Pre reading questions for week five

I think racism still continues even though nobody or a few people identify themselves as racist because I believe and this is just me, that there are racism everywhere we go. It may or not be intentional, but racism is still taught in school such as the history of it in school books. Also, it may or not be intentional again, but I think there is racism in like movies and tv shows. For example, I haven’t really heard a lot about it and I don’t know if I’m right either, but I heard when the movie “princess and the frog” came out, there were issues about the princess being black and not white. I think when the commentators said that the election of Obama meant that racism doesn’t matter anymore in the United States was that he became the first ever black man to run for president and that him running for president actually showed the world something. They also believe that him running would possibly stop people from criticizing the United States as a racist country. Dr. Apollon argues that the election of Obama doesn’t mean that “racism is dead” because he states that, “Any racism is more than overcoming the hateful words. It’s about stopping the teaching of racism, the treatment of immigrants, and etc.” If I was talking to one of my friends about white privilege and they said that they don’t see color, they see people individually, I would ask them to clarify what they mean and maybe elaborate it more so maybe I could kind of get their point instead of maybe having a debate over it because to me, that statement has like two meanings behind it. Like I believe the first meaning could be where she is talking about how she doesn’t see racism in people at all but rather how a person treats her with like respect and how hard they work. On the other hand and this is just me again and I don’t know if this makes sense either, but I believe she could also be talking about how she’s blinded by a person’s color. Like even though she might see a person individually, she might treat them a little bit differently based on maybe their gender, their wealth, or status in society. So basically in other words, her statement could be racist. I would define diversity as having many choices or possibilities and I believe that it relates to structural privilege and social justice because I believe that by having structural privilege, you have a choice of working hard to get where you want and same goes for social justice. There are many varieties of getting social justice; it mainly depends on an individual and how much they want it.

 

Words: 462

Posts reading questions for week 4

During the exercise, the privileges and disadvantages that stood out to me where when you said if our parents ever told us we are beautiful, smart, and are able to chase our dreams, family having or owning 50 books, using a public restroom without having any thoughts of fear in them, walking alone at night, and having to skip meals because your family could not afford it. All of those I found to be pretty interesting because it lead and showed me the advantages and disadvantages that I had and didn’t have it. It also lead me to believe that there are certain advantages that I take for granted because I have those privileges while others do not. Although I did find the family owning 50 books and family having to skip meals because they not afford it to be troublesome because they applied to me. Back then, my family, especially from my dad’s side, could not afford to buy books for themselves let alone sometimes buy lunch at school and I know some relatives before who had a hard time feeding their family because they just could not afford it. I think the idea of structural privilege challenges the notion of meritocracy because meritocracy is a group of people or individuals who work hard and are rewarded by it rather than by their status in society or by power and if someone let’s say gets a better promotion at work then you because of their wealth or by their gender, then not only is it unfair, but it puts those who work really hard on the bottom of the food chain and those who didn’t on the top. Like I don’t really know how to describe it but I think the idea of structural idea makes people work harder. Like you said about the analogy of the video game, those who have the most materials or weapons start off easy compared to those who don’t have anything and have to work hard to get them. I think Jon Scalzi’s posts about “Straight White Male” and the analogy he uses helps understand structural privilege because in his blog, he explains how in the video game or in real life, straight white men have a better chance of gaining access to parts of the map as suppose to those who aren’t straight or who aren’t men. For example, he says “if you choose a to be a player who is a gay minority female, then that’s hardcore” because you get less privileges then the men and have to work a little bit harder than them. I think this is similar to the McIntosh piece because in some ways, both the reading and the blog talk about the advantages of what it’s like to be white.

 

Words: 464

Pre reading questions for week 4

To me, privilege is the same exact thing as having your own right; you are given the opportunity to do something by your own free will or choice. I don’t know if this counts as a privilege to other people in different societies but I think one of it is the privilege to practice your own belief, culture, or religion. Everyone has the right to practice it and not be told by the government or the authorities you can’t do this and that. I also think an example of privilege would be maybe the privilege to vote or like the privilege to sign up for the army. I think white privilege means the whites have their own set of rules or rights that they can do while others cannot. I think we talk about white privilege in ethnic studies because in some ways the things they can do and others cannot is racism. I believe structural inequality means the type of structure or government we have or had in the past was unfair and cruel. Others could do this and that, while others were unable to because maybe of their social status in government or they just didn’t have that much power, money, or labor. I think we talk about structural inequality in ethnic studies because like I said before with white privilege, it has something to do with racism. Advantage and disadvantage means like the same thing as pro and cons. Advantage means like having a positive or up side effect of something while disadvantage means having a negative and down side effect of something. I think we will talk about the advantage and disadvantage in ethnic studies because it probably has to do with white privilege, structural inequality, and racism and mostly the disadvantage it has towards the other racial groups and the advantage it has towards the white people. I would define racism as not being able to do something based on their color, gender, culture, belief, religion, etc. I also think it means not being liked for all of those same reasons too. I think my definition of privilege has somewhat something to do racism because I defined privilege as something to do with maybe your religion or belief and if someone doesn’t like you because of that, I think that counts as racism. Yes, I believe people of color can be racist because anyone can be racist. If you say no then I doubt that because everyone has their own good or bad opinions about other people. I think the white people have the most advantage in the U.S society because they are the most recognized. They hold the most power and if we were to say cause maybe some trouble against them, it would cause a major fight between them and the other groups. I think Lipsitz means by this quote is that the definition of racism changes over time because many people give their own definition and meaning to racism to the point where it leads confusion to some people in different eras. I think in the colonial America and I don’t know if this is right or not but I believe that racism was bad during that time. Not many had a say in their lives and the white people mostly had power and control. During the 20^th century and today, I still believe there is still racism out there but not as bad as it was before. Like the government today gives more people, besides the white, more rights and freedom then they had when they didn’t have any power at all.

