In Response to Synagogue Explosion, Sara Ceraso

I read over the article and also find it very interesting. Ever since 9/11 it is hard for us to think that a building such as one for religious purposes would have been blown up for any other reason than discrimination. It is sad to think that this is what our world has come to. I also believe they are stereotyping, although not in regards to race. From the article it seems that they are pointing the blame on a homeless man. But why? They state that he would have no clear motive. But is it because of the reputation we give homeless people today?

synagogue bombing

This attack happened yesterday. At first it was thought to be a bomb, then an accident, now it's back to being a bomb. The target must have been picked out, at least that is what people are saying. In any case it is an interesting read, and because of the building involved ties in with our discussions. Especally when you look at the fact that people probably think it is religiously motivated without even knowing for sure.

Here is the link: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/04/09/3541060/investigators-search-for-man-believed.html

It is a bit short on information right now, as this did just happen.

White Comedians

I just attended a show at the Seneca Allegeny Casino for one of my favorite comedians Ron White. I paid special attention to his performance because of what we've discussed on class about minorities being allowed to make fun of their own race, I wanted to see who he "picked" on. Ron left no one out he mentioned Latinos, african americans, fat people, special needs people...you name it he talked about it and everyone laughed their butts off including me.

His opening act, Alex Raumondo was mexican and his bit focused on his heritage and also kentucky rednecks.

I just thought it was interesting that most comedians can have free reign to make fun of minorities and its all good.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.8

Mississippi voters

On Thursday Public Policy Polling published results from a poll they had conducted in Mississippi about political issues.The poll focused on republican voters. One of the questions they had asked was if Interracial marriage should be legal. A shockingly high 46% of the people that were polled said that it should be illegal and another 14% stated that they were unsure. To me this was an incredibly high percentage of the voters. Though it is not the first time in recent news that I have heard about a distaste for miscegenation. Last year during the congressional elections it came out that the republican candidate in Westchester NY, Jim Russel, had come written a paper stating his stance against both the Jewish community and miscegenation. Specifically miscegenation in media, like teen movies O and Save the Last Dance. It seems odd to me that in 2010 and 2011 there is such a vocal hatred for interracial couples and marriages to the point where some people think that it should be illegal. It makes you wonder exactly how far America has come in becoming a more racially tolerant country that 46% of republicans in Mississippi believe that interracial marriages should be illegal.

Racial opression

A few days ago while I was stumbeling around online I came upon this website. http://arewhitepeopleraciallyoppressed.com/

The website itself consist mostly of a Two minute thirty second video clip of stand up from the comedian Louis CK. In the clip he discusses the advantages of being both white and a man in today's society and that historical dominance white people have had around the world. He then goes on to discuss how while it would be possible to go to any time in the past and still be in the dominant group he would not like to go to the future. In his eyes instead of the future being a place where all races lived in equality it is a place where white people would be subjugated and mistreated due to their past actions. I thought it was an interesting way to interpret white dominance of society.

Illegal Immigration

I think that immigration will forever be a controversial issue in the United States. Just like we have discriminated against the Irish, the Chinese, and many other ethnic groups, we continue the pattern in present times. Now our focus is Latinos, specifically Mexicans. Just this past year, Arizona passed a very controversial bill, and states like Texas and New Mexico have threatened to do the same. This bill would make it illegal for immigrants to not carry their immigration documents with them a crime. It also would allow police to detain immigrants easier than it has been able to do in the past. Many have criticized this legislation due to the possibility that it will encourage discrimination. I read an article in the New York Times in which a Cardinal from Los Angeles related this to Nazism, in which Jews were forced to carry their identification with them at all times. While this reference is a little extreme, it just shows how passionate some are in their convictions. Here is a link to the NYT article- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/politics/24immig.html.

While this legislation is currently being stalled in court, this shows just how messy illegal immigration is getting in the United States. Does anyone have any thoughts on the Arizona Illegal Immigration bill?

