Trinh Summary

Practically everyone in the story has a hidden agenda for his or her actions. The protagonist, a 22-year-old named Helga, was a teacher at an institute of higher learning called Naxos where the true agenda was not education but instead was teaching Blacks their accepted status in life—lower than that of Whites. She became convinced that she needed to leave Naxos after hearing a speech from a visiting white preacher whose remarks she found offensive. The preacher stated that if everyone acted like those from Naxos “there would be no race problem, because Naxos Negros knew what was expected of them” because they “knew enough to stay in their places” (Larsen 1724). At the beginning of the story, the reader would feel sympathy towards the workers at Naxos, who truly believed they were preparing the students for better lives and sympathy for Helga who tried to convince the new principle, Dr. Anderson, as to the true state of affairs. Helga failed to realize, however, that Dr. Anderson was aware of the situation at Naxos but felt that for change to occur there needed to be “more people like you, people with a sense of values, and proportion, an appreciation of the rarer things of life” (Larsen 1735). Helga mistakenly became offended at Dr. Anderson’s compliment by calling her “a lady” with “dignity and breeding” because of her belief that being able to trace one’s ancestry was more important that one’s actions (Larsen 1735).

Naturally, the narrator feels the pressure of being a minority. At first, he wants to be like everyone else, to be a part of white society. Then, he realizes that such society is not what he imagines it to be. As a result, he wants to reconnect with his family, this time appreciating them as his own. Nevertheless, the narrator is afraid of what his father

Whiteness and racism comes from the oppression, colonization and systems of dominance over black people and their feelings. In this case, an intersectional feminist analysis matters because women who are able bodied, cis-gendered, privileged and white are only being considered whereas bell hooks argue that men, women and trans people who oppressed should be fought for. And Peggy McIntosh adds onto this but a white woman who addresses and recognizes her privilege to help other white individuals understand what they have and blacks do not.

When it comes to things like gender equality, and feminism people are going to have their own feelings and opinions about these certain subjects. It could bring strong, sympathetic, angry, or uninterested. Either way, it brings you some type of emotion to create pathos. She also uses words like “we” and “us” to involve herself with the audience to make feel what she’s feeling. One thing she states that “If we want to live as women, some separatism is forced upon us: Mills College is a wise embodiment of that separatism. The war-games world wasn’t made by us or for us; we can’t even breathe the air there without masks” (1).

The articles “The Myth of the Latin Woman: I Just Met a Girl Named Maria” written by Juthish Oriz Cofer and “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” by Peggy McIntosh are two essays covering the topic of race and gender. With a focus on privilege and race, one may assume that these two articles say the same thing, while in reality that is not true. As McIntosh and Cofer come from two different backgrounds and social standing, the authors offer two very unique views on the subject matter. Due to Cofer being a Puerto Rican woman and McIntosh being white woman, the two are opposites when it comes to white privilege and how it has effected them. This allows for them to give different views on the subject within the papers. Each articles differ in the audience, the purposes, and the appeals used within. On the other hand, both works are similar with the end goal and intended audience. As a member of the audiences targeted by both of these authors, I was able to connect to both of their writings due to the many different ways the two authors connected to their audiences.

In midst of the radicalizations that were apparent in those times, Ferguson brings in the account of the transgendered mulatta. (p. 40). One can imagine the thought that went into this mulatta, where people of all races, sexual orientations could convulge and commit any act of vice that they deemed fit. In this Chapter, one sees a common theme, the expansive arguments around the heterogeneously composed African American culture – something that is visible to this day in the stereotyping that occurs with relation to queer people of color. One can also see another common aspect, in the way in which these articles show the way American industrialization disrupted hegemonic gender/sexual ideals as well as the people mistaking this disruption as racial differences. With the passage of time, these differences became more apparent, but the concept of queer people of color is still something that remains widely shrouded in question in the minds of ordinary

Queer of color critique is, by definition, intersectional. As opposed to examining domesticity through the lens of a queer person or a person of color, the queer of color critique analyzes the ways that race, gender, and sexuality are built off of each other. Roderick Ferguson’s piece stems off of the presumption that racial non-normativity, or non whiteness and sexual non-normativity,

