en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/2410508 Comments by maw412 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/how-has-your-opinion-changed-on-illegal-immigration-119-blog/#IDComment145198784 My opinion of illegal immigration has changed in some senses, but in other ways, my opinions have been more solidified after this lecture. I think that immigration does need to be legal, but on the other hand I kind of understand the desperation that pulls people from other countries and makes them risk everything for this goal. Immigration is what this country was founded on. So it’s kind of weird that immigration is such a big problem the U.S. is facing right now. I always felt as though illegal immigration was wrong, but understandable and that I could not really be a judge of it. That’s another issue: who is the judge of it and why? I don’t think anyone has a completely agreeable solution to that. The U.S., although there is some crowding in major cities, for the most part the country has low populated areas. There would be room for more aspiring Americans if things were more dispersed, but for that to be feasible, a lot of infrastructural growth would have to happen in these rural or suburban areas. Physically speaking, we have space for many immigrants, illegal or legal. However, infrastructurally speaking, economic competitionally speaking, and socially speaking, we don’t have the space or the economy for it. Two ways that my opinion of illegal immigration has changed is that I feel worse for the people going through it and I feel more ashamed of the reasons it is allowed. My mother actually came to this country illegally, but the process involved a fake marriage. Even though that part was settled, she still went through a lot of risk for it because she was escaping from a very controlling and abusive household and church system. She doesn’t like to talk about that. Illegal immigrants all have a personal story that required a lot of bravery and risk. I also have a few friends that are themselves illegal immigrants (I lived in Texas from age 1-9 and in NYC from age 9-11) and I know that they went through a big journey and even though I didn’t know any specific stories, I remember realizing how hard their parents worked to try to keep their families comfortable. I was aware that illegal immigrants risked a lot to get here, but they have to risk more than I thought. They could be jailed, not make it and return to their home countries with nothing to come back to, or they can even be killed in the attempt to cross over these political borders. I feel a little mad about the reasons illegal immigration is allowed. It’s not because there is compassion, it’s because they need cheap labor. That’s the only reason; that’s what it revolves around. That’s just sad, but not surprising. Fri, 22 Apr 2011 19:46:35 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/how-has-your-opinion-changed-on-illegal-immigration-119-blog/#IDComment145198784 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/12/is-nepotism-a-good-or-bad-thing-in-the-long-run-119-blog/#IDComment142935309 Nepotism is such a natural thing. I don’t necessarily see it as good or bad. It’s a social thing so deeply ingrained in human nature that I don’t think it could change without people upsetting those close to them that they choose not to help. People always give opportunities to those that are close to them or people they have some form of relationship with. Nobody even gets upset when people say they got a job because they knew someone that worked there. This ties into the whole “King of the Hill” lesson and explains part of the reason why it is not easy at all for people of color to get “ahead” in this country. There are a factors against people of color and factors that are “for” white people. Prejudice is still a relevant factor in our society. A lot of people do not realize that people of lower economic classes do not have “equal opportunities”. Their schools are bad and ineffective and their neighborhood environments are not conducive to striving for high achievements. When people do graduate high school, it is a big deal. If they go on to college, that’s huge, unexpected, and many of them do not finish. The odds of poorer people achieving high academically are low, the odds of them getting high paying jobs to help get out of poverty or low economic status are low as well. I honestly do not understand why people are so against affirmative action. I believe that people that are against it do not know the basics of it, nor do they know the basis behind why it was even established. In a way, Affirmative Action helps big corporate businesses the most. The corporate heads are given free passes and money loans and the rich just get richer. Affirmative action in the most associated form of the term helps women and middle class people of color. It also helps diversify workforces and universities which is a plus in my eyes. If anyone is against affirmative action, I would hope that they could educate themselves on the extremely extensive history behind hand-outs and help that white people and rich people have been given over the course of the entire history of America! It’s not even about “two wrongs don’t make a right” or anything like that. I think it’s about justice. A government can’t basically obliterate the chances of one group, increase the success and hand-outs of another group, and then do nothing eventually to remediate or fix that. So I feel as though affirmative action is the least that can be done. I personally don’t see why it is geared towards women though except for certain male-dominated professions or high positions that usually men only hold. Women are already taking over colleges, universities, and corporate positions on their own. As was included in the lecture on Tuesday, Obama stated that “AA should be based on economic class.” It’s not meant to start a race war. It’s to try to mediate between the unjust odds that have been doled out to poor people and give them a better chance to break the cycle. Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:33:41 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/12/is-nepotism-a-good-or-bad-thing-in-the-long-run-119-blog/#IDComment142935309 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/did-putting-yourself-in-the-shoes-of-the-middle-easterners-change-your-views-on-the-war-in-iraq-119-blog/#IDComment140835521 Putting myself in the shoes of the “Enemy” in this war did change my views on the war in Iraq. I already had views about the war and I never fully supported it. I do have a cousin that is in the U.S. Army and has spent a lot of time in the Middle East on multiple tours and I always supported him and the good willed soldiers, but not the army or the war as a whole. There is obviously a lot of corruption within it and behind it. The hypothetical example of Chinese forces coming to America and finding coal in Pennsylvania, threatening the U.S., taking control over our resources for their own profit, and terrorizing people and leaving them unable to defend themselves or their land was a helpful scenario. The plot of our personal home base being threatened and the visuals that went along with it let the whole class relate to the real-life situation happening elsewhere. I have always felt a lot of sympathy for Iraqi, Afghan, and other Middle Eastern civilians wrapped up in the war on their home turf. I honest never felt sympathy for extremists, but now I sort of do. I do not agree with the things that they do or the practices they preach (two wrongs don’t make a right), but I sympathetically understand. These people must feel so threatened, disrespected, and almost let down by their God. The Muslim religion revolves around peace and they probably got frustrated to the point of completely revoking that morality. Outsiders are taking over their land, threatening their lives, embarrassing them, taking their resources, ruining their homeland, ruining their lives, scaring them, and killing their family and friends, and more – for THEIR HOMELAND RESOURCES. Maybe all of this drove the extremist to adopt their outlandish theories. Their actions, although “off the deep end”, are somewhat understandable. They are misled. I also honestly didn’t know the war was mainly about oil. I thought it was half about oil, half about terrorism (from them). It’s so often referred to as the “War on Terrorism”. That doesn’t make sense because what the U.S. is doing is a form of terrorism as well. I never took a strong stance for or against the war. This lecture makes me want to know more about the background for the war. Why did 9/11 really happen? I know that exchanges between the 1st President Bush and leaders in the middle east happened involving weaponry and that the Taliban is most responsible for spreading the ideals of violence, but I know like there is much more to the story. Did people in the Middle East know that we were going to occupy their countries? I have a lot of questions. Did the war really start because of the threats they posed (9/11) or were the threats from them coming from original threats from us over their resources? I don’t feel ashamed about our occupation of countries in the Middle East, but I do feel ashamed about our the reasons behind it all and the terrorism the U.S. uses to fight terrorism. Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:50:04 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/did-putting-yourself-in-the-shoes-of-the-middle-easterners-change-your-views-on-the-war-in-iraq-119-blog/#IDComment140835521 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/31/if-we-lived-in-a-female-centered-world-what-words-would-be-used-to-describe-sex-119-blog/#IDComment139279920 In a female centered world, words associated with sex would be different. Firstly, there probably would not be such common usage of explicit words and slang associated with sex. I feel as though these curse words and demeaning slang words are used so much because men have less emotion towards sex (most of the time). The act of sex would also be called “making love” more often. The way things are now, “sex” seems to be used more than ten times more often than “making love”. Sex would probably be a lot more enjoyable in a mutualistic way. Men would still reach their climaxes because their bodies are designed in a way that allows them to reach climax easily. Women would also reach climax a lot more often, I’d say over 90% of the time. A lot of emphasis is put on making sure men are