Staci Becker Post #18

Immigrating

Immigration is a big problem in our country today. I do believe America is a place that people should be able to come to and be able to start a fresh new life but I also believe that it should be done legally. There are too many people coming into the country that are doing it illegally and that is why the border patrol is at an all time for hiring new policemen. On top of that they are at an all time high for deaths and injuries as well. If people want to come in the United States they should do it the right way. The United States is already becoming over populated and we are using way to many resources as it is which is destroying the environment. On top of that English is soon going to not be the number one speaking language in America and Spanish is going to take over. Everybody deserves a shot to start over but do it the right way and go through the process all the other legal immigrants went through and as long as the country is not going to far with over population we should allow these people their shot at a good life.

Pete

Deportation

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/04/09/us-about-to-deport-gay-man-to-ugandawhere-he-is-likely-to-be-killed

I think this is a telling example of why allowing more immigration to America is so important. If only there was some way we could work with illegal immigrants on a case by case basis to find out why it is they are interested in coming here, and having some sort of list based on importance (kind of like a transplant list). If that makes any sense whatsoever.

Victoria Rader post 17

Immigration Issues

I agree with what a few other people have said about immigration and how we should really just let others come here so they can strive for a better life. I also understand the problem that arises with just letting anyone come here. If we let everyone in, I think we would eventually run out of space for everyone. Someone else raised the point (I'm sorry, I can't remember who) about whether or not we have a problem with illegal European aliens, and I though that was really interesting. In my American Literary Roots class, we have been talking about the founding of the country and who has been welcome in America. I recently did a presentation on one piece by J. Hector St. John De Crevecoeur ("Letters from an American Farmer") that frequently mentioned how the Europeans would do wonderful in America. I think it is really telling that he specifies Europeans and not others. I think this is an idea that still rings true today in this country. White Europeans are welcome here, others? Not so much.

Victoria Rader Post 16

The word Racist

I've been wracking my brain all week about why this work strikes such a cord with me. When I first read the passage in the book it really bothered me, after we talked about it in class and I heard all of the different sides it lessened quite a bit but I still can't figure out why one little word can cause me to get so angry and cause such emotion. Throughout this week the word has popped out at me several times. Channel 4 had an article about a man who was arrested in Niagara Falls for again breaking the law again after already being in trouble for posting a "whites only" sign a few years ago. On a funny site I frequent there was a short video with an animated clip under it and it was titled "That's Racist" I guess its wierd that the word is so common place now, I felt that I was the only one that was offended by it.

Jen Post #17

illegal immigration

A topic that many of my classmates have brought up is immigration. Illegal versus legal, how most people seem alright with legal immigrants, and then have problems with illegal immigrants. Illegal immigration is something that I have always gone back and forth about. I’m not perfect and can admit that I have had thoughts that if a person wants to come over to the U.S. that they should do it legally. I still think that if people want to come over that they should initially try to legally. But I understand that this is something that is easier said than done. I know that it is not as easy as it sounds, and that many people are refused to come here legally. I also understand and realize that there are cases where people have no choice but to come here, and use any method. That the only way they could support or help their family is to come to the U.S. I know personally if I had a choice to make a better life for myself and my family, and my only choice was to illegally go into a country that I most likely would. I think that especially if people have exhausted every method to get here legally, how can we blame them for doing it illegally? It is not like they have an easy life here, we have talked about how prejudice America is. That alone should tell people, that their life they left behind was worse. Also I have issues with penalizing people who have come here illegally. Especially if they have an established life here and have lived here for a long time, how can we just uproot a person’s life that has every right to live here as we do?

#18

What color is love?

A couple days ago I happened to watch a movie called “What color is love?” I happened to look it up and found out it was based on a true story. It reminded me of some of the topics we have been talking about so I thought it might be interesting to bring it up. This case happened in Canada, but the topics in it, relate to our class. It was a custody case that was taken all the way to the Canadian Supreme Court. In it a white women slept with a black married basketball star, and the women ended up having a baby. In a trial court, the women won custody of her child (court thought she was a capable mother). But the man decided to appeal it, and he won. One of the issues brought up was the race of the child. He was interracial, but he looked more like his black father, then his white mother. The appeal court thought that this should be taken into consideration. That the black father and his black wife would be able to help the child with stereotypes and racism that he would encounter. The mother, applied to the Supreme Court and they over ruled the appeal court, and she got full custody. The question that this movie asked is “What color is love?” it made me think, would the black family be able to relate to the child better? And should that mean they should raise him? How could the women deal with racism that her child would incur? And then does it matter? If the mother loves her child, should it matter that she might not be able to relate as good as the father? The answers I came up with are, yes race is an issue, and yes the father might be able to better relate to the child. But that does not mean that the child should be taken from his mother. That race should not be so important that it would take a child away from his mother. That by the court of appeals siding with the father, in part by race issues, that it was being prejudiced against the mom. To me also, if the Supreme Court would of agreed, would they be condemning interracial relationships. That they would be saying that only one of the parents could relate better to the child? That by the child resembling a minority, that the mother could not raise the child as well as the father he resembled? I guess I just feel that race should not be as important that it is in many cases.

