Whiteness Studies

Even if slavery is not the presiding rule of the land on this planet any longer, segregation based on appearance still exists, just as the "social construction of ‘whiteness’ historically has implied the racial superiority of whites", and prompted the "separate but equal" doctrines of the late nineteenth century (Rundblad & Kivisto xxxi).

In the essay “Color Lines” by Ralph Eubanks, the author explores the flawed logic of race from a scientific perspective. In the article, Eubanks explains the fact that a person cannot know the ancestry of another person or the nature of that person by looking at their race alone. Heritage is a much more complex concept than a simple racial categorization. In writing the article, the author sought to demonstrate that when looking at a person, you could not confirm their identity based on what percentage of a certain race they may have and that social construction meant to depict one group as being superior or inferior to another. This rhetorical analysis will therefore explore the importance of the rhetorical devices and strategies used by Eubanks to communicate with the audience.

The book has as its principal thesis the consideration of race as “a folk classification, a product of popular beliefs about human differences that evolved from 16th to 19th centuries” (Smedley, 2007, pag.24). The book also specifies three characteristics that distinguish the racial ideology in America: the absence of a category for biracial people, the homogenization of the black or African American Americans, and the impossibility to change a person’s race. (Smedley, 2007, pag.7)

Racial Formation in the United States by Michael Omi and Howard Winant made me readjust my understanding of race by definition and consider it as a new phenomenon. Through, Omi and Winant fulfilled their purpose of providing an account of how concepts of race are created and transformed, how they become the focus of political conflict, and how they shape and permeate both identities and institutions. I always considered race to be physical characteristic by the complexion of ones’ skin tone and the physical attributes, such as bone structure, hair texture, and facial form. I knew race to be a segregating factor, however I never considered the meaning of race as concept or signification of identity that refers to different types of human bodies, to the perceived corporal and phenotypic makers of difference and the meanings and social practices that are ascribed to these differences, in which in turn create the oppressing dominations of racialization, racial profiling, and racism. (p.111). Again connecting themes from the previous readings, my westernized influences are in a direct correlation to how to the idea of how I see race and the template it has set for the rather automatic patterns of inequalities, marginalization, and difference. I never realized how ubiquitous and evolving race is within the United States.

In “The Social Construction of Race’’, Ian Lopez states that race is constructed relationally, against one another rather than in isolation on (p.54); we cannot define what whiteness is or is not without making comparison to other entities such as blackness. Therefore, the creation of racial identities by Anglo-Saxons or white Europeans was justification for their offensive activities against other races; including rape, murder, genocide, causing famines, and taking land. Lopez states in his article that human interaction creates social construction of race and that races are constructed in comparison to one another rather than alone (p.54). We cannot define what it means to be black compared to what it means to be white; we say what whiteness

In society, race clearly affects one’s life chances. These are the chances of getting opportunities and gaining experience for progression. The social construction of race is based on privileges and availability of resources. Looking at society and the formation of race in a historical context, whites have always held some sort of delusional belief of a “white-skin privilege.” This advantage grants whites an advantage in society whether one desires it or not. This notion is often commonly referred to as reality.

How race determined who was in and who was out. As Dickerson states “if race is real and not just a method for the haves to decide who will be have-nots, then all Europeans immigrants, from Ireland a to Greece, would have been “white” the moment they arrived here. Instead, as documented in David Roediger’s excellent Working Towards Whiteness, they were long considered inferior, nearly subhuman, and certainly not white” (69). This shows how race wasn’t about common culture or history but a concept to decide what race is good enough to be consider “white” or better than others. Even though the Europeans where the same race or color of the other people who considered themselves Americans or “white” they were still discriminated for being different and immigrants like everybody else. But soon they realized that identifying them self as being white gave them some sort of hierarchy. It gave them more class compared to the other races. As Debra Dickerson said, “If you were neither black nor Asian nor Hispanic, eventually you could become white, invested with enforceable civil rights and the right to exploit-and hate-nonwhites” (69). Being identify as white gave the power to have privileges that non-whites will never have since they are not the same color. Non- whites are treated unfairly compared to the white people in many ways. Discrimination not only took place between people of different races but

Working Towards Whiteness is about immigrants who are coming to the United States during the twentieth century and struggling to become white. This is because America has this identity of being white and the new immigrants are facing the problem of fitting in based on their race and class. The states have applied restriction so that they can preserve the population to be more white. In Roediger historical studies he brings these practices to light and his goals to draw attention to the biased white supremacist policy of the government in the regulations of immigration. Roediger most evident strength would be that he has the adaptation of the “in-between” status of the new immigrants coming in, which they are neither accepted as white neither can they be able to identify themselves as their pre-existing background.

