Editorial

After reading the editorials to the Burlington Free Press about the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, I realized that both the group for it and against it have some very powerful points. For someone like me who doesn't believe in the death penalty, I don't think that the hate crime law should be the reason for someone to be sentenced to death. On the other hand, I do believe that some groups do need more protectin then others. Yes our laws do speak of equality, and in that case each crime committed should already be considered a hate crime, but our world isn't perfect, and not all citizens believe every one is equal. This is why hate crime laws should be considered. It is a way of telling every one in the U.S. that the government isn't going to sit idly by while people are getting lynched because they are black, or while people are getting tied to posts and beaten to death because they are gay. Someone mentioned in their editorial how our founders of this land automatically assumed that the laws applied to everyone. This isn't true. The Declaration of Independence was written by white males. At the time, the freedoms they talked about only applied to white males, not blacks, or women. So it is about time to stand up for those groups that have been pushed down. The truth is, the majority of the population need to take responsibility for the minority. We need to admit that the regular laws out there against violence just aren't enough to stop people from killing others because of their race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc... You know there is a difference between these laws, when someone can kill a black person out of hating that persons character compared to hating that persons color. In once incident the murderer knew the person, and hated him, the other incident, the person was killed just because he was black. If we can help stop at least one form of hate, why shouldn't we?

Observation Journal #5

So usually when I go to a restaurant with my boyfriend, I will order a steak, and he orders a salad. The waitress or waiter always hands me the salad and him the steak. I don't know if they think that girls don't eat steaks, or that boys can't eat salads, or what. It just has always been like that. Last night I ordered the salad and he ordered the steak at a well known restaurant chain, and for the first time, they actually asked who ordered what when it was brought out. I know this isn't exactly life changing, but for once I felt like I should have ordered the steak, and I wouldn't have felt ashamed for doing so. Overall its pretty funny. I'm glad I could report something good for once though. :) I think I have been focusing on the bad more than the good in these observation journals, which wasn't exactly the point of them. I think I should have thought more about what happened that was good, instead of negative. I'll remember that if I ever have an assignment like this to do ever again.

Reading Reflection #9

"Just like societies of the present, future societies are molded and shaped by human action." (p 310)
My first thoughts when beginning this chapter was WOW, I have actually finished this amazing book already. I guess I look at it as being a text book, but the material in it definitely isn't dry, or boring. It has always been a very interesting read. I have learned so much from reading this book. It really makes me feel more connected with the outside world as a whole. This last chapter proved to ring true to the statements I just made as well. My reactions was one of inquisitiveness once I had finished reading Newman's final thoughts. What really will happen in the future, concerning ethnic differences? The way the author sees it, is that it can go two ways. Either the world will become a "melting pot" and race will not matter, or people will want their "uniqueness" to last generations, and the race lines will be drawn even more visible. Of course the author tells the audience this depends on a number of different things. One is social movement. This is when a group of people who are either being oppressed or are friends, or want to help the oppressed come together to change a law, or social norm they do not like. It gives an example in the text about four teens during the 1960's who attended North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University at Greensboro. These four teens started a social movement when they continually sat at the counter at Woolworth's restaurant, after picking up followers, doing numerous amounts of sit-ins, and even being arrested and thrown into jail. They were at that counter as many times as they could be to demand service, for during that time they were allowed to shop in the same store, but they weren't allowed to eat at the restaurant. This movement lead to other protests at other Woolworth's stores around the United States. After several months of this, Woolworth's integrated their lunch counter. How amazing is that? This further proves the movements that make the most change require a broad coalition of supporters, not just the oppressed.
The author challenged many biases and beliefs in this chapter. It was basically a wrap up of the past eight chapters. He discussed where he believed the United States would be years from now concerning race, sexuality, gender, and class. He advocates for equality throughout the whole text, and he states how hopefully the U.S. will realize that everyone deserves to be tried under the same justice system, and that everyone deserves to have the same rights as others. What makes this text so incredibly good is that the author really believes in what he is writing. He isn't just writing a text book to state the facts, he is putting his life history into it, and making it personal and real.
I have definitely changed my attitude after finishing this chapter, and text altogether. I realize that it does take cooperation of others to make effective institutional changes in this world, but it all begins with one person. One random act of kindness. From now on, I will do my best not to try and say that I can't change something that is wrong without even trying. I learned that you need to be that one person that isn't afraid to say something is wrong and help change it for the better. Individually, people can do so much more then they might think.