satisfied. This probably stems from a lot of historical cultural beliefs and practices. Men have been since biblical times associated with coming first, being the leader, being the head of everything, etc. Also men have been the “bread-winners” traditionally and for that reason and more, women have been “satisfied” by the mere fact that their men were satisfied sexually. It was like a task. More men would know the terms and parts of the female body and how they work in terms of the time it takes to initiate action and move along towards a climax. The statistics themselves would be changed to the point that a female climax wouldn’t even be a big deal or something to discuss as special. Words used to describe sex in a female-centered world would be nicer sounding and more emotional. Nowadays, “love” is not even necessarily associated with sex for many people. I think that in a female-centered world, words such as love, emotion, momentous, special, etc. would probably e used more. If we think about how living in a male-centered world has affected the viewpoints of a lot of men, we can think that it is possible for this status to affect women in the same way if it were a female-centered world. For example, maybe women would be more demeaning to men This might actually be worse for the world, because women can (to men) feel more similar to each other than men do. Because of the varying sizes, shapes, and girth of penises, sex can feel a lot differently. So men with small, skimpy penises would have it way harder to find a woman to please. On the other hand, penetration would be less important! Oral sex on women would be standard. So it’s hard to say. Our media would be a lot different also. Men would want to look and dress differently to please women. Men would be subjected to uncomfortable situations for the sake of looking sexy. However, women might have too much of a heart to subject men to that as seriously as men do nowadays. Sat, 2 Apr 2011 03:12:35 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/31/if-we-lived-in-a-female-centered-world-what-words-would-be-used-to-describe-sex-119-blog/#IDComment139279920 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/22/would-you-point-out-the-people-of-your-own-race-who-make-racial-slurs-or-prejudice-comments-119-blog/#IDComment137379780 Not only would I point out people of my own race making racial slurs or prejudice comments, I have. Ignorance is ignorance. If one of my friends called someone a chink, spic, or a cracker, I would be like “that’s not cool” or “you’re mad ignorant” or “really dude? You’re ridiculous”. Usually when I say things like that I do have a little smirk on my face though and I think that compromises my actual serious viewpoint on it. I smile for one of three reasons: either 1) the overall comment was funny for some other reason (like if they replaced the racial slur with something like “dumbasses” else and it would’ve still been funny); or 2) because I’m so baffled at the level prejudice in the statement that I’m like “o.m.g.” and I’m smiling because I almost can’t believe they just said that; or 3) because I know the person well enough to know that they are completely joking and aren’t really ignorant at all. The latter case doesn’t really make it okay, though. I don’t have friends that use racial slurs or make prejudice comments about other races. I do however have friends that make fun of their own races. For example, one of my best friends is white and whenever I tell her a story about something that happened that involved a group of white people she will say something to the effect of “damn those crackers”. I also have best friends that are black that might say something like “damn niggaz always messing something up”. However, I know that none of these statements actually reflect how these people feel about their own races, the competence of their race, or their connections to their race. It’s all playing around and it is always only said about the race that they themselves identify as. In this case (joking on your own race), I think it’s okay in a friendly context. If I encounter people that are saying derogatory things about a race other than their own, I will call them out on it. I call them ignorant or depending on the circumstances, I might ask them questions to find out why they feel that way. I hope that white people also confront their friends about throwing around racial slurs and comments, because I know it’s common. So you can see more about where I’m coming from, based on my own understanding of myself in race relations situations, I would say I am in multiple “racial identity” stages at the same time. As a person of color, I am in the immersion stage here at PSU being around so many white people- but it’s weird because I am used to white people from NYC and North Jersey that are used to being around people of color, which is a totally different white person. I’m also in the disintegration stage because I’m not afraid to call anybody out on their ignorance! I have gotten into uncomfortable arguments with white people about the seemingly never-ending ignorant statements and confronted black people about ignorant statements/actions also. I’m also in the pseudo-communitarian stage because I have very meaningful and close relationships