(I’m not trying to judge if the child would be better off with the mother or the father. What I’m saying is that it should not be determined because of the child’s race or looks.)

#17

Just White?

In class the topic of all white people being racist was quite a controversial topic. When I brought the quote up I wanted to put emphasis on "white" not denying the fact that all whites were racist but that maybe it was more than just "white people". I wanted to see what people believed and if they thought what I was thinking, and that is that ALL people are racist, no matter color. All people can commit some sort of act either intentionally or unwillingly. How you come back from that is how you may define yourself, but I believe that every person in this world makes mistakes and in some ways makes racists or discriminatory comments without intending to hurt or attack somebody. We live in a color filled world and people are just pointing out the white aspect of it instead of seeing everything else that is going on with it.


Pete Ferguson

Stereotypes, Sara Ceraso

I was just looking through the internet about race and stereotypes and this link came up.

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-racial-stereotypes.php

Yet another definition of the term 'Racist'

In class we discussed Wildman's definition of racism, which in turn meant that all white people were in fact racist because they benefited from a larger racist societal system. This caused quite a stir -- something that I feel the author did purposefully. But overall we concluded, that by her new definition of the word, all people were in fact racist.
I though of this while i was watching an episode of the show "Gangland". During an interview with a white supremacist gang member, who was in prison, the member openly admitted to being a racist with pride. However he stated that to him, being a racist meant that you love your own race so much, that you are willing to kill members of other races ensure the preservation and prosperity of his own race. I had never heard of racism meaning a love for your own race before, at least in a modern context -- but it is a real twisted/disillusioned love. Another thing is, we spoke in class about how strange it would be for someone to say they are proud of being white. Well, that is exactly what this man did -- and it really was quite bazaar to hear someone say it and be completely serious. It was just an interesting take on racism that I had never heard before. I certainly do not agree with it whatsoever, but from this man's view on racism, you can see how violence and hatred can quickly become a factor in extreme racial pride. Sad, but true.

Meredith Cotter, Post #19

In Response to Frank's...

I think that song is very interesting. Also, the line that Frank pointed out was one that stuck out to me as well. I understand that all of our discussion about white privileged were not necessarily meant to be a personal on attack to white people as individuals, although sometimes the essays we read could be construed that way -- I mean we are human and are prone to take some things to heart. However I really identified with the line "It's human nature to want to be a part of something different especially when your ancestors are European Christians." It almost seems as though being white, leaves us with nothing to be a part of, and even a lack of identity. White shouldn't mean 'white' as this bland and colorless 'norm'. We are all different, have different backgrounds and heritages that everyone should be proud of, but after reading White Privilege, all of that gets thrown away (because white = evil) and suddenly the idea that my grandfather left Italy when he was nine to get out of a fascist state means nothing because it gets shoved in the category of "European Christians". The essay by Dyer in section one of the book stated how "variations on white ethnicity (though some are more securely white that others), and the examination of them tends to lead away from a consideration of whiteness itself." Well of course it does, because its breaking apart this large 'white' category into more individualized ethnic experience, which would equal individualized white identity. As pessimistic as this seems, this song, and a number of our class discussion, leave me with the confusion of a displaced person. I admit that I have had a number of privileges just for the mere fact that I am white. But, being white has also led to the whitewash of individuality, and the demeaning and diminishing of ancestor pride, which as been replaced with shame and guilt.