Observation Journal #4

Quick update first - I decided to make a "bag" for the homeless person I saw out on the exit in Shelburn. I put in blankets, food, water, a novel, shoes, socks, shirts, etc... and threw it the back of my car and made my way down to the ramp. Of course he wasn't there when I arrived. So I decided that from here on out, I will always carry something like that with me in case the need arises. I learned that the salvation army only serves one meal a day, so that could be why some homeless people are out begging on the streets. We should always be willing to give what we can!

A few weeks ago, I expereinced a form of discrimination against my religion. Some acquaintances of mine were up in the area because one of their grandmothers passed away. My boyfriend and I offered our space for them to stay. I have had issues with this couple before making fun of my religion, and I basically got the feeling that they believed any one that was a Christian was ignorant to believe any thing that religion was affiliated with. I really didn't expect under the circumstances that they would do this again, yet while riding in the car with them from helping set up the dinner before the grandmothers wake, they both began talking about how the blood of Christ was poison, and how reading versus out of the Bible was brainwashing. I didn't say any thing because this person's grandmother had just passed away, and I believe it would have been extremely rude to do so. I wanted to prove to myself that I could be the better person and just not say something for once. So I pretended I didn't hear. Unfortunately, I felt horrible afterward. They really make me question my own religion at times. I am not an avid church goer, but I do belive in God, and Jesus, and the story the Bible tells us. This doesn't mean I hate people that don't believe in that. What is odd, is that they are overall pretty accpeting of other people, they do not discriminate against race, gender, sexual orientation, or religions other then Chrisianity it seems. Any thing that is against societal "norms" is okay to them, but for some reason things that are supposed to be "norms" are considered extremely offensive I guess. They have to realize it is a two way street, and that every religion, social class, etc... need to be accepted, not just ones that have been oppressed in the past. It is called respect, and common decency. How long will people to continually hurt each other? It literally tears me up inside when I hear things of this nature come out of peoples mouths. They spread so much hate, and inequality. Yes, people are allowed to have opinions, but do not say things just to hurt someone.

Reading Reflection #8

"...the students quickly came to see their working-class backgrounds as a burden"(p 289). My first reaction after reading about the study of the young adults that attended East Coast law school, who were economically challenged, was one of anger. How could ones own class become a burden if you have risen above the odds and are currently attending college, which is something difficult for minority and lower class individuals to accomplish, especially a prestigious law school like this one is. The students apparently tried to mimic the actions, dress, and speech of their upper class peers, totally taking away any diversity that could have been. When people try to fit in like that they end up losing themselves and who they really are. Is society making them this way, by telling them it is not okay to be poor? That if you are associating with people that are economically better off then you that you must try to act like them, or pretend to be like them? Although this isn't the only case, where people felt like they couldn't be themselves. Many homosexual men and women are afraid to "come out of the closet" because they are worried they could lose their jobs, friends, and even possibly their family. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that a person can't be denied a job or fired from their existing one because of gender, race, religion, or ethnicity. No where does it state that you cannot get fired because of your sexual orientation. Although that isn't to say that some states do not ban this. Many counties and municipalities, 14 states, and the District of Columbia ban workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation. Yet there are still 36 states that say it's okay to fire someone if they are a homosexual. Can you imagine the fear that some people must go through. They have to hide who they truly are, and worry that if any one finds out they could lose their job. A persons job is a major part of their life. They spend at least forty hours a week at it. It isn't something that should be taken away because of their sexual orientation. It's even harder for men that do not take on what is considered the typical male job. Male teachers, nurses, dental hygienists, etc... are sometimes criticized for the "womanly" job they take, and are considered gay from the start. What is interesting is that during the early nineteenth century most of the teachers in America were male. It was a time in history where a person that was born male male teachers even then. either taught or went to war. This is where the phrase, "Those who can't, teach" originated from. Many people looked down on male teachers even then. How ignorant is that? Is the job considered so low that only women can possibly do it? What a double standard! Now think about the minorities that are discriminated against in the workplace. They can't hide their differences from the world like the gay community are sometimes able to. They where their differences on their skin. It isn't a secret that could leak out if you tell the wrong person. African Americans are seen for their color, and then some corporations take a direct or indirect racist attitude toward them. For instance, the Miami restaurant that added 15% to an African Americans bill because they believed that "blacks don't tip well". How horrible is that! Also the text talks about the group of black customers that rose above being discriminated against and sued the Denny's restaurant chain because they would have to pay a coverage charge before each meal, they were refused entrance at times, and they were subjected to threats or derogatory remarks. All these people wanted to do was go out to eat, when did that become a crime in America?
The text explained affirmative action as a program that seeks out or provides equal opportunities to members of ethnoracial minority groups and women for educational or occupational positions in which they had previously been underrepresented. It really made me open my eyes. After reading about how far behind white American has put minority groups, the least we can do is to help them rise to our level in society. The six-year graduation rate for Native Americans, Latinos/as, and African Americans is well below 505 compared to 605 for white students. Institutionally, we really need to help minority groups out. It is something that shouldn't even be argued about. Look how long white Americans have been oppressing them? Ever sense Anglo Saxons landed in America and called it their home, pushing Indians further and further off their land. Don't you think the minority groups deserve this help?
I really thought this chapter was overall a very interesting read. Although the author did challenge a belief of mine, with supposed statistics as well. The author states how a person in 2003 would have had to make $15.21 an hour to afford rental housing, and how nowhere in the United States today is there a person with a full-time minimum wage job could afford rental housing. If I am understanding it correctly, this statement is wrong. I currently live with a friend of mine, and I only work one to twice a week making, 3 and half hours at a time, making ten dollars an hour. He makes twelve dollars an hour at a full-time position, and we live quite comfortably. We budget our money extremely well, and find ourselves able to even have a social life outside of rent at $1200(which includes electricity, heat, water, sewer, garbage removal, recycling, snow removal, and lawn care) cell phone bills, cable, credit cards, car loans, insurance, food, gas, and other miscellaneous items. Every month we make a chart on Excel to budget our exact amount what it has to go toward. It seems to work out fine. So I really believe the author was incorrect in stating what he did. It is possible that I am not understanding him right, and he means like a family of four, if any one understand this better then I do, don't hesitate to correct me.