 

 

Words: 601

Post reading questions for week 3

I think what Hattman is arguing is that we should remove the invisible line between race and ethnicity from the census but also take action and change the many and different ways ethnic privilege has been defined by ethnicity against race. I’m not technically sure if this is what she is arguing about but if she is, I would have to agree because we, as citizens or non citizens of the United States, have a responsibility to be able to check what we are on the census without having there be some sort of debate over it. I thought this was a land of opportunity not a land where there is still discrimination based on someone’s race. For example, today Latino’s are still not added on the census and that’s not fair at all. Furthermore and this is just me, I believe that by having this huge connection of ethnic privilege and ethnicity against race, it creates maybe some oppression from other people because they are not getting what they need and want from the government. If my friend asked me to fill out number 8 and 9 on the census I would check that I am not of a Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish Origin for the first question and check Filipino for the second question. Although it was very easy for me to answer those questions it may be hard for others because their race is not there which I find odd because that just means in my opinion that whoever made the census forgot or did not want to add that race. I don’t know if that was the 2000 census or not but even today, every race should be up there and every one should be comfortable checking that box. Flores’ describes the demographic approach as by numerical count and the census while he describes the analytical approach by maybe having shared experience or labels. The last approach, the imaginary, he describes it has having a colonial relationship or having shared memories. It’s important we look at the community in these three ways because I believe that if we don’t do a numerical count or have the census, we would not be able to know what types of group there are in the U.S. We would not be able to know how many whites, black, Hispanics, Asians, etc. there are living here. By having the analytical approach, we wouldn’t really know what names to call these types of groups. For instance immigration is given labels to people who have crossed the border line. We have the imaginary approach because without it, we would not be able to share the same experience that we had back home with other people who are the same ethnicity as you. I think the census reflects racial categories in the U.S by showing us the many types of race and ethnicity there are and if for example someone’s race or ethnicity isn’t there it creates some sort of debate and fight over it. On the other hand, I believe it creates racial category in the U.S by adding more race and ethnicity. If the people who ever created the census decided to add more groups into the category, people might think they favor this group over the other.

 

Words: 546

Post reading questions for week 2

If I had to come up with my own definition of race and ethnicity, I would say that both are similar. They both deal with like where someone comes from and where like they originated from but what differentiates them is that I would say that race has more something to do with a person’s appearance. Honestly, my understandings of race and ethnicity somewhat changed from my pre-reading response. Like I’m still confused between the two of them but, I did learn that races aren’t something that was created naturally or forcefully. They were created because of how we see and classify other people. In other words I guess when we think a certain group is important or different than the others, we start to criticize or analyze them by giving them a certain meaning or definition, thus creating the word race. Also, from my understanding from the reading, I learned that ethnicity has more something to do with an individual and how they seem themselves as in their group while race I believe refers to everyone in a single group. Lastly, I’ve also read that ethnicity, like race, originated from us. That we can give the word itself an identity but it mainly depends on how we see us or other people. Since race and ethnicity have many meanings in this country, I believe it causes confusion because not everyone sees the same point of view as someone else. In other words, it all depends on the individual and how their opinion differs from another person’s view. Because of this, I believe this is the reason why there are still some debate on what the real meaning is behind race and ethnicity. Since no one can really agree on what the real definition is between the two, every one starts creating their own meaning which leads to confusion between race and ethnicity. Yes, I believe everyone has the right to self-identity their own race and ethnicity because no one should tell a person that “they can’t have the same skin color as them” or “they can’t be from the same culture.” I mean it’s not exactly their fault how they were born or like how they both have the same ancestry. Every individual has the right to be the person that they want to be without being judged. Honestly, I don’t really know if this counts as a link between biology and race but some people think that because I’m Asian, I’m smart. Like to me, I feel like this is more like a stereotype than something else. Like just because I’m Asian doesn’t mean I’m smart. Intelligence has nothing to do with someone’s race but how determine they are when it comes to during their homework or winning a competition.