Meredith Cotter, Blog #18

White European Christians BLog #19 Frank DIMaria

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp_lW7yYgiM

So, I found this rap song about a whit person rapping ha. But I thought that the song was very interesting because it talks about a white person assimilating to a predominately rooted black style of music and the fact that rapping from a white perspective is illegitimate because he doesn’t understand the trueness that hip-hop was founded on. The song is called white privilege and he talk about the concepts that we have been discussing in class. There is a line though that I really like. He says something like “its scary to acknowledge the benefits of our white privilege cause its human nature to want to a part of something different especially when your ancestors are European Christians.” This line is so true and applicable to what we’re talking about in class. But, I wanted to get the classes opinion. I encourage you to research the lyrics. I am sorry I can’t give them. I can’t find a site that will let me copy and paste them, but never the less listen and think about what he’s really saying about being white.

 

I am Gonna Teach, Not Classify BLog Post #18 Frank DiMaria

I have thought a lot about the idea of white teaching minority students, as I myself want to teach in the Bronx. But, I just cannot agree with the statement that White teachers cannot connect with minority students. If we were truly embracing multiculturalism in our classrooms, which public education says it does which is false, a connection between minority kids and white teachers wouldn’t be a problem. Here’s the thing, ill be able to connect with my students because our relationships will be based on the individual rather than race. I will build a community in my class and I will connect with my students because I will care about who they are as individuals rather than as minorities. I can’t stand the idea that I wont be able to connect with my students because I am white. I understand race is an issue, but here’s the thing, my focus isn’t about race, it’s about making a true community of learners. Another problem is that multiculturalism is such a misused and thrown around term that its lost it value and true meaning. It’s a term embracing pseudo-equality especially in education, which makes white teachers look like they are doing a good job of teaching minority students while still becoming a authoritative figure in front of the class. I feel like if we focus all our attention on ‘well he’s white so he can’t see from a black perspective’ so many problems are generated that learning isn’t even an element of the classroom anymore. And yeah maybe I don’t understand every aspect of a minority student’s life, but they also don’t know every dimension of me. I am not going to look at my black students as black students; I am going to look at them as individuals.

Students and Race

I've been learning in many of my education classes we have been learning about diversity in the classroom.  One statistic that really sticks out in my mind is the fact that even though the student population is becoming more diverse teachers are becoming less diverse with 98% of all teachers being predominantly white.  Since the classrooms are becoming more racially diverse and most teachers are white, there is little chance for student to be able to connect with their teachers.  The minority students don't see potential role models in their teachers because being a teacher seems to these students as a job that only caucasian people can fulfill. Statistics show that students in minority races aren't pursuing a future in education.  This can only lead to the problem getting bigger and bigger leaving the white teacher to minority student increase higher and higher as time goes on.

Another take on Affirmative Action

Affirmative action is something that is very controversial, which is quite understandable. What you cannot deny is that it has made the only serious effort to ensure equality in important aspects of life such as education and careers. I think that we must all recognize this. Although it is not perfect, I believe that it is a step in the right direction. It has encouraged other organizations to review their own standards, which produced such new norms such as the Rooney Rule. It made those in power recognize that times were changing, and hopefully encouraged more open minds. Many were questioning in class on whether this law should still be in place. Do we really need this rule now? Are we beyond such discrimination in education and jobs that we can comfortably get rid of the rule? I think that we are definitely in a better place than we were, but we still have a long way to go. Instead of abandoning such legislation (which some newspaper articles I read want to do) we should try to modernize it and make it fit in with today's issues. We must still confront racism and poverty, and I believe that using affirmative action will be affective in this.

Staci Becker Post #17

What are we really against?

I think the discussion so far about illegal immigrants is very interesting because as Rebecca and Angela have said, many immigrants are here working, but are also living in fear of deportation and losing their families. Rebecca talked about how she thinks these immigrants deserve human rights, but many taxpayers don’t want to pay for these rights, especially since they’re here illegally. America is made up of immigrants who were given a chance to make a better life; some who have been here for hundreds of years, while others are just coming over. I wonder if the countries these immigrants are coming from have something to do with why people are against them so much? If it were millions of European immigrants, would people be more likely to give them a chance? I understand many people don’t like it that these immigrants are illegal, but I think that everybody should be given a chance to become a U.S. citizen. I also agree that there should be an easier way for these workers to become a citizen, especially for people who are here working, and only trying to make a better life for their family.

