the ocean in pursuit of riches, but they failed to find gold on the street corners” (148). Instead, they were meant to work harder than they used to in their own country.they were made to live and work in very poor conditions.
however, the Irish women had a strategy they called the Irish Ethnic Strategy.this was a strategy in which Irish women did not want their daughters to end up as servants. instead, they were encouraged to seek employment as secretaries, nurses and teachers, so much that by "1910, Irish- American women constituted one fifth of all public school teachers in northern cities and one third in Chicago alone" (161). this advancement of Irish women indicated a rise from the 'giddy multitude.' soon most Irish American were attending college. the Irish were thought of as a race that could easily assimilate the American culture unlike negroes and Chinese.
As i read this article, i asked myself how come Irish people could be easily accepted in the American culture than Chinese or Negroes. however, i noticed that the fact that the Irish are much more similar in color to whites than anyother race at that time played a role in how they were accepted and thought of to easily assimilate. their rise in socio economic status also played a role in their assimilation.

Challenge to Democracy

this is a movie showing the immigration of Japanese people to the new world in the 1800s. it shows how the Japanese were relocated to concentration camps after the war for the sole purpose of protection.

Takaki chapter ten

PACIFIC CROSSINGS-Seeking the Land of Money Trees
in this chapter, Takaki writes about how many Japanese and Chinese people moved to America with a view of excaping the high taxes that were implemented in their countries. they moved to America because they could get better wages and pay less tax than they did in their own countries.They had a lot of dreams of the new world because of different stories they had heard. Some of the stories were that wages in America were far much better than in their countries. “To prospective Japanese migrants, money grew on trees in America” (247). At first, it was mostly Japanese and Chinese men that left their country. But eventually, there was a significant number of Japanese women that added to the immigration number. Because Japanese believed in arranged marriages, they would arrange marriages between daughters in Japan and Japanese men who were in America. This was done through picture sharing and hence the Japanese women that got married this way were called ‘picture brides.’ Takaki states that the “emigration of Japanese women occurred within the context of internal development” (248). But it was also influenced by the needs of receiving courtiers. For example, “in Hawaii, the government initially stipulated that 40 percent of the Japanese contract labor emigrants…were to be women” (250). Takaki states that “furthermore, they [planters] promoted the Japanese family as a mechanism of labor control” (250). The planters believed that Japanese men worked better with their women around.
Looking forward to the dreams of the new world that they had, most immigrants left with joy though some were disheartened by separation anxiety. But to their surprise, money did not grow on ‘trees’ in the new world. It had to be worked for in the plantations owned by whites that were hungry for labor. Therefore, the immigrants became a cheap labor supply for these planters. The planters requested for laborers from different nations. Laborers included people from Japan, China, Korea, Philippines. There was a strategy to this as Takaki points out that “the employers were systematically developing an ethnically diverse labor force in order to create divisions among their workers and reinforce management control” (252). The laborers from different nations developed a competition attitude to prove that their race did a better job. However, despite leading to great productivity, this competition mind created race border lines.
The laborers working conditions were hostile under the supervision of whites. One of the plantation workers complained that “field work was brutal. We worked like machines” (255). The employers fostered discrimination by paying different wages for the same labor based on color and by assigning most supervisory positions to whites. Takaki states that “a Japanese worker told an interviewer how he was frustrated by racial discrimination. ‘I haven’t got a chance to get ahead in employment. You can’t go very high up and get big money unless your skin is white’” (254). This is an evidence of white privilege were people are treated better than others because their skin is white.
To protest to the harsh working conditions, Japanese workers formed strikes. These strikes saw most of them going without pay for several months. However, they Filipinos also could not contain the working conditions any longer and decided to unite with the Japanese in striking. Their goals were frustrated by leaders that lacked integrity by accepting bribes from the planters to call the strikes to an end. Little success of these strikes was that at least the laborers got a few cents increase to their pay.
“Coming to Hawaii with extravagant dreams, Japanese immigrants experienced disillusionment.” (254). Their only hope rested in their children. Most of them decided to send their Japanese American children to school with the hope that education will narrow the bridge of difference between races. However, they learned that what mattered was the color of the skin and not the education. Learning about democracy and freedom, the Japanese American children thought they would enjoy better opportunities than their parents. But their hopes were frustrated by the discrimination they received in employment.
If education and wealth attainment does not put people of color at the same level with whites, what is it that will put them at the same level? The only solution is to dismantle this so called white privilege. No matter how hard we try to make all people equal, if we still embrace that whites should have better opportunities than anyone else, racism will always exist.
As I read the article, I felt sorry for the poor immigrants that came with high hopes, only to be greeted by hostile conditions which were worse than in their own countries.The saddest thing is that most of them could not go back to their countries maybe due to the fears of going through the consequences of the deteriorating statuses of their countries.

