What is the next step?

This class has really made me think about how people interpret why we have race in America. I have taken Philosophy of Race with all of you, plus Athro: Race and Human Relations. This past Thursday on the last day of class we talked about what the next step is. Yes we have all established that Rhodes college screams privilege, and we have issues within out campus in terms of diversity. We talk about the issues that we have in terms of how deep the system of race is in America, but how do we start to cut this idea down? Broadly we have spoken about the issues outside our gates, but before we talk about those issues we should change the diversity issues within our campus. I have no clue where to start, but I have been thinking about this a lot. Sometimes I feel weird bringing up these issues because I am of the white race, and therefore I have this "privilege of whiteness" which we have been talking about these last couple of weeks. It's a difficult issue to speak about, and something that a majority of our population wouldn't doesn't even think is an issue because of their color blindness. A majority of our population in the US think that we are an "equal" society. I just feel like we take these classes to take them, and not really try to go out and change things about these issues. I for one am stuck on how we can even come close to the deconstruction of Race in America, but I think with the amount of help Rhodes gets on and off campus we can give it a try.

How Structural Discrimination Affects Mental Health

I recently attended a lecture by Dr. Mark Hatzenbuehler, a clinical psychologist who researches how social structures affect the mental health of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) populations. The body of his research reveals that a higher percentage of homosexuals have been diagnosed with mental health disorders compared to heterosexuals, especially in regions where same sex marriage is banned. Given these statistics, Hatzenbuehler suggests that structural discrimination motivates LGB people to adopt psychological mechanisms that combat the negative stigma attached to their sexual orientation. Such mechanisms are often the precursor to mental health disorders. Furthermore, Hatzenbuehler has found that suicide rates are higher for both heterosexuals and homosexuals in states where LGB populations are structurally discriminated against, determined by a host of criteria. Consequently, Hatzenbuehler is a proponent for community-based interventions that promote acceptance and tolerance for LGB populations.

I believe Hatzenbuehler's research could be extended to several minority populations. Although mental health disorders were not as widely studied before the civil rights movement, it would be interesting to see if structural discrimination, such as segregation, had similar effects on the mental health of racial minorities. Regardless of how far we have come, I do not doubt for a second that similar results would exist even today. As we have discussed in class, our society places normative value on being both white and heterosexual. If one does not identify with either of these groups, how does it impact their health and wellbeing? Evidently, discrimination influences people both externally and internally. Hatzenbuehler’s overwhelming evidence is frightening. I do not think people realize the dramatic consequences of such public prejudice and discrimination, such as banning same sex marriages or depicting black crime on news channels.

If you're interested in reading more about Hatzenbuehler’s research, here is a link to one of his articles:

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=98510a5a-48a5-46a7-a12d-227ce5bd8546%40sessionmgr12&vid=4&hid=15

...To you all

Hi kids -- in the spirit of Phylicia's post here is my ode to you all.

I will admit that I am often really critical of Rhodes, and that my own relationship with this place is very, and perhaps, unjustly harsh. Much of that, I think, emerges from coming to grips with the way in which this place screams PRIVILEGE. Part of my struggle with recognizing the degree to which I am involved and benefit from the privilege of going here, and the privileges which allowed me to come here, is finding a way to stop letting it Rhodes be a privilege which I am ashamed of and rather have it be a force which motivates me.

In light of this, I think that the discussions that we have had this semester have not only brought to light many of the contours and realities of this privilege, but have also have really reaffirmed my belief in the quality and power of our education. Frankly, on very few occasions have I encountered an open, and lively discourse which not only challenged so many of my assumptions about race, but as importantly, about the sorts of unfounded assumptions about the types of things that people care about in this community. Basically, I had allowed cynicism to blind me to the reasons why I came here, and to the reasons why I love my education, my professors, and the fellows students here.

