Equal Is Not The Same
| By Bluejacket - Sep 26th, 2005 at 7:56 am EDT |
(Originally written at Advance To Boardwalk)
I am an English tutor to Korean man. It is really fun, and I get a charge out of helping him learn the English language. One of our lessons this week was about becoming a naturalized citizen. On the opening page was a picture of man being sworn in as a citizen. My student looked at the picture and declared he thought the man was of Korean or Chinese descent. I looked carefully at the picture (which I wish I could show you all). The man looked much closer to South or Central American descent.
This brings me to something I posted about before. Race, and how do we look at it. Where are race relations in this country? What is "racist", and what isn't? This incident got me thinking about how we view the world. By default, we try to relate to the world from a standpoint that is familiar to us. When we are talking to other people, we are going to assume that they are on the same page as we are, and if they are not, we are going to give the person a picture of who we are talking about. Race is a component to that.
Gender is not too much of an issue, since majority of names tend to be gender-specific. On occasion, you run into a Pat, Chris, or Toni. But, using race as a descriptive term is not necessarily racist. Describing an ethnicity is far different that using a racial slur. There is no place for racial slurs in polite conversation. In fact, some slurs have become almost acceptable. I remember at one point if you threw out the word "bitch" or "nigger", that was throwing down the gauntlet. You'd better be ready for a fight. Now, both words seem to have filtered into our vernacular. To be fair, "nigger" seems to have morphed into "nigga", but you get the point.
It is hard to say when people throw that detail into a story why they are doing it. Part of it could be giving the story some flavor, or recreate the situation that was occurring for the listener. I tend to lean towards this when people use more politically correct terms. If they are mocking or being flat out racist, you are going to hear it in the story.
In my head this is all still evolving. Somewhere, we became scared to make distinctions. While people are taking greater strides to assert their individuality on a cultural level, we are trying to sanitize this trend linguistically. Being equal does not mean being the same.
I am an English tutor to Korean man. It is really fun, and I get a charge out of helping him learn the English language. One of our lessons this week was about becoming a naturalized citizen. On the opening page was a picture of man being sworn in as a citizen. My student looked at the picture and declared he thought the man was of Korean or Chinese descent. I looked carefully at the picture (which I wish I could show you all). The man looked much closer to South or Central American descent.
This brings me to something I posted about before. Race, and how do we look at it. Where are race relations in this country? What is "racist", and what isn't? This incident got me thinking about how we view the world. By default, we try to relate to the world from a standpoint that is familiar to us. When we are talking to other people, we are going to assume that they are on the same page as we are, and if they are not, we are going to give the person a picture of who we are talking about. Race is a component to that.
Gender is not too much of an issue, since majority of names tend to be gender-specific. On occasion, you run into a Pat, Chris, or Toni. But, using race as a descriptive term is not necessarily racist. Describing an ethnicity is far different that using a racial slur. There is no place for racial slurs in polite conversation. In fact, some slurs have become almost acceptable. I remember at one point if you threw out the word "bitch" or "nigger", that was throwing down the gauntlet. You'd better be ready for a fight. Now, both words seem to have filtered into our vernacular. To be fair, "nigger" seems to have morphed into "nigga", but you get the point.
It is hard to say when people throw that detail into a story why they are doing it. Part of it could be giving the story some flavor, or recreate the situation that was occurring for the listener. I tend to lean towards this when people use more politically correct terms. If they are mocking or being flat out racist, you are going to hear it in the story.
In my head this is all still evolving. Somewhere, we became scared to make distinctions. While people are taking greater strides to assert their individuality on a cultural level, we are trying to sanitize this trend linguistically. Being equal does not mean being the same.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
It's a question of pragmatism v. idealism: we hold an united, race-blind society as an ideal, but the glaring racial disparities that still exist fifty years after Brown v. BOE compel us to act because they highlight the racial disparity. Catch-22.
What are you implying, then? That blacks born into two-parent, married families aren't doing well in our society? That college admissions officers, among the most liberal people in the country, are deeply racist against blacks and hispanics but not against Asian-Americans or Jews, and so that must be compensated for? Are you taking the slimy VDARE-esque position that blacks are inherently different genetically?
What exactly are you saying?
We've been "acting" in the manner you advocate for for the past forty years. Affirmative action, welfare, etc. It hasn't cured what ails much of the American black community. I care deeply enough about the cycle of poverty (especially since poverty tends to split around racial lines) that I'm not content to sit on my hands and keep trying failed policies for the next 40 years to see if it'll finally start working at some point.
New ideas are needed.