EXTRA CREDIT

The Ethics of Living Jim Crow
In this chapter, we read about the autobiographical sketch of Richard Wright. In this chapter, he tells of how he learnt to live as a Negro even in his young age. His lessons started in his neighborhood where he could note differences between his black neighborhood and the surrounding white neighborhood. The differences in the houses and surroundings around the houses echoed which house was owned by a white or by a black. As early as childhood, Richard learnt that whites and blacks could not get along. This was evident in the fights that could break time and again between white and black children. Unfortunately, the parents also brought up their children while amplifying theses differences. For example, Richard gives an instance where he was hurt badly after a fight with white children when his mother was away for work. He waited anxiously for his mother so he could explain what happened. Instead, he was smacked and given what he called the Jim Crow lessons, which I believe are lessons of how Negroes should behave towards white. His mother reminded him of how she works for these white people in order to take care of him (23).They therefore, must be treated with respect because from them comes the source of living.
He further brings out how these Jim Crow lessons progressed in his late teenage and early adulthood. This is when they moved from Arkansas to Mississippi. He says they never lived close to a white neighborhood here. It was what he called the “local Black Belt” (23). Everything here was all made up of blacks. There were black churches, schools, black groceries and black clerks (23). This an evidence of what segregation can do. It leads people of the same color and culture close together while they are drawn further away from anyone who is not of their race. Whilst here, one of his Jim Crow lesson was that the only place he as a black boy can get a job is “where the houses and faces are white, where the trees, lawns and hedges are green” (23). With this thought, but yet with determination, he went out to places owned by whites to seek jobs. One of his dreams was to get a better job, at least better than what most of his fellow blacks did. He gives his experience and continuity of his Jim Crow lessons as he moved from job to job. He learnt that a white man, regardless of his status was to be call ‘sir’. At his first job in an optical company, he was reminded by one of the white workers to watch himself because that job was a white man’s job (24). When he told his fellow blacks how badly he was being treated at his place of work, he was told never again to attempt to exceed his boundaries but to “stay in [his] place” (25). From job to job, he learnt what it meant to be a Negro. He learnt that books are not meant for Negroes, that Negroes are ‘bastards,’ that you never say thank you to a white man least he thinks that you were receiving from him a special service, he also learnt of topics that white people enjoyed to discuss and those that they never wanted to hear a word mentioned about (30). He got to witness the most terrible forms of physical and psychological abuse. Finally, he says he had to learn a lot of ingenuity to stay out of trouble, he learnt “to lie, to steal, to dissemble and to play that dual role which every Negro must play if he wants to eat and live” (29).
In all this, we see how the issue of privilege has influence at all levels of the socioeconomic structure. Time and again, Richard learnt how to give honor to every white, regardless of whether he did the same job with them or not. Therefore, like Johnson states, the issue of the color line here, determines who receives respect and who doesn’t. It determines who is to over see the other.

