McIntosh's article on white privilege was really interesting because some of the things she mentioned I have noticed and some I have not. The point on flesh-colored bandages and make-up really only applying to fair skinned people was something I have experienced. But something I have never really thought about was her point number 7. In all the history classes that I had throughout high school, the majority of the text revolved around the white male. Of course blacks were discussed, but only during the topic of slave trade. Main discussion always revolved around what the white race did. I was hardly ever taught anything about Asia, or Oceania. It was white Europeans and White Americans. Only when I was writing my senior paper on a topic of my choice was my knowledge of history expanded to include different regions of the world. This was something I had never really thought about. It just seemed like the norm; this was what everyone else I knew (who didn't even go to my school) was being taught.
This whole article reminded me of one of my favorite commercials, on fair housing practices. A white journalist is sitting at his desk and he finds an ad for an apartment on Park Street. He calls the lister several times, portraying different people each time (a Jewish man, an Indian man, a Black man, etc.). The last call he makes he assumes the name of Graham Wellington (obviously portraying a wealthy white man). In all of his previous guises he was told that the apartment was no longer available, but as Mr. Wellington, the agent says the apartment is available. This commercial is funny, but at the same time very sad because the discrimination displayed is so obvious and so appalling. It shows the inherent privilege white males have. Any of the other men could have been great people, but the agent only wanted to rent to the white man. (There is link to the commercial at the bottom of this post)
In Schiebinger's article, she elaborates more on the quick comment McIntosh made concerning male superiority. When discussing the European male anatomists, she says they were very obsessed with black men (because they were superior among an inferior group) and white women (because they were inferior among a superior group). I think this is a great example of the dominance white men feel they have over not only people of other races, but also people of the other sex.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=CQzze-9iqAw
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think that your comments regarding how history is taught with regard to race and gender are really valid. As a history major, I have found that college is really the first time that I have studied in-depth the history of women and minority groups. In my medieval history class last semester, my teacher told us all to stand up. First he told all the females to sit down, then any people of color, then any people of any religion aside from Christianity, and finally anyone whose parents found it hard to pay the tuition to Emory (that was not technically mandatory to answer, but people did sit down.) At the end, only one person in our class of twenty-five students was standing. "It is his history," our professor said, "that we are studying. And from his point of view alone we learn the history of everyone in the room."
Obviously that history cannot be accurate. Increasingly in history we analyze the sources (exactly like standpoint bias) for things that would influence the writing. White privilege certainly carries over to history and many of the "facts" that we think we know about history are in fact written by white male historians whose standpoint is biased.
Post a Comment