Monday, February 23, 2009

Talking Point III - Carlson

Dennis Carlson’s Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community looks at a number of issues. First his piece talks about the slandering and lashing out of straight America. For a long time in American culture homosexuality was viewed as bad, immoral, disgusting, and as a disease. Students and teachers deal with this issue every single day. From what the article talked about both these groups tend to keep silent whenever discussing queer issues, a major reason for this is to be avoidant of any harmful words or acts that might be imposed on them by their straight peers. Some of the stories of personal experience were pretty gruesome and hurtful. These stories dealt with students and teachers who had become victims of slandering and degrading. What I find outrageous is the amount of “political correctness” we as a nation constantly claim to have. Yet wherever you go I can say, personally, I am sure you’ll hear one straight person refer to either a straight friend of a gay person as a “faggot”. The looseness of this term has become shocking; a word that is completely degrading to straight people, especially men. As a child growing up if you were called a “faggot” it meant you were less of a man. Reading this article I was saddened to see how students have no problem being vocal about homosexuality in negative ways, were as some students said outright during class that homosexuality is gross. We as a nation talk about overcoming hurdles of racism and we have become more accepting as a nation (this is something I personally don’t agree with) but yet we have a tough time accepting people who are gay.

Another terrifying piece of statistics is the over whelming number of suicide victims who are gay. There are also a large number of homosexuals who are homeless and drug users. This becomes a scary insight into what a world of casting stones and judging of a group of people can do in a society. The inability to show compassion and acceptance by straights and the issues of an internal struggle with self acceptance causes youthful homosexuals to make decisions that can have drastic effects on their future, and can even lead to death. This of course doesn’t mean that everyone who is gay will have to deal with this internal torment and social degradation, but for some this is an unfortunate and inevitable outcome. It is nice to see a number of gay alliance groups and gatherings that help give adolescent homosexuals a place to find role models and gain confidence to take on problems of straight, judgmental groups that dominate the culture. One thing I always liked personally was the idea of Silence = Death, I have forever had the upmost respect for people of the gay culture who were willing to teach about gay culture, literature, icons, etc. and were willing to be themselves and be open with their sexuality; no matter what the consequences from close-minded America inflict on them.

One aspect I agree but also disagreed with was the idea of the queer culture through movies. Where as I understand the conflict between ideas of whether the movies are degrading and unrealistic or whether they are movies of triumphs and overcoming social turmoil. One thing I disagreed with was the slandering of the movie Bird Cage. Whereas I understand the idea that the movie makes it seem like there’s a coexistence and acceptance of homosexuals and straight people because both groups attend showings at a drag club, that it is, in fact not really underlining that there’s complete friendship and compassion between the two groups. The thing I didn’t agree with is that the movie puts into place that all gay men are flamboyant, feminine, and gaudy. I believe that the movie deals with a group of gay men who are a part of a sub-culture. I would like to believe that there are intelligent people in the world who understand that every gay person isn’t like that, but then again due to the ignorance of common people to this topic I wouldn’t be surprised otherwise.

One thing about this topic I always thought was interesting was in a documentary that I saw a couple years back which discussed the Matthew Shepherd incident. One person on the documentary made an interesting point about straight people and their feelings about homosexuals. That person said that many straight people claim that they accept gay people and don’t have a problem with them, but then follow with “but I don’t want them coming near me”. Doesn’t this seem to be a little bit hypocritical and also acts as an oxymoron? There’s a constant stigma about the queer culture that people have nothing on their minds but child molestation, multiple sexual partners, flamboyancy, etc. and that these ideas are ruining the fabric of the “American way of life”. So in the long run this idea of “partial-tolerance” is a complete joke and still inflicts a causation of out casting people of the queer community. Oddly enough while I write this piece I think about the article and how every way to label homosexuals is wrong and honestly I feel pretty stupid right now as well. It seems every word used to define the said group of people has been a derogatory term at one point or another, and I feel like I am being derogatory by using each one of the words. But maybe the reason those words and descriptions feel off setting is because when you get older and you see what those words really are used for it becomes a bit shocking and saddening to see loose words like “faggot”, “queer”, “homo”, etc. being used as if people who are gay aren’t even people at all. They’re animals who are disgusting, how can people be so cruel and not even think twice about it?

Finally what bothers me the most about this issue is sometimes I wonder if there’ll ever be co-existence and complete peace with the queer community. Other issues of discrimination such as race coincides and conflicts with the queer culture. Whereas both groups have to deal with issues of discrimination and slandering people who are of different races share some of the same interests with each other, one of those same interests in religion and religion preaches the idea of tolerance and acceptance between people. Yet a large number of churches slander and immortalize the queer culture, and because religion has a large influence on society they basically dictate how to react to specific things. I am not saying that all churches do this, but it is prevalent, I mean, look at the inequalities of law and justice for the queer community. I can only hope someday all of that will change.