TAKAKI CHAPTER THREE

THE GIDDY MULTITUDE
In this chapter, Takaki starts out by pointing that Caliban, in the Tempest could have been African. He states that this is one of the possible thoughts that lingered in the minds of the theater goers. At this time, some of them could have encountered African because at this time five Negroes where brought to England where they were taught English so that they could serve as translators to the English traders. At the sight of these Negroes, the English were struck at why these blacks had a black skin. Some speculated that it was due to a natural infection that their skin was that black. Caliban was thought to be a ‘bastard’ because of his dark complexion. Takaki states that “the color black was freighted with an array of negative images-deeply stained with dirt, ‘foul’ dark or deadly in purpose” on the other hand “the color white signified purity, innocence, and goodness” (51-53). Caliban seemed to personify African traits in the eyes of the theatergoers. Their perception of Africans was that they are a “vile race” living without a God and religion. “Their color allegedly made them Devils incarnate” (52).
The author states that Caliban was not only seen as a savage, but he was also seen as a “deformed slave” (52). He could not be missed by the English because they said “he does make our fire, fetch our wood, and serves in offices that profit us” (52). We see here that Caliban is used for cheap labor and also we see the capitalistic type of thought where cheap labor is used to maximize profit. Eight years after the first performance of the Tempest, a Dutch man came to England and sold twenty Negars (53). Even though these twenty negars might have not been slaves, they saw the beginning of African enslavement. At this time there were whites who were sold as indentured servants. These “men and women were outcasts of society.” Even though most of these white indentured servants came involuntarily like blacks, the difference was that the blacks were being bought from their homes. Unlike these white servants, most of these blacks were not outcasts. Both whites and blacks occupied “a common social space- a terrain of racial liminality” (55). Together, they tried to find ways of escaping their masters. “The problem of whites and blacks absconding together became so serious that the Virginia legislature complained about English servants running away with Negroes” (55). They needed to do something to stop these collaborations or else the masters would be over thrown. To do this, the masters introduced different punishment for blacks and whites even though they committed the same offense. One of the differences was that white servants would only serve for a contract while black slaves would serve their masters till death. Such differences led to the racial line between the white servants and black slaves. The white servants felt superior to the black slaves because they were treated better than the blacks. The masters also later realized that it was less expensive to maintain twenty black slaves than one English servant (58). This led to more blacks being brought in as slaves to replace white servants in order for the masters to maximize profit. Now the distinction in who works more and gets the sternest punishment was determined by the difference between white and black. But the English were not happy that they ended up as servants instead of landowners as they were promised. They therefore became “a threat to social order, forming what the planter elite fearfully called a giddy multitude” (63). The fears of the giddy multitude came to reality when Nathaniel Bacon rebelled and formed an army that “contemporaries described as an incredible number of the meanest people” (64). The only solution to this rebellion was to disarm the servants and get more black slaves instead of white servants. This saw more and more blacks being brought as slaves and working under terrible conditions.
While reading this chapter, I came to a realization that after all, blacks and whites could work together if conditions allow them. For example, the white servants and black servants realizing that they all needed one common thing-freedom, they occasionally collaborated to fight for their freedom. I therefore, wonder if this can be the case if whites and blacks of today are brought to the same conditions where they have to fight for one common goal. In other words, can we narrow the racial gap by creating opportunities where blacks and whites come together more often with one goal? And secondly, could there be change if people in higher positions changed their attitude towards blacks and whites and treat everyone the same way? I personally believe that such moves can make a difference.

ETHNIC NOTIONS

ETHNIC NOTIONS
This is a film that shows depictions of black Americans through images that shows the stereotypes that have been labeled on blacks through out history. Some of the popular depictions include the mammy, the pick ninny, the coon, the sambo and the uncle. These stereotyped images were seen in cartoons, songs and other form of media. The images were used for decorations and were greatly abused. The narrator states that these images “taken for granted, worked their way into the mainstream of American life. Of ethnic caricatures in America, these have been the most enduring. Today there's little doubt that they shaped the most gut-level feelings about race.” Some argue that these cartoons were not taken seriously, but when you see hundreds of them, in all parts of the country persisting over a very long period of time, they have to have meaning. The greatest problem however, is that blacks are seen that way, perceived that way, even in terms of public policy. One wonders why these images continued to exist for such a long time if they did not mean anything. Levine, one of the contributors in the film states that looking at these images often enough, makes black people begin to look like that, even though they do not. Viewed in such a way, these images then have a great impact in our society. She further states that “they [images] therefore tell us both about the inner desires of the people who create and consume them, and also they tell us about some of the forces that shape reality, for large portions of our population.” Indeed, with the excitement that came with viewing cartoons with these images, one can conclude that there must have been a lot of meaning in them to the viewers and listeners. The images served as amusements to the viewers and made them laugh. But the narrator of the film states that “Today there's little doubt that they shaped the most gut-level feelings about race.
Through these cartoons, they were also images of happy slaves which made people think that blacks were happy to be slaves hence making slavery not seem that bad if the slaves themselves are happy. The narrator further states that “In the early 1900's images and songs portrayed a simple, docile, laughing black man: the Sambo.
This image became one of the classic portrayals of black men in film. Care free and irresponsible, the sambo was quick to avoid work while reveling in the easy pleasures of food, dance and song. His life was one of child-like contentment.” This is how people ended up seeing blacks. They were seen as people that could be used for labor in exchange for food and such things as shoes. The irresponsibility stereotype was taken so serious that a black man needed to be cosigned by a white to enter a pub. To this the black man sang: “even though I have money, I cannot buy a drink.” Therefore, it did not matter what a black man possessed. What they could buy out of their earnings did not matter. All that mattered was that they were blacks and therefore, should not freely enjoy what white people enjoyed. They were slaves owned by whites and so needed to be watched by their masters.
The effects of these images at that time perpetuated the issues of racism that even exist today. They led to a magnification of the thought that blacks are always inferior. The belief that Africa were these slaves came from is a dark continent, an assault to civilization.
As I watched the film, I agreed with the narrator and contributors that the effects of these images are still prominent. People still think that blacks are inferior, that they are the only ones to do the hard work. An example of this is how supervisors at work will assign a larger portion of work to a black and lesser work to a white. This gets us back to issues of privilege and white supremacy, where people are treated better simply because they are white.
But, as I watched the film, I wondered if they are any negative stereotypes labeled against whites apart from the privilege ones that we know.