Also, I really appreciate the humor and grace with which everyone received criticism and challenges to their ideas. Especially when talking about issues which touch off so many known and unknown injuries, like race, it can be easy to come to an impasse. I hope to channel the same spirit of openness and willingness to assess myself critically in the conversations that I have now that I have to pretend like I am an adult. But mostly, it has been utterly refreshing to sit down with a group of people, most of whom I don't know or don't know well, and transform the way I think about race not through reading a text, but through conversation. It's been a strange and (dare I say) fun four months.

peace & <3

Homosexuality vs. Race Relations

Last Wednesday, a bill was approved in the TN State Senate that, if passed, would forbid public schools from mentioning homosexuality at all until students were in 9th grade. More details can be found here. As my anger gradually subsided, I began to draw a parallel between the education surrounding race relations and gay rights. We've mentioned before that perhaps schools should teach children to deny racial differences at an early age. While discussing the bill with a friend, I said that I thought ignoring homosexuality would only breed intolerance. She said, "Well, isn't that the point?" I think this is really interesting - could limits on freedom of speech keep important conversations from happening that lead to a distressed social climate? Is keeping children unaware of homosexuality in schools similar to ignoring racial stigmas? What do you think?

The Rise of Racism in Israel?

Hey here is a interesting article from Al Jazeera about growing and outspoke anti-muslim/anti-arab racism in Israel (read me!) The article argues that while there have always been levels of anti-muslim racism, these sentiments are on the rise in the current public discourse in Israel. This ties in nicely with some of the issues brought up in last week's presentation and also with our discussion of whether new cultural/religious racism represents a more advanced stage of racism.

Naming

Recalling America's obsession with naming, I've become curious to know what happens when people are falsely claimed as something that they are not. For instance, I believe one finds it insulting to be called a Mexican when they might be Latino or Hispanic because they speak Spanish, or even when Japanese, Philippines, and Koreans are mistaken for Chinese because of there tight eyes. I remember in high school I would be corrected all the time for assuming my classmates were Chinese when they were Korean or Japanese. And often times, but rarely, I mistake Native Americans for Asians. And even when African Americans are taken as Black Americans. I assumed once that my friend Jew because of her nose, it turned out that her father was hardcore Jew before marrying his wife and converted to Christian. I even thought once that another friend was Hispanic because of her accent when she was white and Italian, and another who's Italian for her dark hair. My point is that yes, as we discussed America has a problem with trying to name and classify groups of people and often, because of stereotypes and ignorance we more often than not wrongfully assign cultural identities to people.

Is Education Enough?

Throughout the semester, we have discussed how racism is deeply entrenched in our society. Although not everyone is the “frothing at the mouth” type racist, people implicitly react to others who have a different skin color. In my social psychology course, we had a guest speaker who discussed white privilege; according to him, an individual’s amygdala, the part of the brain that regulates emotions, shows increased activation within the first 20 milliseconds of interacting with a black person. However, this effect is not demonstrated when one interacts with a white person. Although the participants in this study were not seemingly racist, we are products of our society; “racism produces racists that reproduce the racism that produced them.”

Although we are now aware of this viscous cycle, the question remains, how do we break away from it? In class, we discussed that education, beginning in elementary and middle school years, is key in confronting racism. However, this must be done on a societal level rather than an individual level. Perhaps the government should mandate a nation wide curriculum that educates students on racism, including the consequences of both oppression and privilege. However, is education enough? If behavior predicts attitude more than attitude predicts behavior, then education alone is too shallow of a solution.

Again, according to social psychologists, the contact hypothesis predicts that increased contact with people who are perceived as being different will lead to more information about them and, consequently, less rigid stereotypes. However, this hypothesis will only reduce prejudice under five conditions:

1) Mutual interdependence and a common goal

2) Equal status

3) Informal setting where in-group members and out-group members interact directly

4) Repeated exposure with many members of the out-group

5) Social norms that promote equality

Is there a way to incorporate these conditions in school-systems? Even at Rhodes College, an institution that offers courses such as philosophy of race, there is very little interaction between white and black students. Since the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision, schools have been desegregated for nearly sixty years. However, the consequences of segregation are still lingering. The contact hypothesis makes me believe that school systems across the United States should strive for greater diversity and greater interaction between students of different color. Although I understand that this is easier said than done, I do believe that this hypothesis, along with its conditions, demonstrate that education should not stand alone against racism.

