Being privileged in America, Just What the Heck Does that Mean?

Being privileged in America, Just What the Heck Does that Mean? I do not mean that sarcastically, but I truly want to know how being privileged is defined and who is defining it. As I have learned in class tonight, there were so many privileged subgroups, that it made me wonder, just how long is our list for subgroups of people that are not privileged?

So let me list a few of the privileged groups we listed and try to come up with some sort of classification system that identifies subgroups that are truly privileged and those that are not.

Privileged groups: Membership status, Attractiveness, Dialect, geographic, ethnicity, colorism, banding in organizations, corporate, handedness, smokers, athletically gifted, team membership, Hetero, Gender, ability, experience, Age, stature (body type), English Speaking, Blonde, Blue Eyed, Intellectual, Straight and Married, Class, Avid, Possessions, Job Status, Religion, etc. As one can see, this is just the start of list that seems to have no end. So can we assume that the list of those that are not privileged would be similar?

So here we go, here are a few groups that fit into the less then privileged groups: racism (isn't this colorism?), left handedness, non-smokers (really?) athletically challenged, physically challenged, non ambulatory, non verbal, deaf and hard of hearing, visually impaired, brown or black hair, Religion, Poor (low socio-economics), short, obese, homosexual, gay, brown eyed, English Learners, etc...

I've made my point, obviously there are so many underprivileged groups, that is makes it difficult to conceptualize the reality that many subgroups are marginalized. According to Bell Hooks, class is more then just a question of money, but it is also about values, attitudes, social relations, all that formed the bias that informed the way knowledge would be given and received. Conservative discussion of censorship and silencing, according to Karl Anderson is the "most oppressive aspect of middle class life." As a result students were force to be quiet and shut their mouths, unless they were endorsing whatever power existed. Some students who exhibited loudness, emotional outbursts and unrestrained laughter were considered unacceptable and vulgar disruptions of the classroom social order.

So is it a privilege to be able to speak our thoughts, as long as it is in agreement with those in power. However, we are oppressed if we dare speak in disagreement with the majority power. It amazes me that in a country where we have the freedom of speech, that same speech we choose to exercise can subject us to oppression. Go figure!

After race: an introduction

Tonights guess speaker, Dr. Lee Feigon was able to give us an interesting perspective on the history and transformation of China's educational system. I mention his presentation because it ties in with our readings for this week. During the Mau Dynasty, China's educational system endured a transformation from schools in urban settings to schools moving out to rural settings. This transformation of education into the agriculture society of China allowed China's student population to grow from 9 million in 1965 to 67 million in 1976. The enable China to compete in the global economy!



Unfortunately, China's educational system shifted back to the urban schools and left the farmer culture, where schools closed. As a result, China Gini Coefficient of 47. According to Dr. Feigon, such a coefficient rating can be dangerous and lead to insurrection. Quite interesting and a parallel that questions the Gini Coefficient is that the United States has the same Gini Coefficient of 47. According to Dr. Feigon, this rating has greater implications in a developing country where people in society are learning to read and write. During the Great Depression the United States had a Gini Coefficient of 42. So where is this leading us???



I wanted to use Dr. Feigon's presentation as a segway to our reading of "After Race: an introduction". According to our readings, economic exploitation has always been central to the emergence of racism. Whether it incorporated slavery or indentured servitude, racialized systems of labor perpetrated in Europe against immigrants, including the Irish, Jewish and Polish workers, as well as against indigenous populations around world (Darder & Torres, 2009). As a result, Darder and Torres are challenging us to refuse to accept racialized demarcations of raced or problem populations. They wants us to disconnect from "race" as it has been constructed in the past and look at race as an ideology on the lives of all people. Unfortunately, we have quite some time to reach that point. So, why is that?

Some of the answers that we learned about in our readings were related to "racial constructions". Once again, unfortunately our own U.S. Census system has perpetuated the racial demarcations of our present society. Our Census system currently utilizes 26 different classifications for measuring race. In 2000, "ethnicity" was added to cause even more confusion
(Darder & Torres, 2009). With that being said, how do we move on and grow from our own census system which forces us to make decisions based on their judgements of who we are? It is apparent that our own government must address the issue of perpetuating race after racism. Only then, can we move on as a nation of Americans, then a nation of many races and ethnicities.