After reading White and Male Privilege by Peggy McIntosh from 1988, my class was asked to write about privileges we have experienced in our own lives. Right now with so much stuff happening, its hard to feel privileged at all. However, I do agree with her discussion of male and white privilege. Do I feel that I have experience this in my life? I guess at times, yes.
I have definitely felt this with my professional life. Ironically, at my theater job (subscription, patron and donation sales), my boss made a remark about how it is easier for a man to be successful in this job than women. What he meant was that because of a man's voice, people are more apt to agree to purchase a subscription, join the club or just simply donate. Of course then, the man making more sales than a women, is also making more money in the long run. Is it because of the deeper voices? Maybe they sound more commanding or convincing. I never thought of it much before, as I can be pretty convincing myself, but I can see how a male voice can command a person do do something more than a woman's voice.
Another instance, and completely opposite of the experience above is that while television is expanding what it will allow every year, there are definitely more shows featuring white people than any other race. This happens with toys, too. at least in the U.S.
With so many diverse friends and acquaintances from all walks of life, however, I have not thought of privilege as deeply as maybe I should.
More recently I think I have more privilege because of my age than my race or belief system. I am much older than most of the kids in school, but I think I am allowed privilege mainly because I am a responsible person and serious about why I am in school, where I plan to be and diligent about working hard to get there. This come with age and determination, experience and learning to respect others.
Going forward, I will certainly be more aware of the different privileges that I experience, white, age, and more. It is a shame that we, as a society, do not have more equality between race, creed, age, etc. and even more sad is that I may not see it ever change.
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Clothing, Protests and Revolutions
This is a post in response to to Abi Ishola's Scripts and Sightings Post "
Headwraps, Hoodies, and Denim: How Clothing has shaped Protests and
Revolutions." Ms. Ishola has written an excellent post on the powerful
influence clothing can make for calls to action no matter whether it is about
protesting a serious political issue or just demanding change for a better
existence.
While this post first focuses on the social media outcry in response to the
recent kidnapping of the 200 Nigerian girls from their school in Chibok by the
Nigerian Islamic terrorist group, Boka Haram, I was also struck by her
additional accounts of public protest using fashion and clothing.
For instance, the 1976 "Soweto Uprising" about the
protest in regards to the Afrikaans Medium Decree declaring Afrikaans as the official
language for instruction in school. After
further research I totally understand and agree with their cause, however, I
was surprised that the account of this protest on the blog post and reports in
the news are slightly contradicting. According to the BBC (www.bbc.co.uk), it
was not the police that started the violence that day, but it was angry youths that
began the protest throwing stones and bottles at the police. Ms. Ishola's
account claims the police started the racial violence. Who is really to
blame for the violence, death and destruction that happened that day?
After my research, my first question to Ms. Ishola is “which
account is correct and if the youths protesting were actually to blame, then
what made them think that throwing stones and bottles at police and invoking the
violence was the way to get their message across? Did they not think the police
would retaliate?
The unfortunate reality is that the solidarity of wearing
school uniforms was completely obliterated by their actions that day, albeit it
did get the attention of the media and the world. But to what end...over 700
kids lost their lives that day. If you are going to play with the big boys, you
have to learn to play the game first before breaking any rules.
A perfect example of how a peaceful act can speak more loudly is
the account of four African American men on February 1, 1960 sitting at the all
white’s lunch counter of F.W. Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C.
demanding to be served. These men drove
their point home about ending segregation at the lunch counter by dressing and acting
professionally to change people's perceptions.
According to the New York Times (The Learning Network, New
York Times), this demonstration garnered a lot of attention and inspired the
movement to spread throughout North Carolina to Virginia, Florida, South
Carolina and Tennessee, eventually involving fifteen cities. Typically, reactions varied because sometimes groups of white men would heckle, elbow, jostle and shove the
protestors, but in the end, it was a successful movement.
In response to this very successful movement, my second
question to Ms. Ishola is whether or not it was actually their clothing or was it the
peaceful manner that they protested with that eventually pushed the issue and
making strides towards equality? If they had come in a different mode of dress,
yet still acted peacefully, would Woolworth's been more apt to call authorities and force them to leave or would they have achieved the same outcome? Besides
believing originally that this was just some college prank, why were the police
not brought in to stop the demonstrations? Weren't these men technically breaking the law according to the states that the protests took place in?
In addition, the quiet protest of the African American residents
of Huntsville Alabama boycotting the stores that they normally purchased
dresses and suits for Easter Sunday spoke volumes. By not shopping and wearing Blue Jeans, they
certainly got their point across by hitting the retailers where it hurts
most…their pockets.
In response to this boycott, I ask Ms. Ishola, do you think
this protest/boycott would be successful today and if so, being that jeans are more prevalent today than they may have been then would
people today have the discipline to withstand a boycott like this?