Black Disadvantage, White Privilege, and Civil Rights

In thinking about our recent discussion on black disadvantage and white privilege, I am reminded of the debate that occurred during the civil rights struggle of the ‘60s and ‘70s regarding integration vs. separatism/black nationalism. In the ‘50s and early ‘60s the mainstream sentiment of the civil rights struggle was that integration of the races was the ultimate goal of black Americans. The idea, essentially, was that blacks were denied many of their basic rights as American citizens but that this could be rectified if both races were at the same level. As we have discussed in class, however, whiteness is the norm in America; thus, as the ideology and rhetoric of many black Americans began to reflect in the early ‘60s, the unspoken implication of integration was that blacks needed to be brought into the fold of white America. In other words, integration of the races was really assimilation of blacks into white culture and society, something which Dubois had criticized decades earlier.

Therefore, black leaders such as Malcolm X and Stokely Carmichael argued against integration by way of assimilation and in favor of the development of a strong black self-identity and real black political power – ideas that were combined in Carmichael’s introduction of the phrase Black Power in 1966. Basically, Black Power activists maintained that white society was, in many ways, corrupt and wholly undesirable as an end for black liberation. Carmichael argued in his 1967 book, Black Power: The Politics of Liberation, that real integration of the races could only be achieved if whites focused on fixing the many ills of their society.

Comparing this history to our discussion of black disadvantage and white privilege, I see the focus on black disadvantage at the exclusion of white privilege to be akin to the philosophy of integration through assimilation. It reflects the belief that if whites could only accept blacks into mainstream society and stop actively oppressing them, then racism would be a thing of the past. Clearly, this does not reflect the entire picture. As we discussed, racism in America is also maintained by the “invisible” system of white privileges. White Americans must come to terms with their privilege if the myriad problems of racism in our country are ever to be overcome. In other words, whites must recognize and address what is corrupt and sick in mainstream American society if the races are ever to be truly equal.

Are there privileges to being oppressed?

We had a guest speaker in another class. She discussed feminist views and the way that oppressed groups are trying to come out of their oppression. An interesting point was discussed when thinking about the military and women. As of right now, women are not a part of the draft and women are not allowed on the front lines. A generalization, but true generalization, is that most women are not pushing for women to be allowed on the front lines or for women to be included in the draft. While women are considered an oppressed group this is one example of women being spared from negative aspects that are a part of the oppressive group (i.e. men). Another such example that was brought up was chivalry. Chivalry is a privilege that many women get to experience and that many may not realize is a privilege. This privilege is a part of being the oppressed group, in the way that it is because of their gender that they are getting this treatment. So my question that I would like to ask you all is can you think of ways that other oppressed groups may have privileges that are available to them because of their oppressed status? Also, can you think of the ways that the oppressed groups, such as women in this situation, can overcome oppression and overcome privilege? What would you say to those who want to keep the privilege and get rid of the oppression?

Why don't we care?: Racism and the Drug War In Mexico

Recent news about the second mass grave -- with 145 bodies and counting -- found in recent months the Tamaulipas town of San Fernando (article here) and others things I've been reading have gotten me interested in why we are not talking about the 40,000 people who have died in the drug violence in Mexico in the past 5 years. How is it that this massive humanitarian crisis literally on our borders -- many of the causes of which lie squarely in our own country -- is not at the forefront of our national discourse? I'm not saying that there is no coverage of the drug war in the press -- there is, and some of it is really good -- but more so I am trying to understand why there seems to be an larger apathy and shirking of responsibility by our government and by ourselves as citizens. Part of the answer, which is especially relevant to this course, is how the violence and its victims are framed as racial/ethnic other. I think there is a really important link between the ways in which stereotypes about Latin American people, ( particularly in this case, people of Mexican descent) which is perpetuated in our discourse on immigration and the interest (or lack thereof) in the drug violence. One stereotypical image is the macho, Latin american drug cartel leader -- the American War on Drugs in countries such as Colombia, Bolivia and Mexico over the past decades has linked Latin American people with drug cartels and violence in a very powerful way. Perhaps part of the story is that this general association of drugs with non-white peoples makes it easier to devalue and ignore the thousands being killed by drug violence. It creates a distance between "us" and "them" because this violence, criminality, and drug trafficking are have been linked with Mexican people. The types of racist logic which are so blatantly seen in our public discourse against Mexican and Latin American people make it easier to shirk American culpability in the violence across and on the border. Our drug consumption, our drug policies, our weapons, our money. Racism is one of the reasons (but, by no means the only reason) why these glaring facts about American contributions to the violence in Mexico keep going unrecognized.