Reading Reflection #7

"When children pledge their allegiance to the American flag each morning in school, they conclude with the phrase, "... and justice for all." " (p 265) The pledge of allegiance originated during the late nineteenth century, and weaved its way through our educational and political systems. Around this time, the Anglo Saxon's in the U.S. were attempting to assimilate the enormous amounts of immigrants coming into the U.S. in the White man's culture. The pledge of allegiance was made to further along this assimilation. Every child, including the immigrants would say this every day in school to basically ingrain into them what being American meant. After I first learned this, I developed a totally new perspective around it. It clearly was a time when "justice for all" meant justice for the White, middle class men. Maybe that is why it still doesn't ring completely true in the twenty first century as well.
After finishing this chapter, I was really shocked. Mostly by the statistics of all the injustices in the world today. Statistics that showed racism, class ism, sexism, and discrimination against gender being prevalent today. It made me open my eyes. I never realized that the percentage of African Americans that make up the population in the U.S. is not equivalent to how many are in jail compared to the numbers of White Americans. It really is sad. The most upsetting part was how Black youth are subjected to longer, and more severe sentences for committing the same crime then the White youth in this country. In no way is that considered justice.
I changed my attitudes on corporate crime versus street crime after I read this chapter. I never realized how many upper White American males get short sentences for stealing billions of dollars from their company and therefore effecting every one in the community by doing so, while both White, and Black lower class individuals get longer sentences for stealing or attempting to steal billions of dollars in a bank robbery. It seems incredibly unjust to me. I understand if that person who committed the bank robbery got a longer sentence if they murdered someone , but initially they are committing a crime very similar to that of the upper white class individual who stole billions from their company.
I felt as though the authors own biases should have been put into this chapter to make it more personal. He explained how every one has their biases, and it is good to know which ones those are, but he never explained what his were. I just felt like if he included that information it wouldn't make it seem as taboo, because in order to fix something we really need to lay all out and be honest about how we feel. That is the only way we can really fix things in order to make America a place where every one gets the justice they deserve.