Race: The Power of an Illusion

Episode One: “The Difference Between Us”
In this video, it was stated how visual differences are used to categorize or rather classify people into five races. These visual differences include shape and color of eyes, skin color, hair etc. The one problem that comes with this is that race assumes that external differences are attributed to internal differences. It assumes that race is a biological difference. Therefore, biology becomes an excuse for races. But the idea of race is a biological myth because we only ascribe race to biology. The idea of race has been exploited especially by those who have changed its definition in order to benefit from it. Society places a very big role and has greater influence in how people define race and react to issues pertaining to the same. Due to a racialized society, performance is attributed to race where people of certain races are believed to naturally perform better in certain skills than those of other races. According to the video, scientists also have a social context, they do not explicitly work on data they find, but also have information imparted on them by their society. In other words, even as they carry out research, they already have preconceived ideas about what the outcome of their study should be like. Is there a way to measure race and show whether we are truly different at genetic level?
In this video, a study was conducted where the mitochondrial DNA of students of different “races’ was studied to find out if it is true that we are genetically different. This study shows that there are very few differences in our genome. We all have the same genes except for a few differences which are due to mutations. These few variations and environmental effects might account for the few differences that we see amongst us. From this study, it was shown that there is much difference within one race as there is between two different races.
The conclusion is that race is a salient and historical concept that was invented to categorize. But the biggest question is: how can we unmake race since we made it? I believe one of the ways to unmake race is to educate people about such studies as was in this video which show that we are very similar in our genetic make up and that we should not just use our phenotypes to categorize ourselves

