Major Assigment
Agency is often used by respondents to capitalise on othering so that the position of the other can become imbued with value. In order to write this essay, it would be good to start by defining and explaining the concept of othering and agency; and next to explain how the aforementioned respondents use the previously mentioned strategy to resist the unequal distribution of power and how it reproduces particular social relations.
Before we start with the main topics, it would be best to classify ‘othering’ in terms that are easier to understand. By ‘othering’, we could be referring to any action (verbal or nonverbal) through which any specific group or individual begins to be classified in somebody else’s mind as “not one of us”. It is often easier and simpler to dismiss a person as less human, or less worthy of dignity and respect, than we are; instead of remembering that they are actually complex beings with emotions, ideas, motivations and many other aspects that seem subtle but actually make us who we are. When we speak of agency, Jensen (2011), defines it as the capacity to act within as well as up against social structures. Jensen also then states that he is particularly interested in oppositional agency, and that resistance is central to his analysis of othering and agency. As stated in Jensen (2011), the term ‘capatalisation’ and the verb ‘to capatalise’ are used to emphasise that the creation of capital is an active process involving agency. Jensen (2011) then continues to say that such agency is socially situated in relation to hierarchal differentiation and power. But how could the respondents in Jensen (2011) seek to capatalise on othering so that the position of the other can become imbued with value? Jensen seems to think that the position of the other can, in fact, become imbued with value if it is versioned through a hip hop iconography of black masculinity (Jensen, 2011:68). The position of the other can also become imbued with value through any
Before we start with the main topics, it would be best to classify ‘othering’ in terms that are easier to understand. By ‘othering’, we could be referring to any action (verbal or nonverbal) through which any specific group or individual begins to be classified in somebody else’s mind as “not one of us”. It is often easier and simpler to dismiss a person as less human, or less worthy of dignity and respect, than we are; instead of remembering that they are actually complex beings with emotions, ideas, motivations and many other aspects that seem subtle but actually make us who we are. When we speak of agency, Jensen (2011), defines it as the capacity to act within as well as up against social structures. Jensen also then states that he is particularly interested in oppositional agency, and that resistance is central to his analysis of othering and agency. As stated in Jensen (2011), the term ‘capatalisation’ and the verb ‘to capatalise’ are used to emphasise that the creation of capital is an active process involving agency. Jensen (2011) then continues to say that such agency is socially situated in relation to hierarchal differentiation and power. But how could the respondents in Jensen (2011) seek to capatalise on othering so that the position of the other can become imbued with value? Jensen seems to think that the position of the other can, in fact, become imbued with value if it is versioned through a hip hop iconography of black masculinity (Jensen, 2011:68). The position of the other can also become imbued with value through any