with people that are Hispanic, White, and Asian, but I still look at the world through a “race lens” so I am not in the humanitarian stage. Fri, 25 Mar 2011 02:00:30 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/22/would-you-point-out-the-people-of-your-own-race-who-make-racial-slurs-or-prejudice-comments-119-blog/#IDComment137379780 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/b-s-response/#IDComment137370710 I see why that misconception and assumption would be frustrating! I hate when people assume bad things about me that aren't even major things! To be assumed a murderer when you murdered no one must be so bothersome. There is a wide range of guiltiness and innocence among lifers in prison (and even amongst people on death row!). Also, there are often reasons behind certain actions or situations that are behind the surface and things that outsiders can't see or understand. People sometimes need to be reminded of this. Thanks. Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:01:31 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/b-s-response/#IDComment137370710 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/23/fear-2/#IDComment137369197 This isnt my official blog entry, but I just wanted to comment on this. I agree with most of what everyone has said already and I too was very emotional after reading this....I was shocked, saddened, confused, disgusted, sorry, baffled, and angered. Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:51:51 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/23/fear-2/#IDComment137369197 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/13/japans-disaster/#IDComment135902743 This disaster was catastrophic and sometimes I feel as though people do not realize the extent of everything and the gravity of it all. Some of the reasons for this stem from “our” deeply ingrained “center of the universe” mentality. (Why is the “far east” called “far east” - because it’s far east on our maps and we are “western” and separated). I was talking with a friend of mine today about this and he and his family have been American for generations, but most of his roots trace back to Ireland. He’s one of my white friends that actually pays attention to racial issues and someone that I can actually talk to about global crises to a certain extent. He was saying/admitting that he actually wants to feel more, but he doesn’t because we are so removed from it. Good observation. I then told him about how my whole family is from Jamaica and most of my family lives there. Haiti is a Caribbean island that was rocked by an earthquake. Japan is an island also that experienced that and more. I think the fact that I have more connections to other places in the world and the fact that my family isn’t from the “center of the universe” makes it easier for me to feel a deeper compassion and be more scared by it. If the moment of silence we had in class on Tuesday was for Jamaica, I would have started crying. The impact that Japan has suffered, and is still suffering from, hits hard and makes my heart ache. I think another reason why it is hard for a lot of people to feel an emotional connection is because of how our minds have been fed so much from special effects from action and disaster movies. If it wasn’t for special effects that have visually simulated things like this (like the movie ‘2012’), the footage from Japan would hit some people that saw it just a little bit more than it does. Anecdotal rant: Some people aren’t taking this seriously enough. Some people are just like that and don’t like to even think about unfortunate things or serious issues and make jokes about it. On the other hand, other people just can’t even mentally or emotionally connect to it for other reasons. Some one that lives in my building made a Japan/earthquake/tsunami JOKE yesterday! Then their two friends were like “Man, it’s too early for that! Haha!” Is there going to be a time when this is funny?! Plus, the friends that responded were just kind of adding on to the joke by saying that. Nobody in America was making 9-11/plane crash/building collapse jokes this soon after September 11th, 2001. Even now, almost 10 years later, most people in America would be extremely offended by a 9/11 joke! Some would even get really angry. So why would people even consider making a Japan joke. It’s sad that we can’t all see how sad it is. Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:24:49 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/13/japans-disaster/#IDComment135902743 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/02/is-it-possible-for-affirmative-action-to-take-things-too-far-119-blog/#IDComment132983059 I personally do not feel as though affirmative action takes things too far. I do not believe that affirmative action even cancels out the negative impacts of what really goes on when minorities and women have historically tried and failed at having successful careers in the past. Even if you want to say, “Let’s forget about the past” (which is arguable), you still have to realize that the preferential treatment towards white people in employment opportunity situations is a massive thing and is a huge hindrance towards minorities. You can’t argue that. It’s something that seems