JOHNSON CHAPTER ONE

Rodney King’s Question
In this chapter, Johnson starts by citing Rodney King’s experience which occurred in 1991. Rodney was a black motorist who suffered a brutal beating at the hands of police officers in Los Angeles. His assailants were acquitted in spite of evidence that included a video tape of the incident. Because of this, King uttered the exasperated plea, “Can’t we all just get along?”(P1).
This is the question that Johnson tries to answer in this chapter. He also tries to explain why we can’t get along and what the solution could be. He states that King’s question formed an eloquent summary of the current state of our racial dilemma. Johnson states that the truth is that we can’t get along. This is evident through segregation in housing and schools which is so stubborn and pervasive, and the average wealth of white families is almost 14 times that of blacks. The effects of racism are everywhere and are especially evident among middle class blacks “who believed that if they went to school and worked hard, race would no longer be an issue. But they soon discovered that nothing seems to protect them from white racism” (2).
Johnson then talks about the problems of perception and defensiveness that usually arise as a reaction to the language of race and the entire set of social differences. He points out that the issue of not getting along is not only seen in the color line, but is also evident “across differences of gender, sexual orientation, disability status and numerous lesser divides”(2). To the issue with difference in gender, Johnson points out that men’s violence and harassment aimed at women is almost becoming epidemic. The differences are also seen in the work place where the glass ceiling blocks women from attaining executive positions and also in the income gap which is narrowing at a ‘glacial pace’ as Johnson puts it. Johnson further states that “men dominate virtually every major organization and institution, from corporations to government to organized sport and religion” but they rarely feel responsible for domestic work (3).
As for sexual orientation, society believes the only right way to go is heterosexism. Therefore, those who are oriented in other forms of sexual orientation, i.e. gay and lesbian, receive a lot of physical violence and harassment. The disabled are also “vulnerable to abuse both within and outside their homes” (3). They have to deal with a lot of stereotypes that are labeled against them and serve as a barrier for them to develop their abilities. Such stereotypes include the belief that disabled people are not intelligent, are damaged, helpless and inferior human beings. The environment around them makes their lives even more difficult because they cannot easily access buildings, buses and airplanes, therefore making it even more difficult if not impossible for them to attain the information necessary for their development. As a result, they are most likely to drop out of school and find jobs that will pay them less than the minimum wage (3). All these environmental conditions and stereotypes end up in a “pervasive pattern of exploitation, deprivation, poverty, mistreatment, and isolation that denies access to employment, housing, transportation, information, and basic services needed to fully participate in the life of the society” (3). All these are examples showing how much difference there is amongst our selves.
To such differences, Johnson states that some people argue that we cannot get along due to some variation in human nature. They say men and women are so dissimilar that the level of getting along that now exists is actually a miracle. Others argue that there is only one natural sexual orientation- heterosexual, therefore all the rest are unacceptable. Others still argue that the more capable will get more than the less capable because this is how it has been and will always be.(3).
But in order to make a difference in all these issues, Johnson suggests that we need to talk about the problem using the right words to describe them. Instead of being defensive and uncomfortable when such issues of race, gender, disability are brought up, we should be receptive and discuss openly of how we can make a difference. And to be able to do this, we need to work as a whole.
I totally agree with Johnson, but my question is, when and how are we going to come together as a whole to make a difference? I do not mean to deny the fact that we can make a difference if we come together, but to be more practical, I believe change has to start at the grass root level which is us as individuals. If each one of us can struggle for the change and then come together with everyone else, then the battle will become easier because we all will be one minded.

DRAWING THE COLOR LINE

Zinn Chapter Two- Drawing the Color Line
In this chapter, Johnson begins by stating that “there is not a country in the world history in which racism has been more important for so long a time, as the United States. And the problem of the color line is still with us” (P23). For the rest of the chapter, Zinn tries to answer questions of how this racism and the color line all started and how it might end. He makes these questions more specific by asking whether it is possible for whites and blacks to live together without hatred.
To answer how it all started, Zinn looks and history and states that “if history can help answer these questions, then the beginning of slavery in North America- a continent where we can trace the coming of the first whites and first blacks- might supply at least a few clues” (23). He then directs us to the English colonies where we see the development of slavery into a regular institution and into the normal labor relation of blacks and whites. It is from this institution that a special racial feeling that accompanied the inferior position of blacks in America developed. Zinn states that “everything in the experience of the first white settlers acted as pressure for the enslavement of blacks” (23).
Then Zinn points out the desperation for labor by the Virginians to grow enough food to stay alive. They needed labor to grow enough corn and tobacco for export which they had learned how to grow from the Indians. The profit that came with export of tobacco made the English settlers even more eager to find labor so they could enjoy more profit. This is capitalism at play-wanting cheap labor in order to maximize profit. The settlers could not find this cheap source of labor among the Indians because the “Indians were tough, resourceful, defiant, and at home… as the transplanted Englishmen were not” (24). Zinn states that “blacks were the answer” (24) to the labor problem and “it was natural to consider imported blacks as slaves even if the institution of slavery would not be regularized and legalized for several decades” (24). He points out the start of regular trade in slaves to the time when Portuguese took ten African blacks to Lisbon.
One might wonder why enslavement of the blacks was successful and not with the Indians. Zinn states that the helplessness of the African blacks made enslavement easier. He also points out that the blacks in their enslavement had to be “torn from their land and culture” (25) unlike the Indians who were in their own land. Looking at whether the African culture was inferior and prone to destruction, Zinn points out that the African civilization was advanced in its own way as that of Europe. Certain African kingdoms like that of Timbuktu and Mali were already stable and organized at a time when European states were just beginning to develop into modern nations. Zinn cites instances that show that these African Kingdoms were built on laws based on communal living, an attribute which the slaves brought along with. Slavery also existed in Africa, but Zinn points out two elements of the American slavery that makes it more cruel in history: “the frenzy for limitless profit that comes from capitalistic agriculture; the reduction of the slave to less than human status by use of racial hatred, with that relentless clarity based on color, where white was master, black was slave” (25-26). Different forms of cruelty were seen in especially how slaves were transported and the conditions under which they worked.
In resistance to this cruelty, imported black men and women occasionally organized insurrection but most often responded by running away, engaging in sabotage, and slowdowns. From time to time, whites were involved in the slave resistance. Zinn cites the formation of a conspiracy to rebel and gain freedom by collaborations of white servants and black slaves in Gloucester County, Virginia. These endeavors were betrayed and ended with executions. However, there was a difference in the punishment that would be given to blacks and whites for the same offence committed.
Zinn concludes this chapter by stating that through the above examples, “we see a complex web of historical threads to ensnare blacks for slavery in America: the desperation of starving settlers, the special helplessness of the displaced African, the powerful incentive of profit for slave traders and planter, the temptation of superior status for poor whites, the elaborate controls against escape and rebellion, the legal and social punishment of black and white collaboration” (30). The elements of this web, Zinn states, “are historical, not natural”
The possibility to disentangle and dismantle this web, Zinn states that is under historical conditions not yet realized. And one of these conditions would be the elimination of that class exploitation which has made poor whites desperate for small gifts of status, and prevented that unity of black and white necessary for joint rebellion and reconstruction.
While reading this chapter, I was stunned at how cruel human beings can be against each other all for the sole purpose of gaining more status, and material possession. The number of blacks that died as they were being transported to the plantations really shocked me. I didn’t know they were that large-about fifty million. I was also surprised that some blacks and whites actually tried to come together to escape. I appreciate that Zinn points this out because most articles I have read do not.
The question I ask out of all this is: should whites be totally blamed for the enslavement of blacks? I somehow feel not all the blame should be labeled against whites because blacks themselves were also involved in the trade. Blacks sold their fellow blacks as slaves. Well, one might argue that this was perpetuated by whites. I totally agree with that, but believe that the trade would not have been easy for whites if the blacks did not facilitate it.

Jonhnson Chapter three

Chapter Three- Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination

In this chapter, Johnson stipulates that capitalism played a major role in the development of white privilege and still plays a major role in its perpetuation. He states that this is so because of the importance of economics in social life, the means by which people provide for their material needs. Because economics are the source of wealth and the basis of every institution, they influence the running of these institutions hence giving these institutions no option but to go with the dominant economic system. Johnson states that capitalism has been this dominant economic system for the last several hundreds of years. A dictionary definition of capitalism points out that it is an economic and social system in which the means of production are privately owned and controlled and which is characterized by competition and the profit motive. In this chapter Johnson explains how a capitalistic type of economy leads to a privileged group and an oppressed one. This is because where there is a privileged group, there ought to be an oppressed group. In proving this, he explains how capitalism works.

He starts by stating that “the basic goal of capitalism is to turn money into more money” (P42). With this basic goal, capitalist buy raw materials and labor and produce goods to sell and get more profit. Because the focus is on making more profit, the capitalist aim at increasing their produce-“worker productivity,” for the same or less wages for workers. Therefore, they aim for cheap labor, because “the cheaper the labor, the more money left over for them [capitalists]” (P43). Some of the strategies the capitalists use to ensure cheap labor and more goods hence more profit is top use technology which reduces the number of workers employed or replace workers completely. The other strategy is to threaten closure of the companies if workers protest for wage increase. Therefore, the workers do not protest because they depend on this work for survival. The last and newest strategy is to “move production to countries where people are willing to work for less than they are in Europe or North America and where the authoritarian governments control workers and discourage the formation of unions and other sources of organized resistance, often with direct support of the U.S government” (43). This ultimately leads to workers being oppressed because they do not have other means of survival but to work, and investors, known as shareholders, being privileged by gaining more out of the little they invested in.