Observation #3 "You just never know"

When I was riding with my friend in my car, I noticed a man on an off ramp with a sign asking for food. I I have noticed this man about three times before as well. I started talking to my friend and telling him that we should give this men some food and blankets. He looked at me as though I was crazy. He said I didn't know what that man would do if I stopped the car. He could have a gun, he could be a bad person. I didn't see the harm in just stopping to give food, but I understood his point. You just never know sometimes. I didn't know this person's history. Did he live at a shelter? Was there no food left and that is why he was begging for it? What was the reason he was out there? Was he a veteran? Did he have a mental illness? What was it? Hadn't a social worker or police officer gone by him and asked him if he needed them to bring him to a shelter or somewhere to get food? I never know what to do in those situations? How can I help and ensure my own safety? Who can I trust and who can't I? Who can I call to help this person? I really want to look into this more. There has to be something that I can do to, and I am going to find out just what that is.

Reading Reflection #6

"According to the World Health Organization (1995), poverty is the single greatest cause of ill health in the world today: " (p 205) Although I realized that poverty had an effect on a person's well being, I never realized it was the leading cause of health problems. My first reaction to this was one of guilt. After realizing that poverty, and food shortages are all caused by people, and not natural phenomenas, made me feel as though there is more that I can do to make this world a better place. It made me extremely disgusted with with wealthy countries, when I found out that they could easily afford to provide sufficient supplies to poor countries to keep them in good health. In 2005, the United Nations declared that only taking 1% of the total income of wealthy countries would end world hunger. The United States currently only provides 1/5 of that 1% . It seems that helping the ill and poverty stricken just isn't any one's top priority. Why?
I am still struggling with why America wouldn't give the full 1% when other countries are donating even more then they are. Is it that we can't afford it? the United Nations declared that it was "utterly affordable". So what is the real answer? After reading this chapter thoroughly, I still haven't found it. Does any one else have any ideas as to why? Does it have to do with the war that has been going on in Iraq? Is there ever a good excuse to let numbers of people die each year for reasons that can be controlled?
When I was reading about the discrimination of health care based on an individuals race, class, and sexuality, I became infuriated. I couldn't believe the terms that were used, such as "green screen", meaning that a person's financial situations was more important then their clinical information when it came to being wait listed for an organ transplant. WOW! How is that not illegal? It certainly reinforces the belief that "money makes the world go round". Apparently health care clinics believe that person's of a certain race are destined to have the same financial background. Look at all the Chinese people that were at the hospital for probably days when the American was brought to the front of the line, because they thought there was a better chance that he would be able to pay them because of his race/ethnicity. My attitudes have totally changed toward the health care system after reading this. It gives me further belief that I shouldn't be trusting of health insurance companies, or even doctors, or hospitals. It is sad when the people that are supposed to be there to help you, are the ones that you need to be wary of. Whoever though your class position, race, etc... would determine your health care needs?
There were a few different topics in the reading that I did find interesting. One was a term they used known as the sick role. It basically describes the fact that each society has a certain set of expectations that people need to meet when they are sick. If a person does not behave this way, then they are not considered sick, or considered that they want to get better. It talked about how women in the 19th century, if wealthy, were considered to be very delicate beings that always needed bed rest. The lower class women were considered tougher, and were thought to have "thicker skin". Still to this day, women are more susceptible then men are to be labeled sick. Pregnancy, childbirth, menopause, and menstruation have been medicalized or pathologized. This means that normal biological events in women's lives were considered to be problematic and in need of medical attention. The medical world has even coined the term Premenstrual Syndrome to explain why women get moody, or depressed right before or during their period. The social world now uses this as an excuse to blame sudden mood swings on menstruation. I always here women and men use that excuse to explain their partners, or their own behavior. There are even shirts that have the saying, "Don't mess with me, I have PMS". This just further perpetuates the cycle that women are allowed to act a certain way just because of a normal biological function.
Overall this reading was really informative. It seemed the author really tried to make an emotional connection with his readers. He really wanted them to realize how it is for people of a certain race, class or sexuality. He definitely succeeded in doing so from my point of view.

