In life, people want to know who they are and what they are, carve themselves out, be unique yet fit in, this is why sub-cultures have become so prevalent and race or ethnic groups has become another group for people to belong to and identify with. Now once again I stress this is a point for discussion, as it is a topic that is less black and white, and more grey.
From these examples we see how certain "traits" can be associated with certain race groups and how people tend to self identity with these aspects. Now the question is, does this help perpetuate negative stereotypes or does it help empower certain groups who have been marginalized. The answer is difficult but maybe somewhere in between. Both examples use the idea for humor and show it as being negative, helping to perpetuate stereotypes. However telling people how to "act" goes both ways. Sure the negative traits such as being homophobic should stop, telling people how to dress either way, suit or not, is an arbitrary distinction in regards to race or ethnic identity, as it pertains to no negative outcomes, although prejudice can still occur, such as wearing hoodies as talked about in the lecture.
Does this then lead to "self racism". In retaliation to race identity people may dissociate themselves from certain aspects for example "white people are all WASP's but I'm different." In this example stereotypes are still being maintained even through disassociation. Of course people are multifaceted and may associate with other groups or identities outside of ethnicity or race, such as; gender, sexuality or interests, i.e. people calling themselves "gamers", "bloggers" or "punks".
However self identifying as "Black" could been seen as a positive self reaffirmation, creating a group that fights back against years of racism and stereotypes, seen in movements such as "Black Lives Matter" and "Black Is Beautiful".
Going more in depth and slightly off topic, all of this thought comes from
"Social identity theory" which poses several questions "Why, when and how is social categorisation salient or not salient? What kind of shared constructions of social reality, mediated through social categorization, lead to a social climate in which large masses of people feel they are in long-term conflict with other masses? What, for example, are the psychological transitions from a stable to an unstable social system?” (Tajfel 1979)
So perhaps there is a need to conform to some social group, and ethnic groups have become apart of that. Please continue the discussion, this is only a brief look at a deep topic.
Sources
http://i.imgur.com/s53FQYQ.png
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glOv4MIyNSE
Tajfel, H. (1979). "Individuals and groups in social psychology". British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 18 (2): 183–190. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1979.tb00324.x
|
Monday, 14 March 2016
Race as Identity
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I thought this was a well written post, so well done for that. I found it interesting when you were discussing stereotypical traits of certain groups and how people impose these on individuals and how the marginalized individuals themselves play into and reinforce these stereotypes. It made me think of an example when I was on the train yesterday sitting opposite two Pacific Island males who were discussing music when one said "So what type of music do you like to perform?" and the other replied "Well Im not very musical, i cant play or sing" and the first guy said "What do you mean you are an islander?." Personally that shows me the power of social discourse and how particular ideas and beliefs about groups can become so ingrained in people that even like minded peers perform acts of racism, albeit unintentional.
ReplyDeleteIn reference to your final paragraph there is a need to categorize people and ethnic groups are part of the wider socially constructed groups in society. However does the focus not need to be on trying to equalize these groups instead of trying to eliminate them altogether? As social groups do have various positive impacts.