Jonson further states that “the dynamics of capitalism produce not only enormous amounts of wealth but high and increasing levels of inequality both within societies and globally” (43). To prove the enormous inequality that results from capitalism, Johnson cites some statistics that show that more than two-thirds of all the wealth, including almost 90 percent of cash and half the land, is owned by the richest ten percent while less than a quarter of the wealth is left for sharing among the lowest sixty percent of the population. Such differences, Johnson states, “result from and perpetuate a class system based on widening gaps in income, wealth, and power between those on top and everyone below them” (44). The ones at the bottom end up leading very oppressed lives because even though there is plenty of goods produced, very few is left for a lot of people to share hence leading to scarcity of goods amongst those at the bottom of the socioeconomic class while those at the top have all the privilege of having abundant goods.

Furthermore, Johnson shows how a capitalist type of economy led to white racism when millions of Africans were enslaved as a source of cheap labor on the cotton and tobacco plantations for the sole purpose of making more profit because no money would be invested on wages. Chinese immigrants were also used to build the western railways under harsh and demeaning conditions. Capitalism has also contributed to white racism through the acquisition of land and raw materials. Military conquest, political domination and economic exploitation were used by whites to acquire land from anyone that wasn’t considered white. This lead to oppression and developed the idea of whiteness to “define a privileged social category elevated above everyone who wasn’t included in it” (46-47).

But Johnson admits that the issue of privilege is complicated. This is the same reason why someone may belong to a privileged category and still feel oppressed. He explains this by stating that there are different categories of privilege. Therefore, it is possible that one can feel privileged in one category and yet feel unprivileged in another category hence we can belong to both privileged and unprivileged categories at the same time.

While reading this chapter, I understood the capitalistic type of economy. In as much as I had an idea of what capitalism is, I probably did not care so much to learn more about its effects. I was stunned at the percentages in the unequal distribution of wealth and almost all other things in terms of land and even education. i.e. the privileged go to better schools and learn in better conditions than the oppressed. It made me understand why most things in the U.S. are made in China. One of my friends one time was saying almost everything in America is made in China including the American flag. But what really surprised me the most is that in my country, we have things made in China and yet of poor quality than the same products found in the U.S. So why the difference? I now understand that it is due to the effects of capitalism. Because my country is a third world country labeled in the bottom category, we have to share the remainder of what the ‘privileged’ first world countries have left for us even when we have an abundance of natural resources. My country does not have as much commanding power and influence in the production as the United States, maybe that is why we get low quality products.

THE TEMPEST IN THE WILDERNESS

THE TEMPEST IN THE WILDERNESS- The Racialization of Savagery

In this article, the author, Takaki Ronald illustrates how the performance of William Shakespeare’s Tempest can be approached as a fascinating tale that served as a masquerade for the creation of a new society in America. The article also shows how the English conquered the Irish and Indians by force and took over their land. In this process, many Indians were killed and those that survived were deprived of the opportunities that they initially possessed. “The English claimed they had a God given responsibility to inhabit and reform so barbarous a nation.” The English saw the Irish and Indians as savages whose savagery, they believed, could be improved if these people became civilized showing that the difference between the English and these people was a matter of culture. The Indians were seen as devils that lived in darkness and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and the worship of God.
In the view of bringing the true knowledge of God to the Indians and Irish, the English settlers ended up in a competition of resources with the Indians. Part of the competition was for arable land. Takaki concludes that “within this economic and cultural framework, a discovery occurred: the Indian “other” became a manifest devil. Thus savagery was racialized as the Indians were demonized… once the process of this cultural construction was under way; it set a course for the making of a nation identity in America for centuries to come.” Takaki concludes that “civilizing the Indians was a strategy designed to acquire land for white settlements. All Indians, regardless of whether they were farmers or hunters, were subject to removal, even extermination, if they continued in their “barbarism.” Thus Indians were only given one option and that was to adopt the white man’s culture in order for them to survive.
In his argument, Takaki states that the Indians were subject to extermination regardless of whether they attained the civilization that was to be brought upon them by the English settlers. I agree with his assumption here because throughout the article, we could see that the intentions of the English settlers were more than just bringing civilization to the Indians and Iris, but to actually possess their land. Actually the Indians themselves saw this leading their governor Pequots to protest: “we see plainly that their [the English] chiefest desire is to deprive us of the privilege of our land, and drive us off to our utter ruin.” This is one of the evidences showing that the English had other intentions of satisfying their own desires in the conquest of the Indians as Takaki argues.
While reading the article, I was so amazed at how these English settlers used the God as their sender to get that which they needed. Indeed you would wonder what type of God would find pleasure in the death of thousands of people without prior warning just so others can have possession of temporal things like land.