Laura Kalinowski Post 18

A Thought About Racism

I was talking to my best friend a few days ago, and telling her about the book on White Privilege I have been reading for this course. My friend is Creo, Cherokee Indian, Puerto Rican, Chinese, Black, Indian, and Mongolian. She said that she hears the most racial remarks from black people, more so than whites or any other group - she says that black people "don't like her." On the other hand, I find the most racism coming from white people so I think it is interesting to think about where racism comes from for myself individually, and how it varies from person to person, experience to experience.

- Josh Steffen

Response to “White Privilege and Interracial Relationships”

I think Chris’s post is really interesting, but it also makes me sad because it’s 2011 and there is still a stigma to interracial relationships, and it’s time people got over it. It’s also interesting to think about not only the privileges white people have, but situations in which they are taken away, and what Chris described with the bank is a great example. I feel that what happened to him and his wife was ridiculous and uncalled for. What surprises me even more, was the fact that the teller at the bank knew them, and decided not to cash those checks whenever Chris was alone or accompanying his wife.

-Josh Steffen

Myths

Someone posted a website about myths dealing with immigration and the other day while I was looking around the internet about things on Affirmative Action I found a list of myths that dealt with that topic. I tried posting the myths in here but for some reason either the blog or the website won't let me but I here is the link for you to go in and look if you want. http://www.understandingprejudice.org/readroom/articles/affirm.htm It is an interesting way to look at this topic that some may but others may not. It takes each myth and discusses as to why it is. This gives those an opportunity that may not have a certain opinion on the subject but could help them take a deeper look into this influencial policy we have in today's society. -Mary

A Post-Racial America

We have come a long way since the dawning of America. A country founded upon and perpetuated by a system of bigotry and exploitation of many less technological advanced countries has transformed into what it is today in merely four or five generations. Now by no means do I intend on glorifying America, we still live under a transparant sheet of racial tension. People are still discriminated on based on their color and customs, and resources are still unfairly allocated across all races, but things have improved vastly from America's inception. Especially when you incorporate our near 250 year existance in terms of World history. This notion leads to me think about the idea of a post-racial America. Will America eventually become the "melting pot" that was originally intended? If inter-racial breeding becomes a social norm (which it basically already is), will all our colors mix together, to gray? Are we heading towards a nation of singular language, singular custom, singular religion, singular everything? Or is this totally farfetched? I personally don't believe it is. Like I stated above, 250 years is a very short period of time in terms of how long humans have been around. If we keep progressing in such a radical fashion, I see this as an eminent possibility. Either that or the apocalypse...Something's gotta change. -Samuel Roux, Week 11 Post 1

10 Myths About Immigration

Here is another article that I read for my education class, that I think is something interesting to bring up. The 10 myths are:

1. Most immigrants are here illegally.


2. It's just as easy to enter the country legally today as it was when my ancestors arrived.


3. There is a way to enter the country legally for anyone who wants to get in line.


4. My ancestors learned English, but today's immigrants refuse.


5. Today's immigrants don't want to blend in and become "Americanized".


6. Immigrants take good jobs from Americans.


7. Undocumented immigrants bring crime


8. Undocumented immigrants don't pay taxes but still get benefits.


9. The United States is being overrun by immigrants like never before.


10. Anyone who enters the country illegally is a criminal.

The article goes on to explain each myth and why it isn't true, and if anyone wants to read the article, the link to it is: www.tolerance.org/magazine/number-39-spring-2011/10-myths-about-immigration. I really liked this article because a number of these thing I believed myself before reading it. It is important for everyone to read stuff like this and not just believe everything you hear, which is something I am guilty of at times. It proves a lot of what I once thought wrong, and makes you realize how ignorant you can be at times.