inherently true, but then there have been experiments that have shown it to be true, subjects such as latent prejudice, and the fact that white privilege transcends race, age, and even criminal records! Affirmative action isn’t taking things too far and giving minorities as much of an advantage as a lot of people that are against affirmative action think. It doesn’t even level out the playing field. It just barely shortens the gap between the advantages that whites have over minorities for several reasons. Affirmative action will only help the decision making when it comes down to it if multiple candidates have the exact same qualifications and merits. Because of the history of this nation, I feel as though affirmative action isn’t unfair. There should be another G.I. Bill style thing where veterans from this war (but 90% black and Latino, and only 10% white) get free housing! All of the disinvestment in public schooling for minority neighborhoods should be repaid for the current public school systems and that funding should come out of the funding for public schools for white neighborhoods. Would that be unfair? Maybe not. I feel like people that are anti-affirmative-action forget about or simple do not even know about all of the affirmative action that was given to whites in the past! Then they also don’t know about the affirmative action that is given to white people today! And the affirmative action that is given to the heads of big companies that are, yes - white people! But why is affirmative action in the general sense of the term (helping minorities) such a big deal? If two candidates have the same qualifications and abilities for the job, employers (white and black) would probably lean towards hiring the white candidate. Affirmative action encourages them to choose the black candidate to give them a chance that they are so often denied from other employers. I personally do not see a problem with this. Something has to be done to counteract the prejudice that blacks and Latinos in particular face when trying to get a job and do well for themselves and their families. I feel like affirmative action is the least that can be done. Other more extremist actions could be fought and I might be able to see unfair actions if it went past that. Even though I may not know each individual situation, as a whole, in my opinion, affirmative action isn't harming people and is not taking anything "too far”. Sun, 6 Mar 2011 23:11:04 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/02/is-it-possible-for-affirmative-action-to-take-things-too-far-119-blog/#IDComment132983059 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/23/do-you-think-his-lighter-skin-gets-him-ahead-in-society-119-blog/#IDComment130645226 I think black and brown people with lighter skin do benefit from that feature of themselves in society. This of course is not the case all of the time, but it is very common. I think of it as just a little extra “umph” in the “right” direction. Based on my experiences being a black girl/woman and what I have seen and heard and witnessed, I know this can hold to be true. Based on what I have learned in race lessons or classes in high school and throughout my college career (especially Sociology 119), I know this is true. When my brother and I were little kids, he was lighter-skinned than I was (now he’s darker than I am). One day we were bickering as normal and he said “Mommy likes me better because I’m lighter brown than you”. It stuck with me and I never forgot that. We’re all fine now and it’s not a big issue, but for a few days at the age of 8 I was pretty distraught. I honestly didn’t even realize racial differences and color differences at that age and it was weird that I was introduced to it by a younger sibling. That just goes to show that this ideology gets ingrained in the minds of young kids not just white or black or brown or whatever. Although to varying degrees, it gets pushed in the minds of everyone and has different effects on their psyche based on how they are raised and how they interpret it for themselves. I think this guy (and other light-skinned black/brown people) has a little bit of an advantage for several reasons. One reason is just because of our history as a country and the whole field slave vs. house slave and how that was determined by skin tone most of the time. Then we had mixed people trying to slip into white society because of their light skin, denying their black ancestry to get ahead, etc. Nowadays, this mindset of lighter being better is still deeply embedded in society. People that are scared of black people or hate black people would be a little less scared and a little less hateful towards lighter-skinned black people. That will then get them a little closer to a lot of different goals. If this dude had the same features, same personality, same credentials, same everything, but was just dark brown, I think he might be a little less accepted by society as a whole in several ways. White people for instance might feel a little more connected to him as a lighter skinned person. I think the case is even more complex when it comes to light vs. dark skinned women in our society today. It’s sad, but lighter skinned women are more widely accepted because for some strange reason lighter skin is perceived by many as more feminine, nicer, smarter, etc. It’s bull----, but it’s true. Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:49:29 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/23/do-you-think-his-lighter-skin-gets-him-ahead-in-society-119-blog/#IDComment130645226 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/17/how-can-we-make-people-more-aware-of-the-slavery-that-is-still-going-on-119-blog/#IDComment128934807 I think there are many simple ways to inform our family and friends about modern day slavery and, if we venture to do so, inform people through the internet, the media, or networking. The “bigger” ways would include organizing protests or making blogs or websites. The easiest ways include the direct spreading of information and awareness to people we talk to regularly. For example, I sometimes hear the phrase “back in slavery times”. So upon hearing that, how hard can it be to just retort that? We could say “What do you mean back in slavery times? Slavery still goes on today and there are actually more slaves now then back during the time period you’re referring to.” Then we can go on from there to explain more in detail whatever we know on the topic and throw out a few statistics, etc. There is also a lot of opportunity to spread knowledge about the products that are derived from free and forced labor. For me, it is hard to imagine that some people do not actually know that so many of the things we own were made via slave labor and all of the heartache, injustice, pain, death, and cruelty it undoubtedly involves. We can also just bring things up in conversation by saying we’re glad we’re not enslaved or reflect out loud about how millions of people are enduring some form of slave labor at the moment all day every day, just to get a conversation flowing. I sometimes say things like this (or other random things) and my friends call me random, but it does sidetrack whatever conversation we may be having and I get my couple minutes to spew randomness or social issues at them. I’m the different one in the group, but it works for us and I think it can work for any group of friends. We can also learn more about what products to start getting in the habit of buying. For example, we can all lean towards fair trade products. We can encourage others to purchase fair trade products also. Even if we cannot afford certain fair trade products and if we are penny pinching as it is, we have to not let our guilt consume us, but let it guide us. For example, when the opportunities arise, (whether it be sporadically over the next few years, or on a constant basis after we are making more money and in good careers after finishing our education, blah blah blah) we can start only purchasing, supporting, and investing in fair trade products. Just buying these products helps to make this approach become more of a trend and spread the knowledge. Anyone can do more research into what stores support fair trade (for example: buying clothes from American Apparel, coffee from Grounds for Change, etc). The change that each of us can easily spark may be small, but will conglomeratively make a huge difference and will grow exponentially as the people we inform decide to inform other people. Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:42:27 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/17/how-can-we-make-people-more-aware-of-the-slavery-that-is-still-going-on-119-blog/#IDComment128934807 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/08/why-dont-we-see-wealthfare/#IDComment126847943 This is an interesting topic and I’m glad this was posted to expand on it more from class through this blog. It’s one of those topics that is obviously related to socioeconomics, but more closely linked to race than we think. I, like almost everybody, would think about poor people when I thought about welfare. I knew a little bit about government subsidies, bailouts, farmer subsidies, etc. and at least about their existence and what they were all about. The idea of “wealthfare” beating out “welfare” is something new that wasn’t necessarily hidden, but had never been brought to my attention. If farming was an occupation associated with mostly blacks, Hispanics, or other minority groups in the United States, would agricultural subsidies even exist if any motives for the gain for the majority were put aside? I don’t think so. The fact that most welfare money, which is money that is taxing and taking from all socioeconomic rungs of the ladder, is going to the upper class corporations is sickening but not shocking. Poor people are losing money that is going to the rich. It adds to the many factors that make the poor get poorer and the rich get rich. Why do celebrities get expensive clothes thrown at them for free when they are the ones that can afford it? Why are “subsidies” not called welfare? Those terms are almost the same thing, but it’s a ploy to have welfare be a well-known issue always associated with poor people and then indirectly associated with black people a lot of the time. Then resentment is taken off of the shoulders of the “big wigs” and placed on top of the poor people’s stacks of burden that is already there. So many rich people do not know how to really cut back spending and stop