Reading Reflection #5

"Hey-wait-a-minute! ... You're not a Jew, are you?!" (pg 149) Wow, the author totally let us see a different side of him in this chapter, Expressing Inequalities. Apparently this topic really hit home for him. Having someone question your religion at such a young age can be life changing, especially when that person also threatens your safety. I really was glad to see the author giving us a little bit of his life stories, it made the read more enjoyable, and I was able to see things from his point of view as well as my own.
My first reaction to his story was one of rage. I really wish I could have been there to stop that other child from hitting him. I couldn't believe that something like that occurred without any thing being done about it. Of course that was a different generation. But was it? This generation also experiences hate crimes, such as the Jena (6) incident where nooses were found hanging from a tree in a prominently black and white high school. Those nooses were not considered hate crimes, but a school prank. We haven't come as far as we think we have.
The author really painted a clear picture for me by giving the definition to stereotypes. I had an "Alright!" moment when I read that people use stereotypes in order to see our social environment as a more understandable and manageable place. We are always defining classes and other groups, which in response creates a fulfilling prophecy of some kind. This needs to stop! It is a never ending cycle that continues to loop around, and will eventually strangle us. It really isn't necessary to classify people into groups, whether they are being seen in a good light or not,which is called the "model minority". For example, the stereotype that all Asians are smart. A compliment? Possibly, but still a stereotype none the less. It is when these stereotypes become unfavorable judgements on our behalf, they are known as prejudices.
After I read the piece on racial transparency, I have totally changed my beliefs. I didn't honestly think that whites never experienced racial tensions, but institutionally I guess they really haven't. I hate the fact that being white means I don't have to worry about certain things that others do have to worry about. Now I will look for opportunities where I can change this.
Overall this chapter was very insightful, and the author's point of view on the subject was very refreshing. Hopefully he continues to do this in future chapters.

Observation #2 "They said I look like a boy because I have short hair"

The after school program I work at has some diversity within it. There are some African American children, and some Hispanic children also. There are also some whose primary caregiver is their grandparent, or adopted parents. I thought I would more then likely deal with race and class issues before dealing with gender issues. I guess I was wrong. The other day a fourth grade girl with short hair came up to me. She looked extremely sad, so I asked her what was wrong. She said that two boys at her table had said, "girl that looks like a boy" when addressing her about something. She then began to cry. She said how people everywhere, even elderly people in grocery stores sometime thought she was a boy because of her short hair and how much it hurt her. I felt so bad for this little girl. I basically sat down with her and told her how girls can be beautiful and feminine with long or short hair. I told her how earlier that day I saw a women at my school who was bald, and how she was beautiful. I also told her how there were many girls out there that had short hair for many reasons. It's easier to care for, it doesn't get in the way, and during the summer it doesn't stick to the back of your neck. So there were a lot of pluses to having short hair. After I had made her feel better, I decided to go talk to the two boys that had said she looked like a boy. I brought them out of earshot of the other children and began by asked them if what the little girl said was true. They admitted to it, which was a start, but then began making excuses. They said how sometimes other people had called them girls before and that didn't bother them, that they thought it was funny. They thought what they had said was a joke. I explained to them how much they had hurt their peer, and they did feel bad, not to the extent I probably would have liked, but still nonetheless it was their idea to go and apologize to her. The reason I spoke out against the short hair incident, is because I didn't want the two boys to think that it wasn't okay for girls to have short hair. I wanted them to know that it was perfectly acceptable. I really didn't know how else to tell them what they did wasn't nice, and that girls can have short hair and not be mistaken for a boy. Does any one else have any ideas at what I should have said?
This event was significant in that it really opened my eyes to how much gender is still an issue in everyday life, even in educational systems. This event really was oppressing in that overall it involved boys telling girls they couldn't have short hair or else they looked like a boy. In their mind, girls had to have long hair. I didn't know fourth grade boys could be sexist? Being part of this event has made me more attuned to what is going on around me, including peoples side conversation. Yes, nosy, I know, lol. I just want to find out how every one thinks about gender. I pick up on responses people make in public about things as well. Sense that incident I have noticed how in a movie theater, a girl coming into one alone is more likely to sit next to another group of girls, then a single guy. Or if there is a seat in beside a girl and a guy, a girl will usually take the one next to the other girl.

Reading Reflection #4

"Social reality is not an inherent feature of the natural world but is instead a human creation, established in a process of ongoing social interaction" (Newman, p 108).