Brigit May, Post 18

Take a Walk in Someone Elses Shoes

Reading what Angela and Rebecca said made me think about an article I read this semester for my multicultural education class. We read an article about an 8th grade teacher who asked her class "what is going on with immigration today?" and "how do you feel about it?". After a short discussion it was clear that the class had come to a general consensus; legal immigrants are good, and illegal immigrants are "very bad". Her students began making comments that "they're taking jobs" "they're terrorists" "they bring crimes and gangs". Clearly at this young age, these children are more than likely repeating what they have heard in public, on the news, or from their family members. The teacher decided to show a documentary to the students that was made by Morgan Spurlock (the man who made "Super Size Me"). The documentary/reality show was called "30 Days", and in this particular episode, a man named Frank who is an American working for border patrol on the Mexican border as a Minuteman, agrees to live with a family of undocumented immigrants for 30 days. As you can imagine, Frank holds strong political views that illegal immigrants should be sent back to wherever it is they came from. During Frank's time with the family, he grows close to them, but his feelings do not change on the issue. That is until Frank visits the brother and parents of the family, who still live in Mexico, and who they haven't seen in 12 years. After seeing the horrible living conditions that the family in Mexico lives in, Frank's beliefs on immigration are quickly altered, and he now doesn't blame the family for taking their chances and trying to escape to a better life. Frank later says that he may not want to be a Minuteman anymore. After the teacher showed this documentary to the class, their views immediately changed, and they became much more sympathetic to these people, who days before they were calling "illegals" and "terrorists". These 8th graders now saw for themselves what this one family had to go through, and now were able to form their own opinions on the matter of immigration, and not simply regurgitate what they had overheard their parents saying. It goes to show just how impressionable young people are. As teachers we need to give our students the chance and the knowledge to form their own opinions. If everyone could just take a walk in someone elses shoes, I think that would be a major step towards bettering the racial and ethnic relations within the United States. Brigit May, Post 17

Reponse to “Fear of Raids and Losing Contact”

I really liked Angela’s post. Personally, I think I never really looked at the hardships illegal immigrants have to go through. These people are looking for a better life for their families. It is just unfortunate that many illegal immigrants receive bad reputations of taking our jobs and bringing in crime. I thought Marger’s section on illegal immigration was very interesting. I like that he pointed out that many of the jobs taken over by illegal immigrants are seen as undesirable. In the article Angela posted I thought that this quote was very interesting: “Under U.S. law, children born in this country to illegal immigrants are American citizens and cannot be deported.” I guess this is not anything I have every thought about. That has to be a very scary thing for parents to worry about.
On the other hand, both Marger and this article points out that illegal immigrants sometimes receive tax-payer benefits except for in cases like Georgia where strict laws were passed. I am not sure how I feel about this, on the human rights side of things I believe they need these benefits but as a tax-payer it’s hard to swallow. I think the only solution would be making it easier for immigrants to gain citizenship, especially those families who are just trying to make a better life for themselves.

Giving Everybody a Chance

I think this discussion about the Rooney rule is very interesting because it seems like nobody was against this, whereas some people in the class were against affirmative action/quotas. I also agree that the Rooney rule is a positive rule that “levels the playing field” for minorities who may not otherwise have an opportunity. As Chris mentioned in class, something like 78% of players in the NFL are minorities, with very few in higher positions. These figures show that there is discrimination in the league because you know these minorities are good players, yet aren’t being represented in higher positions. I don’t see how people could be opposed to this rule because they’re not being forced to hire them, only give them a chance. I don’t see how giving people a chance could be something negative because as mentioned in class, a few minorities were hired because of this rule, who otherwise may not have even had an interview. I also agree that this is a positive side of affirmative action that should be implemented in other job positions in society. I think people would benefit from having to give minorities a chance because people who normally discriminate would be required to give them an opportunity, and hopefully change their views. It seems like a small step in the right direction to try and get rid of discrimination in the hiring world. Even though some people may interview candidates just to meet the requirement, it seems like it’s a way to start “leveling the playing field” so everybody can have an equal chance.

Laura Kalinowski Post 17

The exception

In class on Tuesday we began to talk about how there is very little diversity among faculty in schools. I attended a diverse school district and after hearing about everyone else in the calsses schools, I must say that my school doesn't fit the norm. My schooling from elementary up was filled with a diverse faculty. I have had African American teachers, counselors and principals, Chinese teachers, Hispanic teachers, Indian teachers and that's just what I can come up with off the top of my head. I have talked with other people plenty of times about the diversity of their student body, but the topic of the diversity amongst faculty I have never discussed. In this I never got an understanding of what other schools staff was comprised of. I guess I just always assumed that the faculty of a school was a pretty good representation of the student body, apparently I was entirely wrong and my school district was rare. I've always felt privileged to have attended a school district that had a highly diverse student body. Now looking back on my district, I realize that I was privileged to have a diverse staff as well. Growing up with role models of all different races definitely helped to shape my views on race. Seeing the diversity among the staff allowed myself and my peers to feel we could make something of ourselves regardless of our race. As great of an experience my school gave me through diversity among the staff, I do know now that we were the exception and most schools are not as lucky to have that diversity. I dont know the exact solution to this problem could be, (maybe using something like the Rooney rule would help) but I do know that something needs to be done to increase the diversity among school faculty. Schools are such a large influence on a child's life and without being around diversity, their personal development is hindered.
-Ryan Fleming blog post#18

Who's interviewed?

