In this chapter Johnson talks a lot about myths and social construction. He states early on that our society places a strong emphasis on the individual which is more often than not a strong disadvantage because it distorts our view of reality. He also concludes that think only about the individual causes us to play the blame game, always blaming everything in the world on someone else.
Johnson also discusses the idea behind everyone’s personal identity and how that relates to our social systems as a whole rather than the individualistic model. In order to understand what happens in the world you need to know how our social systems behave and interact with individuals, not how individuals act alone.
Another interesting theory that he discusses is the theory of the path of least resistance. After reading about the theory it made perfect sense but it was never something that I realized or identified with before being told about it. As individuals we do what is normally accepted by our social systems and is the easiest for us to do. This concepts just reinforces that its individuals acting within social systems that creates our society.
Once again I do believe that Johnson does a great job of further explaining privilege and oppression in our society today, however, I completely disagree with his statement that, “A University, for example, is a social system, and people participate in it. But the people aren’t the university and the university isn’t the people.” While I think that his intentions are good with this statement I do think that this would be very confusing to many readers. I understand the concept behind what he is saying in regards to individuals and social systems but there is a fine line distinguishing the two. I do believe that a university is the people and that the people are the university. What would a university be without the people behind it? The university is a social system but social systems are nothing without the individuals collectively supporting, creating and nurturing them. If people were not here to support the university what would the university be? If we were not here how different would the university be? If the professors were all different what would our values be? What would our mission statement be if we had a different President?
All of these questions, I think, show how collectively individuals do create the social systems such as Universities.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
The Trouble with the Trouble
“If dominant groups really saw privilege and oppression as unacceptable –if white people saw race as their issue, if nondisabled people saw ableism as their problem-privilege and oppression wouldn’t have much of a future.”
This is by far my favorite chapter in Privilege, Power and Difference. I can really relate to all of the concepts that Johnson talks about and feel he does a great job of relating these issues to actual business practices today. Johnson concludes that there are a few reasons why people do not actively engage in privilege issues; because they don’t know that it exists in the first place, because they don’t have to, because they think that its just a personal problem, because they want to hang on to their privileges, because they are prejudiced, or because they are afraid. Johnson believes that these reasons are the foundation as to why people ignore issues or privilege. He also concludes that there are two ways that the Human Resource Managers went about dealing with the issue; the first strategy they use is to appeal to the sense of decency and fairness that many privileged people have and the other is the business case often used by corporations and universities.
What most intrigued me about this reading was his discussion of the business case and how it relates to corporations. He argues that implementing diversity programs would cost less in the long run than losing talented and skillful workers who are uncomfortable in their environment. He also states that any attempts businesses make to address diversity are short lived because people are not dedicated to the cause.
While I completely agree with Johnson’s argument I do question how accurate his assumptions are about diversity in the workplace. Ever since Affirmative Action became a requirement I think tremendous strides have been taken to implement diversity programs and considerations into corporations. I recently attended the Owens Corning Diversity Leadership Conference where we addressed many of these same issues. Owens Corning does a fabulous job of creating programs that enhance diversity across their global organization and they do so for many reasons. As a generalization I don’t believe that organizations implement diversity programs ONLY for reasons as stated in the business case. I do agree that organizations are forced to implement these standards to stay competitive but I also believe that after implementation these standards have significantly improved the quality of life for their employees and for their customers. It is becoming a global trend to support diversity amongst employees because it makes the organization better as whole. I think that stating that these are the first programs to get cut in a budget crunch is a false assumption because many organizations now realize the overall importance of these programs to their success.
I really enjoyed this reading. I’m a business major and a lot of the topics that were discussed in this reading I have discussed before in my classes. Johnson also states, “Even when people can see the benefits somewhere off in the distance, they still need something to hold them to the vision and see them through the long journey from here to there. Appealing to lofty principles or the bottom line can’t do it, because those approaches too easily give way to forces and considerations that are powerful in the short run even if they are disastrous in the long run.”