Monday, February 16, 2009

Talking Points Pt. II

The Collier article was interesting in giving directions to help establish a bilingual classroom. One thing I liked about this article was setting up times when to speak different languages, and also the importance of not punishing a children or student if they “slip” into their own language while learning English. There is much importance to not allowing a student lose a connection with their own native languages while they are learning English, there has to be patience involved, especially for students who are older, since it’s a lot harder to learn a new language the older you get. I believe Delpit would also of course along with this instructional article call for the importance to teach these students the codes of power, where as we are not talking about “slang” but we are talking about a whole other language and an adjustment to learning not only English but the learning the laws and language of those who hold power in order to succeed to a fuller potential. Rodriguez helps to put a lot of this into perspective from his own personal experiences, when discussing the ideas of learning in a bilingual setting he says “So they do not realize that while one suffers a diminished sense of private individuality by becoming assimilated into public society, such assimilation makes possible the achievement of public individuality.”

I don’t really know how I feel about a lot of these issues. Where I feel that it is important to learn the language of the country you belong to so it is easier to fit into society, especially in this country, I don’t know if it’s a good idea to lose your “private individuality” as Rodriguez would put it at least from my personal experience. Both my mother and father are from overseas, my mother came from Regensburg Bavaria to New York during the 50s. My father came from Ireland to Rhode Island during the 80s. My mother and the rest of my family from her side forced themselves to speak English because they wanted to assimilate into the culture quickly. The reason they forced themselves to do this was because the fact they spoke German caused them to stick out quickly and since the end of World War II wasn’t too long ago they were singled out and slandered by a large number of Americans. This caused my mother and aunt, who stayed in America while the rest of my family returned to Germany years later, to forget a majority of the German that they were raised with.

My father interestingly was fluent in Gaelic for a long time, which is a form of language in Ireland that hasn’t been practiced for a long time until recently where the Irish government has been reinstituting it into the curriculum there. He now has forgotten a good amount of it, when I ask him why he never taught me the language he simply stated “Why would I? You’d have no one to speak it to.” I would become increasingly frustrated when my mother would give me the same excuse when I asked her why she wouldn’t raise me bilingual in German. But the situation was a little different for my mother, since she was pretty much forced to stop speaking German at a young age.

The fact that I wasn’t raised in a bilingual family is very frustrating to me. I tend to take pride in being the first generation to be born in America on both sides of my family and I wish I had something to show for that. When I hear people walking next to me speaking German I always do what Rodriguez talked about, I always turn around and smile at them. I can catch some words and understand a bit of it, I have my Aunt Ellen to thank for that, she returned to America from Bavaria when my mother was a little older, my mother and her two sisters did their best to keep a bit of the German existent in the family. I learned a few words here and there because whenever my family was together my mother and aunts would switch from English to German when they didn’t want us to hear some conversations, this is also something that Rodriguez talked about, German, for my family, was the private language.

Whereas I understand the importance of my mother’s side learning English to assimilate into the culture, I can’t help but feel a bit cheated by the idea of loosing that aspect of your culture. Collier talks about not losing touch with being able to speak two languages, I think that should be stressed more, it’s very important to me personally. For example, I’ve heard so many white people talk about how mad they get when people don’t speak English, I share the same sentiment with that group of whites, but I am not mad for the same reasons they are, I am mad BECAUSE other people can speak the language of their culture and heritage but I cannot. But I can’t blame my parents for this, I understand now as I am older about the importance of assimilation and how much this country stresses it from my own family’s background. But I personally think that a stress of learning English and the codes of power through language is essential, but people should not be forced to forget their own language, it’s a part of their own personal identity, and that’s just as important as their public identity.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Awkward Moments

So i have a friend who i have met at the gym i go to, he's a pretty nice guy and we work out together on nights we are both there. i've gotten to know him, we talk about providence, our lives, direction, music, working out, etc. The other night President Obama's conference about the deficit was on the televisions at the gym. My friend made a comment about how Obama was going to drag the country into shit. I, a curious guy who likes to know people's reasoning, asked him why he felt that way. his response was "because he's Muslim, dude"...

I was confused and a little bit annoyed by the statement. If i thought there could be one thing learned from the JFK presidency it's that those who are the commander and chief are acting on a notion of whats good for the people and the country and the TYPE of religion doesn't negate the views of whats good for the people...

i am not saying religion and government are NOT connected in our culture, what i am saying is that there's a stigma about what TYPE of religion. JFK got slack because he was catholic, where as most presidents before were christian, last time i checked both forms were a part of christianity (i.e. worship towards God and Jesus, Ten Commandments, etc. etc.) and, last time i checked, and i could be wrong, Obama doesn't practice Muslim faith, although he was raised that way (I will admit i am a bit ignorant to his religious background).

Basically what i am saying is that i am annoyed that some people become so focused on things like what a persons background of faith is as opposed to having faith in a nation and the hopes that there can be some political good to come out of their fellow American leader.

I don't get it...Christianity, Islam, Judaism...it's all apart of the holy trinity...so why so much separation...

Sometimes i think this country might fall apart at the seams if we ever elected a buddhist or a hindu...

*DISCLAIMER* apologizes if this is incoherent...i am practicing ranting and not focusing on collective thought.