Until Chris discussed it in class on Tuesday, I was completely unaware of the Roony rule. This rule to me seems like an excellent way to address racial issues in the job market. The only question I have is, Who chooses the minority that is going to be interviewed? I don't really know much about the NFL and was unsure if the people doing the interviewing are the people who pick the minority to be interviewed. If this is the case, then that is the only problem I could see in the rule. It just seems that if a team is set on not hiring a minority, they could just pick the least qualified minority to interview and use that as their reasoning for not hiring. If the teams hiring can do this, then people can find a way around the purpose of the rule. However, if the teams are interviewing the most qualified minority candidate, then the purpose of the rule is being met and is beneficial to minorities. If these teams are choosing proper candidates and are giving a fair opportunity to the minorities interviewing then this rule doesn't seem to have any flaws and I don't understand how anyone could ever see it as a bad thing. I actually think they should maybe increase the number of minorities required to be interviewed, to continue in the strive to create equal opportunities.
-Ryan Fleming blog post #17

Today's Policies

As of late we have been discussing the topic of Affirmative Action. I think that this is a good policy to have as long as it is managed and used correctly. Leveling the playing field is definitely something that we need to work on as a society and by have this legislation it starts the process. Unfortunately this program will not solve the problems of inequality in many issues. With that being said it Affirmative Action certainly helps the cause. It is important to remember that the inequality is deeply rooted in the continual progress of our society. Which brings along another topic we have spoke about, that being white privilege. Things such as white privilege are topics that need to be addressed and figured out before things will get any better when it comes to equality. The difficulty when it comes to this subject is that most people are unaware of the privilege that they have. Therefore it will be a long process before there are huge strides but it is important to start the process to get it in the works. Mary

White Privilege and Interracial Relationships.

As we have been reading sections of the Rothberg text I have had an open dialogue with my wife who is White about white privilege. I have discussed numerous readings with her and she has even read some of them herself. During the course of our discussions my wife said something that I found to be very compelling. She said to me that she is very aware of the benefits that she has received throughout her life because of the color of her skin. She also said that since being married to me in certain social environments people look down upon our relationship and that the same privleges she enjoyed can be taken away without realizing it due to nature of our relationship.

For example, we own a house and my mortage is through HSBC bank. We both have HSBC accounts. My wife sells stuff on EBAY to supplement her income as a teacher. She receives third party checks all the time and routinely takes them to the bank to cash them. HSBC has a policy where they are not suppose to cash third party checks but they always let my wife cash them anyway. I have tried to cash third party checks and they have never let me cash them ever.

The policy states that you are only allowed to deposit third party checks and wait for them to clear. A few weeks ago I went to the bank with my wife because we had business to attend to. She brought along a couple of her EBAY checks and went to the same teller that always cashes her checks. However, with me standing by her side and her holding my hand the teller refused to cash her checks and read back the policy to her about third party checks.

This is what my wife was talking about. This is a great example of a situation where her white privilege was revoked because of her relationship with me.

Rooney Rule

Adding to what Rebecca said in her post. I also think the Rooney Rule is a great piece of legislation and what I like about it the most is the whole idea of opportunity that it presents to those individuals who might not have these opportunities otherwise. The Rooney Rule is a great example of an affirmative action policy that is positive. With that being said there is still a large group of people out there opposed to it. Its hard for me to wrap my head around the backlash towards the rule when it clearly presents a number of positives which clearly out weigh the negatives.

