Black Men: Stigma, Status And Expectation Summary
Conforming is something that is expected from everyone, but who benifites from this conformity? Shavar Jeffries, Holly Brewer, and Amy Tan might have an idea. Shavar Jeffries’s New York Times article “Black Men: Stigma, Status and Expectation” discuses the historical and present racial stigma against black men in the United States. Jeffries covers the dehumanization of black people, the discrimination against them, and finally the current day prejudices and stereotypes held against them. Holly Brewer’s article “Stereotypes” addresses gender stereotypes and their effects on young people. Some key points include a list of gender stereotypes, how young children are when they are presented with their “gender roles”, and how aware yet inactive
…show more content…
the public is in addressing this issue. Amy Tan’s article “Mother Tongue” is about her experience growing up with a mother who’s English is heavily affected by her Asian heritage. This has a profound effect on Tan’s life and her perception of her mother. Prevalent in all three articles is an imbalance of power. All three article have similar views on conformity, noting that conforming tends to benefit the powerful, leaving the less powerful open to harmful stereotypes.
The authors agree that conformity benefits the powerful.
Tan recognized this when observing the way people treat her mother, who does not conform to Standard English when speaking. In one instance, while on a visit to the doctor, Tan’s mother is refused a diagnosis, and treated unfairly until Tan was called. Tan says, “she would not leave until the doctor called her daughter… And when the doctor finally called her daughter, me, who spoke perfect English...we had assurances the CAT scan would be found” (Tan 2). In this situation Tan and the doctors are more powerful than Tan’s mother because they conform to English language standards when speaking. Notice the issue is not resolved until Tan is called--not because Tan’s mother can not be understood, at the time she was speaking her “best English” (Tan 2)—but because the doctors had no respect for someone who does not conform. Brewer also believes that conformity benefits the powerful. When speaking about traditional male gender roles Brewer mentions the superiority of men. She says, “Men are in charge; they are always at the top… As Husbands, men tell their wives what to do” (Brewer 3). These gender roles immediately increase the power of a man—especially over women—in the United States’ already paternal society. If a man chooses to conform to these gender roles he gains power, in this respect conformity again benefits the powerful. The third author, Jeffries brings forth further evidence to prove that conformity benefits
the powerful. In his article about racial stigma against the black community he references the history of slavery in America. Jeffries says, “Racial stigma, moreover, informed that adverse treatment was both appropriate and necessary…According to the United Sates Supreme Court, black folk… ‘might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for [their] benefit.’’’ (Jeffries 1). Historically the black community was seen as a group of uneducated animals that were rightfully exploited for their labor. This view is used to justify the legalization of slavery in the United States. Due to the fact that many of the slaves conformed to the view that they were uneducated and animalistic—though not of their own accord—the powerful were able to legally oppress and benefit from this oppression.
the public is in addressing this issue. Amy Tan’s article “Mother Tongue” is about her experience growing up with a mother who’s English is heavily affected by her Asian heritage. This has a profound effect on Tan’s life and her perception of her mother. Prevalent in all three articles is an imbalance of power. All three article have similar views on conformity, noting that conforming tends to benefit the powerful, leaving the less powerful open to harmful stereotypes.
The authors agree that conformity benefits the powerful.
Tan recognized this when observing the way people treat her mother, who does not conform to Standard English when speaking. In one instance, while on a visit to the doctor, Tan’s mother is refused a diagnosis, and treated unfairly until Tan was called. Tan says, “she would not leave until the doctor called her daughter… And when the doctor finally called her daughter, me, who spoke perfect English...we had assurances the CAT scan would be found” (Tan 2). In this situation Tan and the doctors are more powerful than Tan’s mother because they conform to English language standards when speaking. Notice the issue is not resolved until Tan is called--not because Tan’s mother can not be understood, at the time she was speaking her “best English” (Tan 2)—but because the doctors had no respect for someone who does not conform. Brewer also believes that conformity benefits the powerful. When speaking about traditional male gender roles Brewer mentions the superiority of men. She says, “Men are in charge; they are always at the top… As Husbands, men tell their wives what to do” (Brewer 3). These gender roles immediately increase the power of a man—especially over women—in the United States’ already paternal society. If a man chooses to conform to these gender roles he gains power, in this respect conformity again benefits the powerful. The third author, Jeffries brings forth further evidence to prove that conformity benefits
the powerful. In his article about racial stigma against the black community he references the history of slavery in America. Jeffries says, “Racial stigma, moreover, informed that adverse treatment was both appropriate and necessary…According to the United Sates Supreme Court, black folk… ‘might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for [their] benefit.’’’ (Jeffries 1). Historically the black community was seen as a group of uneducated animals that were rightfully exploited for their labor. This view is used to justify the legalization of slavery in the United States. Due to the fact that many of the slaves conformed to the view that they were uneducated and animalistic—though not of their own accord—the powerful were able to legally oppress and benefit from this oppression.