My first reaction to the reading was one of confusion. The personal story within the reading was about two parents trying to socialize their children androgynous. This means they wanted to bring up their two twins, one female, one male to have both male and female traits and behaviors. They wanted to break down the gender barriers that some parents create when raising their children. The author clearly points out that parents cannot "create" their children's identities, yet just two paragraphs down, he states that "We create, re-create, confirm, or change our social identities every time our actions, appearances, thoughts, perceptions, and values are taken as reflective of or in contrast to what others expect of us" (Newman, p 108) I understand that he is trying to say we create our own identities, but he is also stating that other people effect it, which includes our parents. I think that parents have a lot to do with a child's beliefs on gender, sexuality, race and other large issues within society today. Throughout the book Newman expresses his beliefs on how adolescents look more to their peers for acceptance then their parents. Isn't that in itself a stereotype? I know many children/young adults that would rather make their parents proud then be apart of the "crowd". I agree that peers are a major part in some children's lives growing up, and eve turn into family, but there are certain incidences where that is the total opposite, and some see friends come and go, but their parents were always there.
After I read chapter 4, I totally understood how hard it was for certain classes to succeed in the school system. The classes seemed to be broken down into races and beliefs, not just economic standing. I understood why some parents would want their children to go to segregated schools because they want them to have a rich heritage, or have a higher ability to succeed. Although I don't agree with that, I understand some people's strife's. One African American women put her reason she wanted segregated schools very clearly. "Integration? What was it good for? They were just setting up our babies to fail" ( quoted in Winter, 2004, p 27) (Newman, p 141).
It is extremely heartbreaking to read this, but I understand why this mother said that. In this chapter, the statistics alone back up what she is saying. It is sad to say it, but because minorities are so oppressed in this society, they are the least likely to go on to college after high school, or even finish high school.
One point of view that should have been included by the author was what he thought we could do to change all the stereotypical behavior in schools about gender. After reading about the studies that proved the majority of schools treated girls differently then boys, I thought Newman should have commented on what society could do to change this. It is important to get every one's feedback on social issues such as this.

Reading Reflection #3

"So what are you going to ask Santa to bring you for Christmas?" pg 72
Imagine such a simple question during the holidays offending someone? Sometimes I just don't understand what all the "necessary" precautions are for regarding religion. People take things too seriously sometimes. What is wrong with saying, "I'm sorry but we don't celebrate Christmas"? Yes, we should respect the people that are not religious or do not celebrate Christmas, but we should also understand that there are others out there that do. I guess this stirs up some memories from last year. I have worked at the same after school program for two years now, and the school that we are in does not allow the children to perform any acts of gift giving or Christmas activities. It is as though they totally ignore some of the children that actually do celebrate this holiday. They do learn about Kwanzaa, and Hanukkah however. I believe all these religions are important and should be touched on. When did it become not okay to have Christian beliefs in the school? All beliefs should be respected.
This also makes me think back to Tim Wises essay, "Honky Wanna Cracker?" It talked about how using honky wasn't as significant as using the "n" word. I guess my sentence just proved that true. The fact that I can write honky, but not write the other racial slur makes it even more obvious. Although I do not believe that blacks, institutionally can be racist, I do believe that both whites and blacks can make hateful politically incorrect remarks. Both are signs of disrespect and should not be used. No remarks of that kind should be accepted, just like all religious beliefs should be.

Observation #1 "That's so retarded"

I believe a lot of the time we don't think about how it's not only race, gender, class, or religion that people discriminate against. There are also the mentally, physically and emotionally disabled. The other day while I was walking to my human behavior class, I noticed a large group of people pointing and laughing at the way a student on campus was running. In my opinion this student might be somewhere on the Autistic spectrum. I am not an expert by no means, but I do know some about Autism because my nephew is Autistic. This group of people were also students. There were about six or seven in the group. To see this type of behavior made me sick, but what made me even more upset, is that I didn't say anything. I just watched, which is even worse then committing the action. I knew it was wrong, and I just kept walking, rather then stopping to tell them that it was wrong. I regret that so much. This event is significant because it brings to light that there are not only derogatory terms used against people because of their race, sexuality, gender or etc... There is also terms out there against the disabled, like when someone says, "That's so retarded". They may not mean it to be mean toward that group of individuals, but society has labeled that as being acceptable language to use when something upsets you. This event sustains a state of oppression because it shows how society continues to close itself of from the "abnormal". We are only hurting ourselves by doing this. Not being open to individuals with different ways of thinking and living is in reality us oppressing ourselves. In fact I know that this student that group was laughing at was extremely intelligent. I had English class with him two semesters ago and he was one of the best writers in the class. He had a great sense of humor too. Afterwards all I could think about is how I could have just ignored it. Why did I do that? This isn't the first time I have done it, and I don't plan on ever doing it again. No one deserves to be laughed at no who they are. It isn't something I believe in. Laughing at someone because they are different then you isn't right, and those of us that know it isn't should speak out. I know I would want someone to do that for my nephew if any one ever did that to him. That is why I will never just stand by and watch ever again. When something like that hits closer to home you finally understand the impact it has.