Another movement that has garnered much attention is a protest that has been initiated to stop
brutality against opposition in Venezuela bringing an immense amount of media
attention opposing the government and their actions. The movement is called
#BetterNakedThan and has gotten people to pose naked in their facebook and
twitter posts as a criticism of their government. For instance, According to a
blog post by Elias Groll on blog.foreignpolicy.com “Venezuelan President
Nicolas Maduro denied that he used excessive force to put down intense
anti-government protests, which left as many as 39 dead” (Groll). According to
the Huffington Post,
“President Nicolás
Maduro and opposition politicians agreed on Tuesday to hold talks in an attempt
to defuse the crisis, in which at least 39 people have been killed, the
Associated Press reported.”
The #BetterNakedThan protest tactic was started after several
masked male government supporters stripped a student of his clothing and beat
him up because of a confrontation with anti-government protesters at the
Central University of Venezuela in Caracas (Groll).
According to BBC Mundo, this campaign started with
advertising executive, Ricardo Cie who was outraged by the footage of the
student being beaten and got some friends to post nude photos in solidarity
with this student. (Huffington Post)
From there the movement took off with many Venezuelans
posting images with captions such as:
- Better naked than humiliated and silenced by the violence
in our Venezuela.
- Better naked than without hope.
- Better naked than dead, without education, without food,
without culture, without dreams.
- Better naked than to allow the continued restriction of my
rights.
- Better naked than with hatred and no future.
While this protest is the polar opposite of protesting with articles of
clothing it is just as relevant and protesting without clothing and adding the captions that are with them…
just as powerful and unforgettable.
Sources
Groll, Elias, http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/04/09/now_venezuelans_are_taking_off_their_clothes_to_protest
Alfred, Charlotte,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/09/venezuela-better-naked-than-photos_n_5119259.html?utm_hp_ref=world,
The World Post, April 9, 2014
http://www.nytimes, The
Learning Network, New York Times,
Feb. 1, 1960: Black Students and the Greensboro Sit-In, February 1, 2012
Monday, October 6, 2014
Sociology and The Structural Functional Theory
The Structural Functional Theory was created by Emile Durkheim and was the study of how Society stays together without falling apart answering the question of how Society reproduces themselves. This theory is partially about each individual's dependence on others. Not dependence in a traditional sense but for survival.
This may have begun at the start of the Industrial Revolution when more and more people went to the cities looking for work. Living in a city of strangers is a far different existence from living amongst family and a close knit community, or a smaller society.
I was fascinated to learn more about smaller societies that are held together by mechanical solidarity. Its a way of life I can't personally imagine dealing with. To live in a society that has no tolerance for differences or diversity would make me feel trapped. However, if a person has grown up in a society like this, it may be the only way they know. It can also make a person want to flee and find another way to live.
Imagine leaving a community like this to come to a city like New York. How shocking it would be to learn to survive. This is where learning to live with strangers forces dependence on one another to survive and makes modern society more cohesive.
There are several options our society engages in to survive. One is that we often depend on people to talk through our problems, whether it be to a person's best friend, mother, father etc or a co-worker or the bartender at the corner bar. It's a way to stay connected. When a person is disconnected from society, they may not feel able to survive.
It all comes down to a division of labor. In other words, diversity fosters a dependence on one another. A good example might be a teacher and student relationship. While in today's world, of course a person can do research on the internet on their own, etc, but a major part of learning is from being taught by others. In school, students also learn things that are latent. For example, while a person goes to school to learn the basics of math, English, science, history, etc, on the playground they are also learning about class, racial differences, social divisions and social hierarchy. Its not what is advertised as a benefit of going to school, but it is in fact a benefit. A college student is not only learning about the subject they want to study but they are also learning to live on their own, control their spending, learn responsibility and more.
Life will and should continue to teach us things we are not expecting and these things will keep us growing. Depending on one another is not a weakness, but it is necessary for survival along with being a part of the Structural Functional Theory.
This may have begun at the start of the Industrial Revolution when more and more people went to the cities looking for work. Living in a city of strangers is a far different existence from living amongst family and a close knit community, or a smaller society.
I was fascinated to learn more about smaller societies that are held together by mechanical solidarity. Its a way of life I can't personally imagine dealing with. To live in a society that has no tolerance for differences or diversity would make me feel trapped. However, if a person has grown up in a society like this, it may be the only way they know. It can also make a person want to flee and find another way to live.
Imagine leaving a community like this to come to a city like New York. How shocking it would be to learn to survive. This is where learning to live with strangers forces dependence on one another to survive and makes modern society more cohesive.
There are several options our society engages in to survive. One is that we often depend on people to talk through our problems, whether it be to a person's best friend, mother, father etc or a co-worker or the bartender at the corner bar. It's a way to stay connected. When a person is disconnected from society, they may not feel able to survive.