Rooney Rule

Take a look at this article: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/12/28/kremer-redskins-interviewed-gray-to-comply-with-rooney-rule/
After reading this I wonder if the Rooney Rule goes far enough. The author explains that some coaches view interviewing minority candidates as a “chore.” Like Chris mentioned in class, many coaches interview “token” minority candidates. I do not know how the Rooney Rule could possibly go any further without being considered reverse discrimination. Also, as Chris mentioned, “token” candidates do sometimes get hired; therefore, the Rooney Rule is effective by putting those candidates in the interview position. Overall, I think there is a really fine line between going too far and not going far enough. I do not think that any affirmative action plan can totally satisfy anyone. What I do like a lot about the Rooney Rule is that it emphasizes opportunity. This rule gives minorities an opportunity to present themselves and hopefully, if the candidate is qualified and the hiring committee is not racist, they will have an opportunity to hold a high position within the NFL. I think as far as affirmative action goes, this is probably the most positive policy I have heard of. Even though the author of this article disagrees, I think if the Rooney Rule were to enforce any more affirmative action policy it would cause unbelievable backlash.

Affirmative Action

I think that in theory affirmative action could really help reduce white privilege. Unfortunately, quota systems like Pete mentioned often give affirmative action a bad rep. In my opinion, affirmative action is meant to level the playing field. Whites often have a leg up because they have a strong history of family ties, workplace affiliation, school affiliation, and they do not usually face discrimination. Affirmative action could work really well if it was solely used to get minorities on the same hiring level as white males. It would be extremely hard to regulate affirmative action in this way, which is why it rarely works out and leads to misconceptions.

Herms and Merms. Sara Ceraso

Last week in class we discussed the idea of the "5 sexes" and it really got me thinking about an episode of the show "House." There was a child who was born with both male and female dna, and the parents had to decide which one to raise their child as. In the end they had chosen the "wrong one." It also made me think about discussions I have had in my Theories and Methods class last semester dealing with feminist issues. Many people use the words female and woman interchangeably, which in fact is not valid. Biological sex refers to being male or female, that can't be changed. Gender is labeled with man or woman, which is socially constructed. Why is it that "women" end up "in the kitchen?" Because society has made it that way. She isn't in the kitchen because she was born female. It's a difficult process to explain, but relates back to the idea that most things are socially constructed and defined, included gender, race, and ethnic groups, etc.

Affirmative Action. Sara Ceraso

So I'm a little late on the blog posts for this week, but I figure better late than never.

I wanted to continue talking about the idea of affirmative action during job interviews, and other things that set racial quotas. Sometimes the reason why I don't talk in class is because I don't want to offend anyone and I don't want people to take what I mean to say in the wrong context. I completely disagree with affirmative action in this case. In fact I don't really know where I agree with it. Yes I understand a lot of stuff has gone on in the past against racial and ethnic groups, but if we keep trying to "pay back" for what our "white privileged ancestors" have done, wouldn't that just keep the cycle going? When is enough enough? In the case of applying for a job, I think they application should be more blind. It reminded me of how one of the Professors grades exams. She makes us write out name on the backs so that she grades our papers before knowing who wrote them. If you do this during the job interviewing process, I don't see how the write man/woman for the job wouldn't get it. If all the people that are best qualified happen to be black, then they just happen to be black. Or if the only people qualified happen to be mainly women, then that's the way it should be.

Creating a bigger divide

The topic of Affirmative action is a commonly discussed subject. I am sure that all of us have discussed the subject many times prior to our class the other day and have all formed our opinions on the matter. Personally I think there are many benefits to affirmative action, yet in a way I feel as though it is just creating another problem in itself. In using affirmative action, aren't we just placing more of an emphasis on race and gender? If we are trying to break down these barriers and "level the playing field" then using race and gender to fill quotas or determine who gets a job or accepted into college, is just making the playing field even more divided. If there were a way to just leave race and gender out entirely that would be the best way to create more equal opportunities, but seeing how that is in most way impossible, the question of how to be level the playing field remains. I don't really know how we can change the root of the problem, I just feel that affirmative action is just an attempt to improve things while making matters worse at the same time.
Ryan Fleming blog post#16

Heterosexual Privilege Checklist from the Queers United Blog

Hi everyone,

Here is the link to the blog that I mentioned in class, in which the authors took inspiration from Peggy McIntosh and compiled a heterosexual privilege checklist.

http://queersunited.blogspot.com/2008/10/heterosexual-privilege-checklist.html

Best,
Jeff