I could not disagree with this statement more. Our society is based on bottom lines and lofty principles. Our economy would not be the same; we would not be such a wealthy and prosperous nation if we weren’t based on those things. Johnson does a great job making his argument but I disagree with some of his statements.
This is by far my favorite chapter in Privilege, Power and Difference. I can really relate to all of the concepts that Johnson talks about and feel he does a great job of relating these issues to actual business practices today. Johnson concludes that there are a few reasons why people do not actively engage in privilege issues; because they don’t know that it exists in the first place, because they don’t have to, because they think that its just a personal problem, because they want to hang on to their privileges, because they are prejudiced, or because they are afraid. Johnson believes that these reasons are the foundation as to why people ignore issues or privilege. He also concludes that there are two ways that the Human Resource Managers went about dealing with the issue; the first strategy they use is to appeal to the sense of decency and fairness that many privileged people have and the other is the business case often used by corporations and universities.
What most intrigued me about this reading was his discussion of the business case and how it relates to corporations. He argues that implementing diversity programs would cost less in the long run than losing talented and skillful workers who are uncomfortable in their environment. He also states that any attempts businesses make to address diversity are short lived because people are not dedicated to the cause.
While I completely agree with Johnson’s argument I do question how accurate his assumptions are about diversity in the workplace. Ever since Affirmative Action became a requirement I think tremendous strides have been taken to implement diversity programs and considerations into corporations. I recently attended the Owens Corning Diversity Leadership Conference where we addressed many of these same issues. Owens Corning does a fabulous job of creating programs that enhance diversity across their global organization and they do so for many reasons. As a generalization I don’t believe that organizations implement diversity programs ONLY for reasons as stated in the business case. I do agree that organizations are forced to implement these standards to stay competitive but I also believe that after implementation these standards have significantly improved the quality of life for their employees and for their customers. It is becoming a global trend to support diversity amongst employees because it makes the organization better as whole. I think that stating that these are the first programs to get cut in a budget crunch is a false assumption because many organizations now realize the overall importance of these programs to their success.
I really enjoyed this reading. I’m a business major and a lot of the topics that were discussed in this reading I have discussed before in my classes. Johnson also states, “Even when people can see the benefits somewhere off in the distance, they still need something to hold them to the vision and see them through the long journey from here to there. Appealing to lofty principles or the bottom line can’t do it, because those approaches too easily give way to forces and considerations that are powerful in the short run even if they are disastrous in the long run.”
I could not disagree with this statement more. Our society is based on bottom lines and lofty principles. Our economy would not be the same; we would not be such a wealthy and prosperous nation if we weren’t based on those things. Johnson does a great job making his argument but I disagree with some of his statements.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Framework Essay: Dichotomizing
Framework Essay”: Dichotomizing
After reading the section on dichotomizing I believe that the author did a great job in explain the background of the two parts our society has created. He concludes that not only are these two mutually exclusive classes present but also that there is a gap in the views between different generations of people.
He spent majority of this section not necessarily arguing but making sure that the reader fully understood this concept and how it is present in our society today, as well as, the past actions which have shaped today’s views. The authors views are expressed when he states, “from the essentialist position, race is assumed to exist independently of our perception of it; it is assumed to significantly distinguish one group of people from another. From the constructionist perspective, race exists because we have created it as a meaningful category of difference among people” Even after this statement he never takes a stance on he feels. He only further elaborates on the theory’s that he believes shape the way we view the issue of race and how we dichotomize people.
The one issue that I would have liked if he had addresses further is the difference of opinions between the age gaps. I find this very interested and even more important if analyzing how future generations are going to act toward the current issues of race and dichotomy. How are future generations going to improve the current situation? I believe that the issues of race and dichotomy are slowly improving with each decade but will take tremendous strides to improvement with the new generation. In the essay it discusses how today’s youth of different religions and historical periods are producing other distinctions other than the traditional black and white.