It all comes down to a division of labor. In other words, diversity fosters a dependence on one another. A good example might be a teacher and student relationship. While in today's world, of course a person can do research on the internet on their own, etc, but a major part of learning is from being taught by others. In school, students also learn things that are latent. For example, while a person goes to school to learn the basics of math, English, science, history, etc, on the playground they are also learning about class, racial differences, social divisions and social hierarchy. Its not what is advertised as a benefit of going to school, but it is in fact a benefit. A college student is not only learning about the subject they want to study but they are also learning to live on their own, control their spending, learn responsibility and more.
Life will and should continue to teach us things we are not expecting and these things will keep us growing. Depending on one another is not a weakness, but it is necessary for survival along with being a part of the Structural Functional Theory.
Sociology Theories - Social Conflict
In class on Friday, the discussion topic of the day was Sociology Theories. We have not covered everything yet as there is much to think about. The first theory discussed was Social Conflict. What is it, one might ask? To quote the definition from class: "Social Conflict is a struggle of those with power and those without power, or in short 'struggle over power'"
Living in a Capitalist Economy is a major contributor to this power struggle. In an economy like this there are two groups of people involved. To put this in simple terms, you first have the Capitalists (aka as a class of people or the owners of nature) and the laborers or workers.
To begin to understand what this all means, lets start with the Capitalists or the owners of nature. Before hearing this concept in class, I never thought of our society in this way even though I pay very close attention to what is going on in the world. However, it is crystal clear that this is exactly what is going on. You have the few that have the power and control everyone else.
For instance, lets think about our food supply, which is directly connected to nature. You have institutions or classes of people, if you will, such as the FDA, the USDA and others who create stringent rules about what America is allowed to consume. They control the organic farmers (aka the laborers) and charge them a pretty penny to be able to say they are certified organic. The irony here is that the FDA and USDA also allow themselves to be controlled by another group of Capitalists (Monsanto, DuPont, PepsiCo, Coca Cola, etc) who pay them to not enforce GMO labeling laws without a care that so much of our food supply is tainted and poisoning consumers. This is just one example of many.
The second group, the laborers or workers are ironically the majority. We work our whole lives to make enough money to live and survive and it gets harder and harder to do in this economy. There may be the few who live a more comfortable life, but many will struggle through the power struggles of past by being forced to work harder and longer hours to make ends meet without receiving much back. By that I mean that the power struggle is a story as old as time. There has always been the workers making the Capitalists rich whether monetarily or with power. Occasionally, however we workers fight back.
One of the most recent records of workers fighting back is Occupy Wall Street (1% vs. 99%). It is a perfect example of the fight to even the playing fields. People are simply sick and tired of being forced to work themselves to death for little payback, while making the power hungry Capitalists richer and more comfortable. Its not fair, but it is the reality we live in. Will the tables ever turn forcing the Capitalists to give back more or maybe even chip in to keep the world running smoothly? Its doubtful, but if the 99% keep fighting hard, you never know.
Living in a Capitalist Economy is a major contributor to this power struggle. In an economy like this there are two groups of people involved. To put this in simple terms, you first have the Capitalists (aka as a class of people or the owners of nature) and the laborers or workers.
To begin to understand what this all means, lets start with the Capitalists or the owners of nature. Before hearing this concept in class, I never thought of our society in this way even though I pay very close attention to what is going on in the world. However, it is crystal clear that this is exactly what is going on. You have the few that have the power and control everyone else.
For instance, lets think about our food supply, which is directly connected to nature. You have institutions or classes of people, if you will, such as the FDA, the USDA and others who create stringent rules about what America is allowed to consume. They control the organic farmers (aka the laborers) and charge them a pretty penny to be able to say they are certified organic. The irony here is that the FDA and USDA also allow themselves to be controlled by another group of Capitalists (Monsanto, DuPont, PepsiCo, Coca Cola, etc) who pay them to not enforce GMO labeling laws without a care that so much of our food supply is tainted and poisoning consumers. This is just one example of many.
The second group, the laborers or workers are ironically the majority. We work our whole lives to make enough money to live and survive and it gets harder and harder to do in this economy. There may be the few who live a more comfortable life, but many will struggle through the power struggles of past by being forced to work harder and longer hours to make ends meet without receiving much back. By that I mean that the power struggle is a story as old as time. There has always been the workers making the Capitalists rich whether monetarily or with power. Occasionally, however we workers fight back.
One of the most recent records of workers fighting back is Occupy Wall Street (1% vs. 99%). It is a perfect example of the fight to even the playing fields. People are simply sick and tired of being forced to work themselves to death for little payback, while making the power hungry Capitalists richer and more comfortable. Its not fair, but it is the reality we live in. Will the tables ever turn forcing the Capitalists to give back more or maybe even chip in to keep the world running smoothly? Its doubtful, but if the 99% keep fighting hard, you never know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)