Reading Reflection #2

"My father was a Negro! We were colored! After ten years in Virginia on the white side of the color line, I knew what that meant" (Williams, 32) My first reaction to the second chapter, "Manufacturing Difference" in Newman's Identities and Inequalities was one of intrigue. After reading about Gregory Williams experience with being white in Virginia and black in Indiana really opened my eyes. How confused he must have been as a child, adolescent and young adult growing up. What color did he mark on his college entrance forms? Because Gregory was multiracial it excluded him from everything to do with the black and white community. No one wanted to except someone into their "culture" if they were bordering the line between Caucasian and African American. The most empowering aspect of this story is that Gregory ended up overcoming such a major obstacle in his life, and became a lawyer and a professor. He did not let his socially defined role as neither white or black effect his identity. He had the strength to identify himself as being multiracial, and the best part is he is proud to be so.
I definitely had an "Alright! Now I understand" moment when reading this. The chapter discussed race through a scientific perspective, and a social one. It basically cleared up for me that there isn't a gene that 100% of African Americans have that Caucasians don't have. It explained how race is more of a social aspect then anything else. "The meaning of race, gender, class and sexuality, therefore are fluid, socially or politically determined, and historically or culturally specific" (Newman, 37) Newman also discussed in this chapter how Americans tend to use essentialism, and split people into groups based on their differences. There was a part in the text where Newman mentioned a Vietnam girl coming to him in one of his classes he was student teaching in, and telling him how in Vietnam all people see only Americans, not black, white, Asian, etc... She related a persons race as the same as being fat, skinny, tall or short. Imagine if everyone in the world could think like that? The construction of race and ethnicity also made a lot of sense to me, and made me realize how people create an identity for themselves. People learn that each group has certain boundaries that distinguish one group from another, each group has a social position, and finally your group is either proud to be who they are or ashamed to be themselves. This made me extremely sad. Other groups are making the minorities feel this way. It's almost scary to think about how one group has so much power over the other. I also learned how race can depend on your social class. Some white people were referred to as black because they were poor and considered lower class and vice verse. People are using the term white as if it is good, and powerful, while doing the exact opposite with the word black. The funny thing is no one is the exact same color as someone else. There are different shades of black and white, and so many in between. How is it possible to group together and say this one is white and this one is black? It isn't humanly possible to do it accurately. We should be able to learn to live and celebrate diversity and who we are. Maybe one day we will.
After reading this article I decided when I come across a question asking about my race, I am going to put human, sense there is only the human race. Maybe if enough people do that, they will stop asking the question altogether on any entrance or census form.

"...for the love of God, let's learn to forgive ourselves" Tim Wise

While I was reading Tim Wise's essay, "Exploring the Depths of Racist Socialization", I felt frustrated. Apparently this man has not yet forgiven himself or his families history when it comes to racism. It felt like the information he was putting in his essay was mainly personal. It felt like he had a lot to get of his chest. "Fact is nigger is still the first word on most white people's mind when they see a black man being taken off to jail on the evening news". WHAT? I don't think that. Yes, I see color. That is obvious. But I do not see a "nigger", because I choose not to see one. I see a person. Just like if a white person was sent to jail, I don't think "oh there goes that cracker/whitey/Anglo-Saxon/Caucasian piece of shit." I think there goes someone that possibly made a bad choice. It's too bad we couldn't just drop every title we were ever given with and just be known by our name instead of a race. We create racism when we do this. I believe as long as there are races there will be racism. How can people overcome the title they are given when something like a Census is out there gathering statistical information to prove where certain races stand in life. Give people the freedom to succeed in life, and maybe they will.
After finishing reading this essay, I had an "I'm still struggling" moment. It is so hard to get out into words what I believe, even though I know what Tim Wise was saying wasn't something I agreed with. I just felt even more confused. It seems with each article or essay I read that is about racism in some way or another, just leaves me asking more questions. Like where this author got their information? Is racism more of a personal issue then a public issue? Or is it both? Sometimes I wonder if we are just making it a bigger issue then it really is, and then other times I disagree with that statement.
It is possible that Tim Wise's late grandmother said the things she did before she died was in fact because she had Alzheimer's disease. I do know though, that because of his essay, my behavior toward racism has changed. I can no longer look at the older generation without thinking that it is quite possible that each elderly person I meet might be racist because of their upbringing. I can honestly say that was never the first thought that went through my mind before reading this.