 

 

 

Words: 462

Pre reading for week 2

To me, I would define race as where people originally originated from. For example, the Italians came from Italy, the Germans came from Germany, the Filipinos came from the Philippines, the Mexicans came from Mexico, etc. I also would define it as someone’s physical appearance such as nose, hair color, eyes, etc. Ethnicity on the other hand, I believe has to do with the same thing as race. They both deal with their nationality except maybe ethnicity deals with other things too such as their traditions, beliefs, culture, etc. Although I think both ethnicity and race have similarities, they also have differences that distinguish the two of them. Like I said before, I believe race has a lot to do with how someone looks while ethnicity deals with more of a person’s history and culture. Take for example, Filipinos. They are said to have a race of dark skin, black hair, sometimes morena, skinny, etc. Their ethnicity would probably be like their religion which is catholic and the language that they speak which is tagalog. I don’t exactly know what you mean by common racial classifications that we use here in the United States but if I had to guess I would say African Americans who were born or originated from Africa, the Mexicans who originated from Mexico, the Caucasians who originated from here in the United States, and the Pacific Islanders or Asians that originated from Asia. I think what makes a group a race is the similarities they share such as their background history, the food they eat, the religion they practice, what they do and don’t believe in, if they share any physical appearance, etc. There are a lot of things that make a group of people a race. But I think the most important one would be their language. If they share the same language, communication between each other would be much easier because they would be able to understand one another much better. Honestly, I would characterize my own ethnicity like every Filipino out there. Someone who practices Catholicism and goes to church every Sunday, someone who believes that if you jump on New year’s eve you will get taller, someone who takes off their shoes once you go into someone else’s house because its polite to, someone who knows how to speak and understand tagalog, etc. I chose these kinds of labels because that’s just how I was taught to be; Not just because I see other Filipino’s do those things too, but because that’s how my parents raised me to be. My race on the other hand I would describe it differently. Since most Filipino’s are dark skinned, morena, and dark haired, I am not. I am light skinned and have brown hair. Yes, a lot of people get my race or ethnicity wrong. Often I get mistaken as Chinese and I believe that is because I am not like all the other Filipino’s they see which is like I said in their eyes dark skinned. Although sometimes I get mistaken for a Chinese, some people do get my ethnicity right and I believe that is because my behavior is the same way as all the other Filipino’s. We eat the same food, we talk the same, we speak the same language, and we have the same beliefs and culture.

Words: 557

Post reading for week 1

Reading the three articles by Whitson, State of Arizona, and Monteiro, I was able to understand why ethnic studies are a big fuss all over the world. Many people, the government mostly believe that by having ethnic studies taught in school, it can somehow overthrow the current government. That’s why Arizona created the House of Bill 2281; because they saw ethnic studies as a threat to their power. They believed that by writing out a law that stated all of the consequences if ethnic studies still continued, it can scare them. I don’t know if this is exactly right but I think the problems that the 1968 strikers wanted ethnic studies to address was like the racial tension between like the white people and the black people. For example, the editor of the gater was attacked by a group of black people because he wrote an article stating that he and other people were not comfortable having a Black Student Union. Another example would be George Murray. He wanted black students to carry guns at school to protect themselves from anyone who was racist against them. I also believe that one of the problems that the 1968 strikers wanted ethnic studies to address was like the promotion of diversity. They wanted to voice out their opinion and thoughts on how maybe society can be changed. If a conversation between an HB 2281 and a 1986 striker happened, it would probably go with the striker saying that ethnic studies is not a promotion of resentment toward a race or class of people nor will it ever be the promotion of the overthrow of the United States government. Then the HB 2281 will retaliate by maybe saying that by teaching ethnic studies you are creating another racial tension between this group and another group just like during the 1968 strike at San Francisco State University.  The arguments Tom Horne is making against teaching Ethnic studies in the Tuscon Unified School District is that by teaching ethnic studies, they are separating different individuals or races as to oppose to teaching every single different culture in social studies as a unity. He also goes on by arguing that most people come to America because it’s the land of opportunity and that these people trust the schools to teach their kids about how America is the land of opportunity and that if they work hard, they can reach their dream instead of oppressing it. Although this is very true, I disagree with this argument. I believe that learning ethnic studies is not going to oppress anyone. I mean sure it might bring some feelings and emotions, but not to the point where they will take action and go on strike. Like I don’t believe that being oppressed will stop students from reaching their goal. In fact, it depends on the individual and how determined they are to reaching their goal. It has nothing to do ethnic studies and how it can affect their learning. The arguments Dyson is making in favor of ethnic studies is that by teaching ethnic studies, anyone from different backgrounds or color can learn ethnic study classes. He believes that white Americans can benefit from all of the different ethnic study classes that are being taught. I totally agree with this statement because by taking different classes other than your heritage, you are basically getting out of your comfort zone. You are able to learn about the different foods, traditions, beliefs, etc that they have. You will be able to realize the history and the hardship that they had to go through. If one of my family members asked me about opinion about this controversy, I would tell them that ethnic studies should be taught in school. That having ethnic studies will not oppress anyone’s feelings and if it does, it all depends on the individual and how they take it. Just because someone feels that way doesn’t mean everyone will.

 

 

Words: 660