Rosenblum Article

The Meaning of Difference
In this article, the author, Rosenblum Karen, considers issues of how difference is constructed in contemporary America. To do so, she has divided the article in what she considers key questions about difference, i.e. how difference is constructed, how it is experienced by individuals, how meaning is attributed to difference, and how difference can be bridged. To answer these questions, she divides the primary axes of difference also called master statuses into race, sex and gender, social class, sexual orientation, and disability.

In looking at disability-one of the master statuses, Rosenblum concludes that disability is socially constructed. It is created by environments that lack the physical design or social support that would make life worth living. To illustrate this point, she quotes Morris, 1991:40-40 who gave an example of Larry McAfee who was involved in a motorcycle accident which resulted in complete paralysis and the need to use a ventilator. After spending all the money that he had on private care in his own home, Larry ended up in a nursing home where he thought that life was not worth living. He therefore, decided that his life should be ended and went through legal procedures for that. But when finally he won the support to end his life, Larry decided to delay his decision. Morris concludes that what Larry wanted “was to live in his own home and get a job.” He further argues that “it is not the physical disability itself but the social and economic circumstances of the experience which can lead to a diminished quality of life” (page 24). Therefore, disability should be understood as a result of disabling environment.

In her argument, Rosenblum also concludes that the categories of disability are themselves socially constructed. They are not the “givens in nature… but rather socially constructed categories that emerge from the interpretive activities of people acting together in social situations (P24). She gives learning disabilities as an example of a disability that did not exist until educators began to popularize it. However, she states that almost two million students are served as learning disabled. She further argues that disability is created in both physical and conceptual ways. People are labeled as disabled depending on the helplessness created by their physical limitations. Thus Higgins comments that disability is made and remade through our beliefs, behaviors, policies, and practices, interpersonal, organizational and social activities (P24).

In dealing with the master statuses, Rosenblum states that society has reduced the complexity of a population to aggregates and then to a simplistic dichotomy. Aggregation ignores the conflicting statuses an individual inevitably occupies and assumes that those who share a master status are alike in essential ways. She concludes that dichotomizing “promotes the image of a mythical other who is not like ‘us’ and ultimately results in stigmatizing those who are less powerful” (25). This has led to constructing ‘others’ as profoundly different. She gives an example of how biological differences in males and females have been the grounds from which to infer an extensive range of non biological differences hence leading to different legal, social, and economic roles and rights. Though these differences are highly held by society, very few significant differences have been found between men and women. The differences are thought to be there because we are all socialized to produce such differences. The expectations of such differences are also seen in race, class and sexual orientation. For example, Rosenblum argues that differences of race are expected to involve more than just differences of color.
Rosenblum further notes the similarities that are there in the sanctioning received by those who cross race, sex, class or sexual orientation boundaries. She gives an example of how a child who marries from a different race is as likely to be disowned by his parents as a child who is gay. This leads to labeling of one another based on the features on seems to acquire. Men that appear feminine are labeled gay and thus boys are structured at an early stage not be behave like women to avoid public humiliation. Due to this labeling, it is likely that people will pretend to be what they are not and these labels have become as Rosenblum concludes, the social control mechanisms which are effective up to now because all of us are guilty of effecting them in one way or the other.

This article made me realize the stereotypes that are labeled on race, sex and gender and especially disability. In our society today, those who are disabled are never thought of being able to do what others without physical disability are able to do. If they perform beyond people’s expectations, then they are considered to be almost supernatural because society’s view is that they should perform below that level. I also liked the way she illustrated that both of us are dependent in one way or another despite the stereotype on the disabled as the only ones being dependent.

INTRODUCTION

My name is Carol Mayuni.
I am a sophomore majoring in Nursing and Public Health minor.

I'm originally from Zambia- Africa.

I took this class because it meets one of my BG perspective requirements but most importantly because i want to learn more about different issues of race and gender. I hope to learn alot from everyone.