According to Charles Mills, race matters and is a category reflecting custom. These customs are broken down to racial classification matters. We as individuals associate race as a cluster of attributes. These attributes include physical and psychological/moral facets. When it comes to physical attributes, we focus more towards the skin, bone structure, hair color, and all biologically substances that human beings have naturally acquired. On the other hand, Psychological

Race refers to a group of persons who are different from other groups due to their alleged genetic and physical traits. On one hand, racism is the preconception that members of a certain race are prime than individuals of other races. In America, white supremacy is the belief that whites are superior to others. White supremacy took different forms, such as colonialism, slavery, and apartheid and has led to institutional racism. Members of minority races, particularly African Americans, have experienced institutional racism in both political and social institutions in many forms including discrimination in health care, employment, incarceration rates, housing, education, and politics. On the other hand, racial worldview entails declaring oneself to be superior over

David R. Roediger displays the history of how the theory of “whiteness” has evolved throughout the years in America in his book, The Wages of Whiteness. According to Roediger, “whiteness” is much a constructed identity as “blackness” or any other. He argues that this idea of “whiteness” has absolutely nothing to do with the advantage of the economy, but that it is a psychological racial stereotype that was created by white men themselves. He claims that it is definitely true that racism should be set in class and economic contexts, also stating that “this book will argue that working class formation and the systematic development of a sense of whiteness, went hand in hand for the U.S white working class.” Roediger basically lays out the fact that “working class ‘whiteness’ and “white supremacy” are ideological and psychological creations of the white working class itself.

Rather than merely examining the affects of racism on people of color, the book turns its attention to whiteness and how a system of white privilege, supported and perpetuated by whites, also damages whites by inhibiting them from making meaningful connections with other human beings. Until I almost reached the end of this book I was uncomfortable and disturbed by the way the book made me feel. As a white male, I am aware of the pain that my ancestors have created for others to advance the free world. I have pain for those who suffered and disagree with actions that were taken by my white predecessors. But I believed that we are now in a much more advanced world where we have chosen the first black president and equality was a focus of most Americans. Identifying with my culture as currently being a white supremacist society is something I have never considered, or would not want to consider. In Neuliep, within the Coudon and Yousef’s Value orientations, we perceive the human nature orientation within the United States with people being essentially rational. This term, rational, can be somewhat subjective. And if we continue with the same value system, and look from ‘the self’ values, we foster our self-identities from the influence of our culture’s values. If we are to reflect truthfully to how our country evolved and what we ‘had to do’ to create our freedom by limiting the freedom of other, how would we then perceive

In Olson’s (2001) article, “The Genetic Archaeology of Race,” he states, “people are too closely related— and have mixed too much throughout history— to differ in fundamental ways.” Although research continues to prove that race is a construct set by society, people continue to essentialize humans into various categories based off of race. Essentializing race is the act of assuming that “these categories have and inherent and unchanging nature” (Andrews, 2017, p.19). For example, throughout history African Americans have been classified as being primitive, promiscuous, violent, etc. While on the other hand, White Americans are described with positive characteristics such as, sophisticated, responsible, law-abiding, etc. These terms have served

Most white people tend to view themselves as having ethnicty, but not race. Through a white persons perspective, they are normal in relation to non-whites who are viewed as different. The reasoning behind this view lies between the "blind-spots" and obliviousness whites have developed through generations. It is this obliviousness that contributes to the difficulty in interaction between the whites and the non-whites. Ethnicity plays a vital role in drawing conclusions about the operation of race in America. As stated by Harlon Dalton, "Drawing parallels makes sense to them because they regard white ethinicty and non-white race as being more or less equivilant."

Shome describes “whiteness” as being the way in which white people are “raced subjects,” just as black people are (Shome 366.) By this, she means that we are often taught that non-whites are at a disadvantage, but not