being frivolous or wasting money and then that leads to the need for corporate welfare. Then the money that goes to farmers is indirectly also going to these same upper class citizens and corporations because they gain also from being able to buy the products at cheaper prices for personal use, but also in bulk for their corporations! When we discussed why we automatically link welfare to poor people, a philosophical and sociological statement was made in class about whether or not this is a thought that is “happening freely”? I would say that it is not freedom. Our own brains in our own heads are programmed to think in certain ways that are detrimental to the possibilities of better class dispersion or less of a gap in the wealth spectrum in the U.S. Our own brains sometimes help the poor get poorer and the rich get richer in many ways, not just when it comes to the topic of welfare. Wed, 9 Feb 2011 05:09:55 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/08/why-dont-we-see-wealthfare/#IDComment126847943 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/01/if-you-could-how-would-you-rename-and-re-classify-people-119-blog/#IDComment125478150 I personally feel as though there is no way to classify “race” in an accurate way or a politically correct way. Going back to the whole purpose of this socially constructed idea of race, it was to categorize for separation, hierarchy, justification of cruelty, status distinction, etc. All of that aside, race is such a jumbled and unclassifiable thing from a scientific perspective. I don’t even understand how race are actual categories if it has been proven that all people came from a certain area of the world and probably all looked the same at one point. As corny as it sounds, we’re all "the human race" with ancestors that looked the same. There are black people that are ¼ white, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, etc. So are they even “black”? And why do people that are half black and half *insert race here* get classified as black. Even though it was a term from the United States’ slavery era, where did the term mulatto disappear to? There are quite a bit of people that are black and white and there should be a “category” for them. Maybe in the future, certain technologies that involve racial testing will be a lot cheaper. All babies will be DNA tested and it will become a routine thing before they get discharged to go home. Then everyone will really have documentation about their genetic makeup. Then the institution of race would go haywire in a good way. Because how would people justify oppression at that point? A lot of “Caucasian” people around the world would freak out upon realizing they are ¼ “black”. If surveys and questionnaires really want to find out the “race” of everyone that takes it, they should add more options. For example, bi-racial (black and white), bi-racial (Asian and white), bi-racial (Hispanic and black), etc. society as a whole needs to reexamine the reasons behind getting this extra data and whether or not it is necessary. We also need to think about whether or not racial classifications and distinctions are even necessary. We have learned a lot in class about the muddled distinctions, multiple names for referring to the same groups of people, and about how none of it really makes sense. Classification by tribe or nationality should remain and become more inclusive, and take dominance over racial classification. At least that would be a set, determinable, indubitable truth or falsity. I am black, but my whole family is Jamaican. My brother & I are the only people in our family that were born in the United States. I don’t consider myself African-American and I honestly don’t know why not. On questionnaires I sometimes answer “Other- _Caribbean-American_”. I am also 1/8th European (Scottish) and 1/8th Indian (as in India, so Asian, not Native American). So how would I answer “African-American” and feel like I am being truthful to the people asking or truthful to myself? If it was up to me, honestly, I wouldn’t reclassify or rename races. I would do away with the whole institution. Wed, 2 Feb 2011 18:21:13 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/01/if-you-could-how-would-you-rename-and-re-classify-people-119-blog/#IDComment125478150 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/26/how-do-you-classify-yourself-119-blog/#IDComment124261777 I classify myself as a lot of things and place myself in various categories, some even contradictory to one another. Since this is a class about the human construct we know as race, I’ll start with that. I classify myself as black because of my skin color, even though that is not always the factor that people use to classify race. I am Caribbean-American; Jamaican-American. Sometimes I will just answer African-American for questionnaire type things, other times I will answer other. I switch it up from time to time. Confuse the man. Why does the man need to know how many black vs. white vs Asians vs. other there are anyway?! I classify myself as a music lover and a musician. I have played classical piano since I was 5 so it has been an important part of my life and my sanity. I, as is the case with a lot of people, do not know what I would do without listening to music