Friday, February 6, 2009

Talking Points #1

1.Kozol/Goldberg

Kozol’s publications to me have always been both enlightening and absolutely and terrifyingly depressing. His power to show people a world that does exist in our own neighborhoods and puts it in our faces, whether we were unaware or aware of it. This piece from Amazing Grace is so depressing, but it’s topics Kozol is more than happy to educate the masses who are blind and or ignorant to the horrible living conditions of groups of people, mainly lower classes of minorities. The way some people are forced to live in this country is appalling and what’s absolutely disgusting is the facts that the U.S. Government’s “help” isn’t anywhere close to a saving grace. It’s bad enough that welfare is just a joke in this country. The only things that the government surpluses people with are clean needles and condoms to stop the spread of AIDS in the area. In these living conditions how are lower class minorities expected to rise up and overcome the problems that have been inflicted on them for so long?

Then you have Bernard Goldberg who puts Jonathan Kozol on his list of “110 People who are screwing up America”. Claiming that “Kozol is the patron saint of today's powerful liberal educational establishment.” (Goldberg, 294). What really makes me mad is the fact that Goldberg classifies Kozol as a “Liberal” because he likes to talk about things that are not addressed. From what Goldberg is saying people who follow this “rhetoric” are dooming America’s way of life. Who said that these people hate America? If anything many “Liberals”, better than that how about just PEOPLE in general are getting disgusted by American Government policies and politics. Have guys like Goldberg ever realized that maybe the ignorant slandering and a paranoid accusation is what “liberals” hate? Maybe people in general love where they live but just hate the people who are running things? How are Kozol’s descriptions of inner city youth going through hell everyday or talking about Chicago’s dilapidated school’s with no resources “ruining America”? Guys like Goldberg are those people who get defensive because writers like Kozol are, in a way, scaring them by letting general public know that there are less fortunate people out there and Goldberg is afraid people are going to blame America for that. The only thing people are blaming are the guys who hold the power who are turning a cheek to the pain and suffering that poor, minority, inner city kids are face every single day.

2.McIntosh/Muwakkil

In McIntosh’s article she talks about the innate, yet “unknown” privledge that white people are born with. She discusses the idea that there are things that people of the white persuasion don’t necessarily have to fear like people of different ethnic groups have to face. She also talks about the inequalities that women face compared to men, but she makes a point to talk about how even though she is a white woman who has to deal with inequalities between her gender and men that she has a higher advantage that people who are of either sex in a different racial, and class group. One of the statements on the list she wrote that I found interesting is when she states “I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.” (McIntosh, pg. 50) One thing I have noticed a lot, is when someone of a different race when speaking their mind, especially in a public political debate, that they are representing everyone in their race. I remember in one of my Psychology classes we watched “Eye of the Storm” in which after Martin Luther King Jr’s death the media kept saying things like “who’s going to represent them” or “who is going to speak for them”. The “them” in this class were African Americans. A plethora of news media personnel were acting that Martin Luther King Jr. represented and entire race in America, almost as if he was “the Black Representative of the U.S.”. Whites seem as if they don’t understand that it’s just a human speaking his or her mind, but that a person of a different race is talking about their race as a whole, regardless of sex and class.

Salim Muwakkil’s article is about how stastically whites think that African Americans have just as many job opportunities as whites. It was also mentioned that whites believe that racism and bigotry has declined greatly in America. In some aspects to me it has, but when I say that I mean that it’s not so much open racism and bigotry anymore. What I see people do, which is in my experience only done by white people. Whenever someone is going to make a racist joke they look around the room to make sure no one is in earshot, the joke is told, and then everyone laughs about it. This makes me think about how racism hasn’t really gone away in more than one sense. First off, the joke being told it is racist so therefore people are laughing at specific traits of other races. Secondly, this whole thing brings me back to Johnson’s article and how we don’t use specific racial terms and names, but yet we have no problem being blatantly racist in what is suppose to be a “harmless joke”. This newspaper article has some amazing statistics about how Whites are more likely to be called back for a job interview than African Americans, Whites who spent time in jail get jobs over African Americans who have never been to jail, etc. Both McIntosh and Muwakkil’s articles show that inherited White privilege is very prevalent in the lives of whites, yet they don’t think that they actually have an advantage, either that they ignorant to it, or that they just choose to ignore it.

All Together
Both of these articles tie me back to Goldberg’s book. With McIntosh and Muwakkil’s articles clearly stating that whites have a more of an advantage in American culture does that mean that they’re ruining America as well? Issues like this become less Liberal and less “Conservatism” and more of an issue of Whites don’t want to be called “racist” or “inherently powerful” so they get defensive and write articles about this. Now if someone like Kozol writes about people in terrible areas and tells their stories because those people would never be able to publish something that means Kozol is being too “Liberal”. Now if a person of a different race, let’s say African American talks about the inequalities he’s being “racist against whites” and he’s speaking for his entire race. This is why I get aggravated by high power white Americans who feel under attack and have to write ignorant, overly defensive things. To me, it’s very frustrating, or is that because I tend to identify with middle/lower working class people, and by statistics include whites and many people of color…