The distinction I was trying to draw was about differences between racism and prejudice/stereotyping. Racism has to do with a belief(which can be expanded to include imbedded tendencies we are unaware of) in value(inferiority/superiority) of races in virtue of the prejudices/stereotypes we perscribe to them.
"Belief" may be a bit strong. Research suggests that people can harbor racist attitudes without actually having racist beliefs. For instance, if you gave me an exam and asked me various questions about the superiority or inferiority of certain races, I would give non-racist answers. And that's not just to look good -- it's what I really believe. If my life depended on getting objectively the right answers, I would still give those. Nevertheless, that's consistent with my having racist attitudes, as revealed by my behaviors and reactions. For instance, suppose I become afraid when I see a black person. That suggests racism but needn't be a matter of belief. The situation would as with other cases of fear without belief in danger. For instance, if I look down from a very tall height it can induce fear in me even though I don't believe I'm in any danger. It's a fascinating phenomenon in general, and might be akin to racism without the sorts of beliefs you mention.
Perhaps this isn't racism though? I'm not sure. It may require more than just the sort of fear I mention. Perhaps other attitudes or reactions are necessary as well, e.g., tendencies to reject, find fault, avoid, feel indifferent to suffering and injustice, and so on. Notice that none of these things require the sorts of beliefs you mention. The fault-finding tendency may be a tendency to find faults which are actually there, but to a greater degree than one does with other races. This seems like racism, although it's a subtle matter (and also partly a matter for stipulation).
While both are problematic in their own ways, my point was to demonstrate how you can have prejudice without racism(which are often conflated). A more useful example than the one I attempted to give in class would be a prejudice that assumes black people listen to rap music while white people listen to country music. This seems to be a clear case of stereotyping and prejudice however it doesn't imply that either of those traits and or races is superior to one another(although one could certainly form a racist viewpoint from these stereotypes). This seemed like an important distinction to point out because as the conversation went on, the terms became more and more conflated with one another.The clarification question had to do with the nature of microaggressions. Are microaggressions phrases that within them contain derogatory connotations which are inseparable from the phrase itself(as is most evident in the "you are a credit to your race" example). Or can any phrase be a microaggression under specific circumstances? Because the way the chart lays it out, the "message" column seems to imply that those are the underlying suggestions of the "microaggressions", although it seems clear that the messages listed are not the only possible implications these questions could have.
As I mentioned in class, I don't see how a phrase itself could suffice for microaggression. Not even "you are a credit to your race". For instance, imagine it being said ironically, in great jest, between two good friends of the same race. A form of words can never itself suffice for performing an action, which is what a microaggression is, I would think.
The reason I began to make this point in class is because of the question which revolved around an assumption that racism necessarily involves hatred towards another group. But it seems consistent and quite probable that there are racists who don't hate other races, but still find them inferior in some regard. While I agree that we have subconscious value judgements attached to many of the stereotypes we are making, I don't think that it is true in every case.
My topic for my presentation revolves around this a little so I would like to weight in. I took a class called Moral problems here and we touched on some interesting things and preferences/stereotyping/prejudice and racism. In my opinion it is the same. Those stereotypes or prejudices steam from something. If they are giving more attention it turns into racism The micoaggressionsi also steam from negative stereotypes. For instance in my class, we discussed a company. What if you are a CEO of a company and you are hiring new staff. Your previous staff consists of white people already. You have two great candidates who have the same qualifications, one is black and one is white. The CEO chooses someone he thinks will fit into the working environment and chooses the white person. That is a instances of preference. The CEO thinks the white person would make a better worker. What are the underliying reasons for his thoughts? What makes him choose the white person over the black person even though they have the same qualifications. There have been many stories of people of color who don't get jobs they are qualified for because of their name. I think this is due to implicit racism. We have to understand that exists and it is due to the issues we haven't dealt with as a country. There is a test that actually show how we indirectly are racist sometimes. It is called the Implicit Association Test ( Race Version). Anyone can take it and it basically show you words and images and sees how we categorize them. It’s a interesting test. This is just something to think about.
ReplyDelete- Fayokemi Ogunmola
Disclaimer: I wanted to add this to the blog post but I don't know how.
ReplyDeleteUnderstanding The Inheritance Argument
Having an inheritance can be a very VERY good thing. Who doesn’t want 50,000 to 50 million they didn’t have to really work for. This can be argued but I don’t know anybody who wouldn’t want some extra cash or property. Some people can’t wait to have there inheritance. I think about all the African movies I’ve watched that show two sons fighting for property after their father’s death.
Sometimes we inherent traits from over parents. Like sense of humor, facial features and parts of their personality.We would all love to inherent all the positive things, but we hate all the negative things. Genetically, if your parent has or is at high risk for a disease that is heredity, you can be at high-risk. For instance, if your father has diabetes, you may have to watch out so you don’t develop it too. If you do develop diabetes a large reason for that would be that it runs in the family. It’s a fact that you can’t really run away from.
Or for instance so negative behaviors that our parents may have had. For example, angry problems or abusive nature. In my experience, when you talk to some people they tell you, “ yea, my father was abusive to my mother, I promised myself I didn’t do this when I was older”. In pop culture, ( if you are familiar with it) the Chris Brown/ Rihanna fight was big news. In Chris Brown’s apology he said “ I used to see my mother abused by my father, I didn’t know I could do that to a woman, I’m so ashamed”. That was the gist of some of his apologies.
So my point it is, we sometimes inherent negative things we have to make right or fight through the consequences. To accept all the positive things ignore the negative is not wish to me. We have to proactive in making sure we don’t experience the negative impacts of your parents actions. In the case of health, you have to be proactive in living a healthier life, you can’t hide away from it. It can seriously be a detriment to your way of life. That’s the way I see it, to those who argue against the inheritance. It’s more so the consequences that fall upon the child. If it’s a negative consequence, you need to rectify it so you won’t pass those consequences down to your own offspring.
I think there is a distinction to be made between differential treatment and discrimination. Discrimination is treating another individual or group in a manner that is different and unfair/disadvantageous. For example, there does seem to be cases where differences should be made (e.g. criminals vs. noncriminals, or accommodations for those with disabilities) but it is considered discrimination when this difference in treatment is unfair or puts the person at a disadvantage.
ReplyDelete