1. I didn’t realize before reading how inequality is often discussed about who LACKS but not who GAINS. I suppose some of that makes sense when it comes to basic rights (i.e. Johnson’s “unearned entitlements”) but when it comes to “conferred dominance” it’s not spoken about as much.
2. I thought it was interesting that the authors noted that some Whites want to be in a post-racial world because they feel that personally they are not racist, and it would be uncomfortable for them to acknowledge that they still benefit from racist structures because they might have to give up some comforts to be truly anti-racist.
3. I like the idea of disrupting white normativeness by naming it. I think similar strategies can be used for gender roles — naming and questioning (“and why aren’t boys allowed to cry?”) sparks curiosity and the inevitable conclusion is always realizing that it’s all bogus. Bad Bunny’s halftime show disrupted white normativeness by centering Puerto Rican culture, hence so many White people being made uncomfortable. Even the fact that we don’t usually capitalize White is a way of making Whiteness the norm.
Argument Statement: The authors argue that the opposite of racism isn't colorblindness but rather "color insight" — naming and acknowledging the continued racism in society and actively combating it instead of passively focusing on individual purity of thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment