Reading for Monday April 9th

The reading for today was entitled "Erasing @race: Going white in the (inter)face" written by Beth E. Kolko. The argument that Kolko is presenting in this article is that race seems to lose its face in cyberspace. This means that people's perception of race disappears when they enter the internet. For example, if it weren't for the picture on the main screen of this page, few people would ever know that I was a white male. There can be tell tale signs, such as written communication that I am a white male, or sometimes it can be as simple as a name. However, there is no way to be sure who the person on the other end is, making the internet a "protoutopian" environment.
As mentioned on page 218, users are subject to "representative norms and patterns, constructing a self replicating and exclusionary category of "ideal" user, one that, in some very particular instances of cyberspace, is a definitively white user". The author is mentioning that there are characteristics that can separate us in a cyber world, however, they are harder to find than visually categorizing individuals in day to day circumstances. Even in standard computer games such as solitaire, the computer does not have an understanding of age, race, ethnic background or any of the factors that could help it win. It is unable to judge, which makes it easier for the player to win than in real life.
A question that I would like to pose is why aren't computers, with all the technology present, more apt for for different types of people. There are features for young adults that make it easier for them to understand computers, as well as foreign language programs. However, would there be a way that a computer could be made to suit more of an individual's needs than a general public need? The home computer or laptop is more generic than it really should be, and customizing it for certain groups could make it easier for groups to understand. I'm not promoting the segregation of cyberspace by making classifications of computers for certain type of people, I am simply suggesting that it could be beneficial for some people to have computers more convenient for certain types of people.
I was intrigued when reading this article because it is a very valid point. The internet is a type of utopia, where people can't be judged or scrutinized. It is also an environment that enables people to meet others with similar likes and dislikes. For example, the article about racism in cyberspace. It shows that there can be a group for just about anything on the internet that may not be casually accepted in everyday life.

Facebook

The assignment for today was to look at a page on facebook of someone who you loosely know and tell how it relates to things learned in Ethnic Studies. The individual, who will remain anonymous is a former teammate of mine on my high school soccer team. Things such as race, class, gender and sexuality are evident throughout his facebook web page. Though there is not a lot of information, the viewer can made generalizations about the page on their own.

First, the person is a male and according to his listing is attracted to women. It is also evident within the pictures that are on facebook that he prefers women. In addition to the pictures, while viewing them it can be seen that there are no people of color in any of the pictures. This could be simple coincidence or it could be very much a preference. the person who owns this profile is Italian American and is very proud of his ancestry because of the pictures of his tattoo's and the groups he joined. To relate to gender, he has chosen very masculine things such as working out to put into his profile. Of course, it is a generalization to say that putting ESPN as your first TV show is masculine but for the most part it applies in this situation.

One question that I have is why this person did not have a picture of at least one African American in his pictures? After graduating from a school where 25% of the population is African American, it seems almost unreal that he would not have at least one picture with an African American in it. Also, the profile in general is very sparse. It could be that it is a masculine way to keep things personal and inside.

I enjoyed this assignment because it showed a different aspect of how you can judge people's responses to questions. Noticing how people respond to questions such as music and other forms of entertainment can really speak volumes about the person you are studying.

Dixie-net

The reading for class this week was entitled "I'll take my stand in Dixie-net" by Tara McPherson. It is apart of a larger book entitled "Race in Cyberspace", a compilation of many authors. The main concept of this article is the neo-racism that is taking place on the internet, and why the current standpoint still exists in the south. The websites are designed to protect their "Southern heritage" and their icons, such as flags, that keep them alive today. It is a problem that these thoughts continue in American culture, and that 150 years after the Civil War, we are still divided.
One of the problems that the author discusses is the writer's registers of place. The author feels that because the south has been stereotypically called "redneck and racist" that they inherently act in such a way. Also, the author describes the websites as not racist, but supplying racist information, such as links to other websites for confederate or rebel on-line activity. Her depiction of the "Cultural genocide of the Confederacy" furthermore proves that there is a social uprising of southern men and women that believe the former Confederate States of America should be upheld.
One question that I have, and something that I found as interesting was the fact that there was a Confederate States building in Washington D.C. that is still fully functioning. It doesn't make sense to have a building in operation for something that has been abolished since 1865. Also, if the taxpayers are paying for this building, it would raise quite an uproar from many people as to why it is so important to hold on to this building.
I enjoyed reading this article because it was something that few people ever realize is still exists. It is a mindset by a few individuals that live in the past because it is the only way they can feel important. Unfortunately, there is little chance of this ever changing.

Why I hate Abercrombie

The reading is for McBride's article "Why I hate Abercrombie" and it gives much insight to the companies practice in advertisement and their main target audience. The author sites the fact that he has seen many gay men wearing Abercrombie & Fitch at a gay bar that he visited. He sites facts that advertising of men and women wearing next to nothing poses a problem in society and what we perceive as acceptable behavior. After giving a brief history of A&F and its roots in outdoor clothing, he goes on to talk about advertisement and the "celebration of whiteness" (pg. 68).
The main concept of the article is that the advertising for Abercrombie and Fitch is biased towards the white male and female population, and the models of this clothing have to have a certain type of look that would identify them as A&F. In one part, it shows that "Dreadlocks are unacceptable for men and women". The only race that hairstyle would be natural to would be the African American race, which makes it blatant racism. In a book for brand representatives, it shows a picture of an African American male and it shows that he must have a short Afro cut in order to appear natural and classic.
This article begs the question that why won't people shop at other store comparable to A&F such as American Eagle Outfitters where it is not as biased? When a person buys the product, they are buying the image and everything that goes along with it. In my opinion, it should be boycotted if it is not acceptable to people of other races.
My opinion of the product is not skewed since I don't purchase items at the store. However, I don't believe that it is appropriate for companies to only market products to a certain race or ethnicity. To do so gives a bad representation not only to the owners of that store but the people that own the product as well.

Cybertypes

Todays reading was for Nakamura entitled "Identity Tourism" describing the commercials and the companies of technology companies. Commercials are a risky business because in the attempt to find something attractive to get the audience to buy the good or service being presented, the company may alienate or isolate a certain type of people. This often happens with race or gender and can have devastating effects on the sale of that particular item. One of the main commercials that Nakamura is describing is a MCI commercial that is the "largest internet network in the world", saying that the company is very worldly and accepted by most people. However, as Nakamura describes, it is paradoxical because it shows many different people and the aim is to show that they are not different and their minds should only be viewed.

One of the key concepts of this article is that fact that it is very much a fantasy and is not a true representation of real world activities. Stated on page 94, describing advertisements about travel, Nakamura writes " Including these 'real life' images in the advertisement would disrupt the picture it presents us of an other whose 'unspoiled' qualities are so highly valued by tourists". By showing real life, it may make things less desirable for the consumer and the product or service may not sell. What is good for one set of consumers is not for another.

A question I pose towards this article is that in some aspects, the truth may be better than lying about the product being sold. In one particular instance in my past, my family took a trip to Belize City. In the description it sounded like a tropical paradise, but when we arrived there was a bus strike and it was the equivalent of a 3rd world country. In that case, it would be better to have described some problems because the customers view of that product is now permanently scarred from that experience.

For myself being a business major, I found this article to be very eye opening in the sense that sometimes lying about a product in order to make it sound better and less discriminatory is not always the best policy.

Reading for March 14th, 2007

The reading for today's class was entitled "How Jews became white folks: and what that says about race in America" written by Karen Brodkin. The chapter outlines some of the concepts of why Jews were not considered white during the pre- World War II days and how they likened themselves to African-Americans. She describes how her parents struggled when they came to America to find somewhere they belonged and could live and how it was for her own struggles. It depicts some of the worst times in American history in regards to racism, ethnic superiority and anti-antisemitism.
One of the key factors in this reading was World War II and its effects on the lives of Jews and "lower class" minorities. Things such as the GI bill prohibited the lower class people such as African Americans and Jews from collecting the money owed to them, including women. This was the reality of those times but as the author describes, it becomes better around the 1960's. Upstart suburbia's like Leavittown were no longer allowed to discriminate against blacks or Jews and equality was on the rise.
One thing i am unclear about is the reasons for why a Jewish person would not be considered white. Most Jewish people have white complexion but are not considered white because of religious premise. It makes very little sense to base skin color blindly on religion nearly 1900 years after the original conflict started.
I found this reading to be informative because I did not know the struggles of the Jewish person quite that far in depth. I knew of antisemitism but I didn't know it ran so deep into America's past.

Reading for March 12th, 2007

The reading for today is Chapter 12 out of Zinn entitled "El Norte: the borderland of Chicano America". It describes the move north of many Mexican and Latin American people to America and its effects on Mexico and the United States. It changed the Mexican infrastructure by forcing farmers to the cities to work factory jobs and shortly after the big move made the Mexican Revolution, pitting rival factions in a brutal war against each other.
Among other things, he talks about the railroad that entered Mexico and its effects on migration. Mainly, the idea that Mexicans began working a vast array of jobs was a main point. They had spread across the southern states and even to portions of Michigan and Illinois. Quoted from the text, Zinn describes the Mexican labor force as "usually assigned to the worst jobs and received the lowest wages" during the great immigration boom of the early 1900's. They often worked "contract to contract" so that opportunities were limited to them and could basically become slave labor.
The idea of the Mexican immigrant being poor is not a surprise to me during the early 1900's. What is interesting to me, however, that during the 2000's, this really hasn't changed. Mexican Americans pride themselves on how much work they can accomplish and how efficiently it is done. In the same token, the average American puts in very little work into their work. It would seem more reasonable to pay the hardest worker the most money to do their work efficiently. It is more profitable to capitalize off of the hard work of someone than to pay more money for less work. My question would be why are Mexicans paid very little even in this century?
This article basically solidified everything I thought about the treatment of Mexicans and Mexican Americans. I believe they are treated unfairly in the American culture. Where I do believe that there should be restriction on immigration, I believe that the Mexican natives that are present in the states right now should be treated better and given better jobs.