After reading my assigned section I feel better educated on dichotomizing, as well as, past believes and values that have shaped this concept. I also feel that this issue will continue to improve but may never be completely nonexistent. Our society will always see differences whether its race, religion, education, sexuality etc. but how we react to those visible differences will be forever changing.
After reading the section on dichotomizing I believe that the author did a great job in explain the background of the two parts our society has created. He concludes that not only are these two mutually exclusive classes present but also that there is a gap in the views between different generations of people.
He spent majority of this section not necessarily arguing but making sure that the reader fully understood this concept and how it is present in our society today, as well as, the past actions which have shaped today’s views. The authors views are expressed when he states, “from the essentialist position, race is assumed to exist independently of our perception of it; it is assumed to significantly distinguish one group of people from another. From the constructionist perspective, race exists because we have created it as a meaningful category of difference among people” Even after this statement he never takes a stance on he feels. He only further elaborates on the theory’s that he believes shape the way we view the issue of race and how we dichotomize people.
The one issue that I would have liked if he had addresses further is the difference of opinions between the age gaps. I find this very interested and even more important if analyzing how future generations are going to act toward the current issues of race and dichotomy. How are future generations going to improve the current situation? I believe that the issues of race and dichotomy are slowly improving with each decade but will take tremendous strides to improvement with the new generation. In the essay it discusses how today’s youth of different religions and historical periods are producing other distinctions other than the traditional black and white.
After reading my assigned section I feel better educated on dichotomizing, as well as, past believes and values that have shaped this concept. I also feel that this issue will continue to improve but may never be completely nonexistent. Our society will always see differences whether its race, religion, education, sexuality etc. but how we react to those visible differences will be forever changing.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
The “Tempest in the Wilderness, The Racialization of Savagery
The “Tempest in the Wilderness, The Racialization of Savagery
After reading The “Tempest” in the Wilderness, The Radicalization of Savagery, I believe that the author concludes that the violence that the English exerted, both over the Indians and the Irish was barbaric. I also feel that he provides relevant information about societal struggles and conflicts relevant to the time period in which these horrible acts took place.
Throughout reading all of these tails about Christopher Columbus and the brutality that was used over the Indians, as well as anyone else who was a different race or religion, what I don’t understand that most is how this was done to human beings appear to have been so innocent. While this may or may not be the case they are certainly portrayed in this reading as very benevolent figures that were more than willing and eager to meet Christopher Columbus and all the men that he brought with him.
The essay begins by stating, “In their first encounters with Europeans, the Indians tried to relate the strangers to what was familiar in their world”. How come the opposite was not true of the Europeans? What is it about the culture, values and religion of the Indians that made them welcoming and humble? What is it about the culture, values, and religion of the Europeans that made them look upon the Indians with such disgust?
I believe that it is these questions that form the base of racial and religious discrimination in today’s society. Even British laws and plays were influencing others views of people different then them. British law was forbidding marriage between the Irish and the colonizers and stated that the new world order was to be one of the English over the Irish. Also as this time, British play writers such as Shakespeare were influencing these views but including personal values and plays in popular plays. By so many people, both in the government and in the media of the time discriminating it was only a matter of time before two dichotomies were created.
The violence that was shown to the Irish was a foreshadowing of the violence that would be shown to the Indians. Shakespeare claimed that the Irish could be “nurtured” and could become civilized. Essentially what the visible difference between the English and the Irish was culture. The same was true of the English and the Indians. Whatever it was that made the English feel they were more sophisticated and cultured than another human being is beyond me but was the driving influence affecting the America’s today.
I like to believe that we have come so far in viewing other people as equals but its hard to not ignore that we have a long way to go. Just a few hundred years ago it was believed that some people were just “natural slaves”. While this may no longer be the consensus today discirimination is still very present in our society and I wonder if we will ever be able to full recover from the division the English and others have created all over the world.
After reading The “Tempest” in the Wilderness, The Radicalization of Savagery, I believe that the author concludes that the violence that the English exerted, both over the Indians and the Irish was barbaric. I also feel that he provides relevant information about societal struggles and conflicts relevant to the time period in which these horrible acts took place.
Throughout reading all of these tails about Christopher Columbus and the brutality that was used over the Indians, as well as anyone else who was a different race or religion, what I don’t understand that most is how this was done to human beings appear to have been so innocent. While this may or may not be the case they are certainly portrayed in this reading as very benevolent figures that were more than willing and eager to meet Christopher Columbus and all the men that he brought with him.
The essay begins by stating, “In their first encounters with Europeans, the Indians tried to relate the strangers to what was familiar in their world”. How come the opposite was not true of the Europeans? What is it about the culture, values and religion of the Indians that made them welcoming and humble? What is it about the culture, values, and religion of the Europeans that made them look upon the Indians with such disgust?
I believe that it is these questions that form the base of racial and religious discrimination in today’s society. Even British laws and plays were influencing others views of people different then them. British law was forbidding marriage between the Irish and the colonizers and stated that the new world order was to be one of the English over the Irish. Also as this time, British play writers such as Shakespeare were influencing these views but including personal values and plays in popular plays. By so many people, both in the government and in the media of the time discriminating it was only a matter of time before two dichotomies were created.
The violence that was shown to the Irish was a foreshadowing of the violence that would be shown to the Indians. Shakespeare claimed that the Irish could be “nurtured” and could become civilized. Essentially what the visible difference between the English and the Irish was culture. The same was true of the English and the Indians. Whatever it was that made the English feel they were more sophisticated and cultured than another human being is beyond me but was the driving influence affecting the America’s today.
I like to believe that we have come so far in viewing other people as equals but its hard to not ignore that we have a long way to go. Just a few hundred years ago it was believed that some people were just “natural slaves”. While this may no longer be the consensus today discirimination is still very present in our society and I wonder if we will ever be able to full recover from the division the English and others have created all over the world.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
About Me!
Hello! My name is Ashley Timmons and I am a sophomore here at BG! I was originally born in Seattle, Washington but moved to Centerville, Ohio when I was 7. Growing up I always had my heart set on going to Miami University at Oxford but for financial reasons decided to go to BG. I am happy to say that I have never regretted that decisions.
I am very involved on-campus and I am greatly appreciative of everything that Bowling Green has given me. I am a member of the Zeta Kappa Chapter of Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority and serve as the Public Relations Chair. Along with my involvement in Kappa I am a member of the American Marketing Association and serve as the President of LiveBG.com, a business that we started last year. I also have a Marketing and Public Relations internship with Ameriprise financial in Toledo where I have learned a lot about what I want to do with my future.
I love my family and friends and firmly believe that I wouldn't be where I am today without them. I am a easy-going and fun-loving person that loves to meet new people and is truly excited about life. Anything else you want to know don't hesitate to ask!
I am very involved on-campus and I am greatly appreciative of everything that Bowling Green has given me. I am a member of the Zeta Kappa Chapter of Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority and serve as the Public Relations Chair. Along with my involvement in Kappa I am a member of the American Marketing Association and serve as the President of LiveBG.com, a business that we started last year. I also have a Marketing and Public Relations internship with Ameriprise financial in Toledo where I have learned a lot about what I want to do with my future.
I love my family and friends and firmly believe that I wouldn't be where I am today without them. I am a easy-going and fun-loving person that loves to meet new people and is truly excited about life. Anything else you want to know don't hesitate to ask!
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Columbus, the Indians and Human Progress
The first thing that caught my attention was in the very first few paragraphs. I find it fascinating to read about the early attempts at consumerism. Columbus explains how the Arawak men and women brought him and his sailors “gifts” of parrots and cotton balls in exchange for glass beads and bells. These early trades were the very beginning of consumerism in America and have established the process of exchanging goods for money that we currently use today.