White Privilege and Passive Participation

In class on Thursday, we spoke of Whiteness studies, saying that this was a new area of study causing people to broaden their views of black oppression to include white privilege. This referred to the structure where we once focused on the perpetrator, the victim, and the wrong and suggested that these items should not be the only focus. Now an additional variable, the beneficiary must be inserted. Here you have a model that includes the perpetrator, the victim, and the beneficiaries who benefit every time the perpetrator succeeds in devaluing the victims. In this new structure, the problem of passive participation is now placed under the microscope as we examine white privilege. We explored the way in which white privilege remains an issue because some white people do not acknowledge the fact that they benefit from it. Another issue was the tendency to separate one’s self from the issue of black disadvantage because of the comfort of knowing that you are not actively trying to participate in its perpetuation. However ignoring this or failing to acknowledge this as a problem does not change the fact that you are still benefiting from white privilege and thus aiding the perpetrators by refusing to acknowledge such unearned privileges for what they are. But should you actively try t overturn the current social structure? What can you do? Would you actively refuse to receive the benefits of white privilege? And how do you regulate such instances? /During class we came to the conclusion that there are some ways with which we can begin to overcome such issues. It was unanimously decided (I believe) that first people must recognize this phenomenon as white privilege (Yes. I will now belatedly define this here.) which refers to the unearned benefits gained by white individuals which are usually gained at the expense of others. Consciousness must be raised of the subject. People should be taught that racial categories have no biological or scientific foundation and educated on white privilege. How should we go about this education? It was suggested that we should have different races in school working together to reach common goals from a young age. This alone will not be sufficient to overthrow the current social structure, but is this a good starting point? /On a side note, I have heard much debate over an “old south” party recently. I do not know much about exactly what group on campus that it was held by, but it seems that some black students had issues with it. It is apparently some sort of tradition to hold this function annually, but certain individuals find it to be disrespectful. What seemed to exacerbate the problem was that it is usually held on or around Martin Luther King day. I do feel like this was an unnecessary function and it was strange to me how the enlightened students of Rhodes felt like this would not make a portion of the students on campus uncomfortable. Again, I do not know much about the issue, but it was an interesting topic of discussion that I thought I would present. Does anyone else feel like it was disrespectful to have this party? I’m interested in seeing what you all think of this. /(The slashes were my attempt to separate paragraphs...I wasn't allowed to skip lines for some reason.)

White Privilege vs. Black Disadvantage

We talked about white privilege vs. black disadvantage in class. And I was on the fence about whether or not it would be more beneficial to talk about white privilege or black disadvantage. I think white privilege needs to be talked about because as we discussed in class there are so many white people who are not aware of their white privilege and it needs to be brought up to the forefront. On the other hand, I think that black disadvantage is easier to recognize and I believe that it needs to be addressed as well because there are certain disadvantages that many face that is not recognized. While reading the Invisible Knapsack article, I must admit, as a black woman, I was annoyed at her attempt to write down these fifty things. She wrote down fifty advantages to being white, things that I have never thought of because I am not white and I asked the question of whether or not writing down these advantages serve a purpose, other than knowing what you have an advantage to do. I want to pose her question again, will whites be willing to end it or lessen it? I don't think it serves a purpose, I can, as a black woman, sit and write 100 disadvantages of being black and say this will open my eyes and others to see how am being discriminated against, but what is the purpose? Will I do something after that to stop it and will others stop changing these disadvantages just because I brought them to the forefront. As we discussed in class, there needs to be a constant reminder and correction about privileges and disadvantages and it not these unearned privileges and disadvantages will continue.