Post for the video. Feb. 28th

For February 28th, we were asked to watch a video on the internet regarding the immigration of Japanese and Chinese and their struggle to escape stereotype during World War II. Many of these individuals were sent to camps in various locations to be monitored by the United States government. Many were thought to be spies, and had to live in barracks with many other people and their own families. It presented many challenges for these immigrants that were very reminiscent of the African American slavery 100 year before. However, it was more interesting on how the film presented this injustice.
The film showed happy citizens of these camps, people who spent long hours in fields and machining. It showed families that were content with building partitions in barracks to separate themselves from other families and have a makeshift home. These people were ripped from their homes, many of them being 2nd generation, and put into a confined area. The film tried to justify this treatment as a service to these people, and showed that thanks to these camps these people picked up traits that they normally wouldn't have.
A question that I would present is why incarcerate all Chinese/ Japanese citizens while other dangerous groups roam free? We did not put any German citizens into camps, neither the Italians and they were both against us in World War II. It presents certain questions about ethics because both of those groups are from the European continent while the Asian culture is very little understood and were thought savage. It makes little sense to only hold those people incarcerated while some of the high risk groups are walking free.
I felt that this video was blatantly racist, but showed how the government wanted to absolve themselves because they knew it was wrong to do. The government tried to show that there was benefit to put these people into the camps and many learned new trades and dispersed out of the California region. It really presents a question of ethics, whether it is right to concentrate on one group of people while letting others go free.

Post for Feb. 26th, 2007

For this reading, we studied chapter 10 of Takaki entitled "Pacific crossings: seeking the land of money trees". It basically described the lives of Japanese immigrants throughout the 1800's and into the 1900's and their struggles with customs that have been around for centuries. One of the customs that was most discussed in this chapter was the idea of arranged marriage and the purpose of children in Japan. According to Takaki, there were to be three children in an ideal Japanese family; "One to sell, one to follow, and one in reserve". The daughter was the one to "sell", the eldest son follows in his fathers footsteps and the one in reserve is in case something happens to the eldest son.
Takaki goes on to talk about the workforce of Japanese in Hawaii in growing sugar cane. With the influx of labor migrating east, it was more profitable to devote their energy towards one cash crop that was successful. Immigration actually regulated on how many people of the Chinese culture and Japanese culture could immigrate because the Japanese had so many people coming east that it threw off the proportion of Chinese. It was put into effect that 2/3 of immigration coming east must be Chinese and 1/3 could be Japanese
The main question that came to mind during this chapter was that the Chinese and Japanese work force was in essence a type of slavery. Why was there no emphasis on equality for these people but more emphasis towards African American slavery? One answer could be that it was less obvious for people in the most populated area's to realize what was going on. It was rare for people on the east coast to meet a person from the Asian continent. However, in a time where fighting for racial equality was so important, it does not make a lot of sense that this type of cruelty still continued, even though they were paid workers, but poorly at that.
In my opinion the chapter shows that even after the "end of slavery" there were ways around it so that cheap labor could be bought. Immigrants in this time were a large reason for the success of the United States, but little is known of the Chinese and Japanese struggle on the west coast. luckily, authors like Takaki brought these struggles to the forefront by writing books like this.

Just for fun

As you can see by my picture, i'm a pretty wierd guy. In actuality, the picture is from a music video that my friends and I made over the last few summers. I'm including a link to it, and I'm hoping maybe people will respond and let me know what they think. Watch these in order for it to make sense.

Journey- Ask the Lonely
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx281VhR71M

Journey- Stone in Love
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyzQl1msfnU