every day. In the same grain as musician, I am also an artist and an artistic person and an artistic thinker. I am female. I am heterosexual. I am single. I classify myself as a (Penn State) student. Not only in school, but I’m constantly learning and constantly given the opportunities to learn from people, from situations, and just from sitting and thinking about random things. Based on my major, I’m a future landscape architect… I classify myself as an intelligent person. I’ve always been in “advanced” or “gifted-and-talented” programs/classes, I got my iQ tested, I’m in the honors college, I figure stuff out… I classify myself as a believer in God/Jesus. I would like to think of myself as a Christian. I don’t classify myself as perfect. I’m a good-hearted, good-natured person. I classify myself as privileged, especially for someone that others classify as “black” or non-white for that matter. We’ve learned a lot, from this class and other sources about the poverty of the world. We should all be aware by now about how as people living in America, we’re already at the top of the game then being in college, having food all the time, having clothes, laptops, cell phones, money, rooms, speakers, ipods, shoes, cameras, lip gloss, ballpoint pens, Ethernet cords, books, perfume, blankets, mirrors, razors, lotion, lamps, necklaces, bracelets, scarves, alcohol, brushes, dvds, and even bobby pins, makes us more privileged than a disgustingly high percentage of the world. [And yes, I just looked around my room and named random items.] Even though I’m not “rich” compared to a lot of people at Penn State or in the U.S., I’m undoubtedly a privileged “rich” person on a global scale. We do a lot of classifying. Why? Is that human nature? I classify myself as someone that has been affected in a detrimental way, by the classification-happy society in which we live. I classify myself as your typical human, unafraid to go on and on about him/herself when given the chance. I wanted to avoid this post, but then I thought: it’s human nature. I classify myself as unclassifiable really. Fri, 28 Jan 2011 05:20:34 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/26/how-do-you-classify-yourself-119-blog/#IDComment124261777 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/18/what-do-you-think-blog-2/#IDComment122908528 I also thought that this exercise was very interesting and intriguing. It is amazing how different ethnic groups cannot be divided by race. Race is a social construct and ethnicity is so much more so that makes sense when you think about it. I would have been able to divide people up a little better based on the feedback we got from people afterward and how I was thinking they should have been arranged. Maybe that is because I come from a very diverse background and interaction with many people of many cultures. The “like” features of people that were from India, of Hispanic decent, or of Arab decent also says a lot. It can be difficult to break people up simply by looking at them. Due to all of the migration of the past, voluntary and involuntary, we see these features shared likeness of people from opposite sides of the world, literally. As was discussed in class, there probably are some little defining characteristics or features that would have clued into the separations. But it is nearly impossible for anyone to know the differences of every feature of every cultural group around the entire planet. The categorization of the Native American female student in the Asian group was telling. This harkened back to the whole migration from Asia across the connection between Russia and Alaska and down through Canada and into the Americas. The fact that basically nobody had heard of the tribe she was from said a lot too. People that only know Navajo, Cherokee, Algonquin, or whatever, really know nothing at all. She probably gets mentally tagged as Asian by people all day everyday, which must be frustrating. We can talk for days about the frustrations of being tagged black (when you are black) and all the complications that stirs up, but after this exercise, I thought that it is probably more frustrating that people have their own ignorant predispositions about what race they simply think you are. The categorization of the white student and the black students made me wonder about if any of them are mixed and do not know, or if they think they know, but may find out something different. We can group and sort people based on looks all day and come up with several different solutions. We can even go based on what people say and not be completely right because of the loss of historical lineage, lies being passed down through the family for whatever reasons, confusion, or undocumented migration. I am looking forward to the results of science and DNA categorizing people. I think the revelations from the testing will be amazing. Sat, 22 Jan 2011 03:25:23 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/18/what-do-you-think-blog-2/#IDComment122908528 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cw%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment121198840 Soc 119 Fri, 14 Jan 2011 01:42:54 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cw%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment121198840