Another remark that caught my attention was the sentence, “like other informed people of his time, he knew that the world was round and that he could sail west in order to get to the Far East”. Today we would take information such as the world being round for granted because we tend to consider it such common knowledge; While hundreds of years ago it was a fascinating discovery that was known by only a few.
While early on in the reading it gives glimpses of Columbus’ character being rather selfish the reading really emphasis this when they talk about how he claimed to have seen land first and took the reward away from Rodrigo. I always pictured Columbus being a very kind and gentle leader and I am surprised to hear stories of his selfishness and an autocratic leadership. It further emphasis these characteristics when he took some of the Arawak prisoners on his ship so that they could lead him and his crew to the gold. I was horrified to read that he was supplied with an abundance of ships and men on his next voyage which had only one mission; “gold and slaves”. Treating the Arawak people like animals and sending them back to England is just cruel and would never be tolerated in today’s society so why was it back then? Even more disgusting was when Indians were found without a copper token around there neck and had their hands chopped off for not finding enough gold in the three month time period they were given. It’s equally as cruel to read about how after Columbus and his men began killing the Indians it was only a short amount of time before majority of their population and heritage was gone.
Prior to reading this chapter I had such high expectations about who Christopher Columbus was. I saw him as someone to be idled, some that is recognized in classrooms across the United States. When, in all actuality, he was a selfish and greedy killer. He took the lives of thousands of innocent Indians to find gold. Why is a man like this spoken so highly of in classrooms across the America? Why do we glorify a man who holds none of the values and morals that this Country was founded on?
It’s even more interesting to think about how America became such a great and independent country. Was it the same selfish greed the Columbus possessed? Did we follow in his footsteps? And if so, is it fair for us to criticize him when we all take for granted the freedoms we have without truly realizing how we got them?
The first thing that caught my attention was in the very first few paragraphs. I find it fascinating to read about the early attempts at consumerism. Columbus explains how the Arawak men and women brought him and his sailors “gifts” of parrots and cotton balls in exchange for glass beads and bells. These early trades were the very beginning of consumerism in America and have established the process of exchanging goods for money that we currently use today.
Another remark that caught my attention was the sentence, “like other informed people of his time, he knew that the world was round and that he could sail west in order to get to the Far East”. Today we would take information such as the world being round for granted because we tend to consider it such common knowledge; While hundreds of years ago it was a fascinating discovery that was known by only a few.
While early on in the reading it gives glimpses of Columbus’ character being rather selfish the reading really emphasis this when they talk about how he claimed to have seen land first and took the reward away from Rodrigo. I always pictured Columbus being a very kind and gentle leader and I am surprised to hear stories of his selfishness and an autocratic leadership. It further emphasis these characteristics when he took some of the Arawak prisoners on his ship so that they could lead him and his crew to the gold. I was horrified to read that he was supplied with an abundance of ships and men on his next voyage which had only one mission; “gold and slaves”. Treating the Arawak people like animals and sending them back to England is just cruel and would never be tolerated in today’s society so why was it back then? Even more disgusting was when Indians were found without a copper token around there neck and had their hands chopped off for not finding enough gold in the three month time period they were given. It’s equally as cruel to read about how after Columbus and his men began killing the Indians it was only a short amount of time before majority of their population and heritage was gone.
Prior to reading this chapter I had such high expectations about who Christopher Columbus was. I saw him as someone to be idled, some that is recognized in classrooms across the United States. When, in all actuality, he was a selfish and greedy killer. He took the lives of thousands of innocent Indians to find gold. Why is a man like this spoken so highly of in classrooms across the America? Why do we glorify a man who holds none of the values and morals that this Country was founded on?
It’s even more interesting to think about how America became such a great and independent country. Was it the same selfish greed the Columbus possessed? Did we follow in his footsteps? And if so, is it fair for us to criticize him when we all take for granted the freedoms we have without truly realizing how we got them?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)