Reading for the week of Jan. 28th

This week, we are concentrating on the work of Allen Johnson and his book "Privilege, Power and Difference". Since my groups presentation is on chapter 2, I will be concentrating on chapter 3, entitled "Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination". Johnson tries to convince his readers that privilege is basically controlled by capitalism, and still fuels the fire today. What people can sell or buy really depends on their status in society and what privilege they hold. He explains how capitalism works and its relation to class. He also states that "the richest 10 percent of the U.S. population holds more than two-thirds of all the wealth". This widens the gap between rich and poor, and making us even segregated than we first thought.
Some of the things Johnson talks about are history of race and gender in the relation to capitalism. Slavery was one of the glairing examples of capitalism in history, with the enslavement of millions. He goes on to talk about the manifest destiny that occured later in the move westward and its obvious connection to capitalism. Not only that, women have been held down in our capitalistic economy, often giving the excuse of paying them less and making women work secretarial jobs.
One question that I want to ask is why, in 2007, is this still happening? Women are still, on average, paid less than men for the same work and capitalism only benefits the people with the most money in their pockets. Those born without the silver spoon, which happen to mostly be minority, have a difficult time rising out of the situation they are in because of the low paying jobs available and the lack of opportunity. If we live in a land of freedom and opportunity, why are the wealthy the only ones that can afford it?
My reaction to the reading solidified my thoughts on capitalism and what is and is not fair for people. Economically speaking, it would be more efficient to have everyone working than having poverty and unemployment rate of 5%. The more people working with satisfying income will benefit the economy more. I'm not saying that communism is the right answer, far from it, but I believe the only way that we can have equality is to make sure everyone has a job that is fair pay throughout that field of industry.

Reading for the week of Jan. 21, 2007

The reading for this week is by Ronald Takaki entitled " The Tempest in the Wilderness". The main idea behind the article is the viewpoint of the English, and their view of the "Savages" that were the Irish and Indians. He relate those two groups of people to the Shakespeare work called "The Tempest". In this play, the character Caliban is an Indian in the New World, and he becomes victim to English conquest. It was a common thing in that day to talk about the pride of English conquest, and Shakespeare was no different.

One of the main questions I have about this reading is why the English did not find brotherhood with the country of Ireland and surrounding countries of that time? Why would the English find Irish people to be incompetent savages, other than the pure fact that they were nomadic. It was also a problem with Scotland at the time, where the English found themselves to be far superior than their counterparts. It would be more profitable to view the Indians and Irish as an equal and work with them to find a better way of producing agriculture and other necessities.
I
felt very taken back by the reading, being of Irish decent. I was not raised with the idea that the Irish were savages or nomadic. Maybe I was raised in a way to show the pride in my heritage and not the rough times, but at the same time I never knew of the battles between Ireland and English.

Reading for Jan. 17th, 2007

The topic for today's reading is one that can lead people to their own conclusions on right and wrong. It deals with the sensitive subject matter of correct nomenclature for certain racial groups and sexual orientations. It also deals with the type of outlook people have in this subject matter, the two types being essentialist and constructionist. All of these things have a very significant part in how we determine ethnicity's and other types of class, sex, and so on.

One of the paragraphs talk about the reaction of an African American man to the question "which do you prefer to be called, black or African American"? His response was one of anger, mainly because of the ignorance of the person asking it. In the black man's eyes, he feels he should be treated as a person not a color or race. For the white interviewer, his outlook is that there are different races and colors, and you fall into that classification. This can easily be conveyed in the context of essentialism and constructionism. The white man is an essentialist, who believes there is clear cut answer to the question he asked. He believes that the master statuses determine who we are. On the other hand, the black man can be viewed as a constructionist. He believes that there are different views that can be taken about who he is besides his color or race. He believes that he is a person, just the same as if he were Indian, Hispanic or white. These two people obviously differ greatly on their outlook on life.

Another aspect is the way we as a society view certain lifestyle choices. In the case of homosexuals, people believe that there are two different ways a person can become homosexual. The first is that it is a choice by the individual to become "gay", where in the reading a person is condemned by his family and almost sent to castration to make him straight again. The other choice is that the person is born homosexual and cannot help the fact that he or she is that way. Many studies conducted recently show this to be possible. In the case of the same person in the reading, the parents ask for forgiveness when they learn it was possible for him to be born gay.

In conclusion, there are many ways that people can be viewed by others. By race, sexual orientation, class, gender and so on, we tend to separate ourselves from each other in an attempt to make ourselves look better. There are different types of people; essentialist and constructionist that believe two totally different things, neither being the right point of view. In the end, it is a persons right to view people as they see fit to be viewed.

Reading for Wednesday, Jan. 10th

The reading assigned on January 10th was an exerpt out of a book written by Howard Zinn. It described Christopher Columbus and his cruel treatment of natives in the Carribean Islands. He used these people as slaves and pawns to get gold and repay his debt to the countless people he owed. It is stated that the natives of these islands were very willing to share and would do anything for their guests within reason. However, the feelings were not mutual because Columbus and the other passengers that set sail in 1492 felt that these people were "Savages" and animals, bearing no shame for their naked appearance.

About me

I am Mike Lagnese and i'm a sophomore at Bowling Green State University. I am majoring in Supply Chain Management and plan to graduate in 2009. I'm originally from Twinsburg, Ohio which is a suburb of Cleveland. One of the things I hope to gain from taking this class is knowledge of other ethnicities besides my own.