This week, the readings touched on issues relating to resistance and social change. Martinez explains how the U.S. has struggled to see issues of race beyond just Black and white. She also stresses the importance of including other races when speaking on these issues. Hernandez argues that the mainstream feminist movement fails to include minority and low-income women and the issues they face. She states that the movement only benefits white middle class women. Collins explains how people’s ideas and behaviors actualize other people’s inequalities. She says comparing levels of oppression is a competition for attention and instead we should use a new mentality that interlocks these inequalities. Harris

This essay will critically analyze the various forms of oppression that are set out through Audrey Lorde’s concept of the “mythical norm” as discussed by Barbara Perry. Through the “mythical norm”, it can be seen that oppressions exists through the forms of racism and sexism which are exhibited through many scholarly texts and articles. Racism can be seen as a means of privilege and power that is given to individuals who coincide with the criteria of societies norm. In this case, these individuals consist of white, heterosexual, male beings who unknowingly oppress their racialized counterparts. Oppression can also be seen through the form of sexism. Sexism looks at the injustice and inequality of male dominance over female, which results to men being more privileged and advantaged in society over women who are disadvantaged. Therefore, privilege and power is obtained by those who coincide with the concept of the “mythical norm”, leaving minority groups who do not coincide with this conception oppressed through the forms of racism and sexism.

In this case deviant bodies include terrorists, immigrants but also transgender people from minority communities. Comparing Jorgensen and Delisa Newton allows us to see that the person closest to white, homogenous values is accepted more than the deviant body. However, it is important to understand that these “values” are not inherent, they are learned and we are conditioned to believe in this hierarchy through the social. This is what Plemons is arguing and it is helpful to analyze Beauchamp and Moore through this lens. The reason why this is important is because it helps explain why people pushback within the boundaries that are confining them. Beauchamp shows how instead of trying to breakdown this heightened security the NCTE tried to remove gender as a marker for verification. Inadvertently, or purposely trying to take the pressure off themselves and onto another group, immigrants and

That both genders have common ground as people. She goes on to describe how society is becoming more progressive, that whether or not people want to admit it, changes are coming and as time goes on women will be granted more equality. This change was already being seen but just needed further progression.

Later on, Mintz brought up how the novel is “often read as if it were a straightforward critique of slavery and racial prejudice” rather than a metaphor of a journey. In doing so, Mintz establishes that our understanding of the book is limited to focusing on slavery and racism instead of a journey, supporting his claim of in the process. By providing the evidence, Mintz persuades the audience that the novel is truly difficult to understand for future generations through his contrasting structure, which underscores the incorrect understanding people have developed. This doesn’t work too well because the contrasting structure fails to explicitly state the position the author and state the claim the author is making. Since Mintz relied on the contrasting structure instead of stating his claim, the audience may not pick up on the author’s claim and not be persuaded at all, despite the evidence and credentials

This kind of behavior towards our fellow men is unacceptable, and therefore it needs to stop. Discrimination leads to people becoming weaker and vulnerable because it lowers someone's self-confidence, it hurts them mentally and physically, and it destroys their peace of mind. When people are discriminated against, they feel weak and scared. When you feel this it leads to you losing your peace of mind. This is an issue in a lot of situations in this novel.

The article had a deep analyzation of Trifles by Susan Glaspell. Alkalay-Gut focuses in on scenes that show the clear division amongst the men and the woman in the play. For various scenes, the article takes apart and truly explains the symbolism throughout the course of the play. Not only are the symbols explained and given high importance, but Alkalay-Gut mentions the main character would have never had a fair trial to begin with. This ties in with my theme focusing on the belittlement of women.

While it would be very easy to focus on the constant assault of the sexuality of both the men and women that are represented in this story, I feel that sexuality is only a minor theme. The provocativeness that the story contains is used more to draw people to either listen or view the story itself than present a major theme in sexuality. The major issue that he is trying to bring forward is that of conflict and how it occurs in more than just war. Let's look at the three major conflicts within this story.