As a member of an minority group this subject matter is something of interest and has personal relevance to my experiences surviving in a pre-dominantly white society. The absence of appropriate Asian role models in the multimedia such as television, films, history, papers and in positions of credible political and economic effect, stimulated a natural procedure for personal questioning of identify. The public labels which encircle us either positive or negative shape our perceptions of home and influence the kind of decisions we make. If we don't understand the social textiles of society in which self is developed and do not nurture an authentic inquiry into how oppression functions, we wrap up living those communal labels. Some of these can be unsafe and cause us to be disadvantaged even to the point of oppression of ourselves. Maybe it's argued that is an improbable phenomena but mental oppression is a well-researched and uncontested concept between academics. I am simply referring to and naming what it really is, "internalised self-oppression".
This newspaper will try to take a look at the discourses and ideas which shape and influence our understanding of oppression as well as creating a connection between this and social labelling. Oppression as an idea has a very broad so this means and relates to different types of minority groups in several ways. On this paper I'll explore the relationship of oppression attracting on various kinds of resources and information to support a particular perceptive. It should be recognised that oppression is not exclusive to contest but influences on other groups such as women, disability, age, sexual orientation and category with varying examples of intensity and differences. However, for the purposes of this assignment I will specifically concentrate on the idea of race. I'll present the four key criteria's of oppression offered by Ann Cudd in her publication Analysing Oppression (Cudd, 2006) and then concentrate on the consequences of communal labelling as phenomena. I am going to present a view that to be able to comprehend oppression we must also understand the interpersonal systems, structures and affects that facilitates internalised oppression. My bottom line will aim to provide some ideas towards highlighting how to end oppression and limit or reduce its effect on individuals who are exposed to the dynamics of oppression.
Defining layers of oppression
History literature literature document oppression in various ways from religious repression, class dissimilarities, poverty and wealth, terminology and knowledge just to name a few (Kernohan 1998). Oppression is typically understood to relate to the loss of liberty, free choice, freedom and capabilities due to actions of these in positions of electricity (Wartenberg 1992). Half a century in the past, if asked the question what's oppression, many would make reference to slavery or colonialism. In this point in time there is a increased understanding and awareness of oppression. Iris Young a respected author about ability and oppression features how oppression has a much broader understanding making reference to "systematic and structural phenomena that are not necessary the consequence of the intentions of the tyrant. Oppression in the structural sense is part of the basic fabric of an society, not really a function of a few people's choice or procedures"(Young, 1992, p. 176). In this admiration oppression can be considered to be in the mental and behavioural habits of every member of society including those who find themselves well indicating individuals if they are aware of it or not.
Oppression once we once considered is far more delicate, as Jean Harvey talks about civilised oppression "involves neither assault nor the use of legislations. Yet these understated forms are by far the most prevalent in American industrialised societies" (Harvey, 1999, P. 1). Recognising different types of oppression means decoding ethnical and societal norms which do not clearly categorise or has a distinct oppressor. We all contribute to oppression in different ways and perpetuate kinds of harm consciously or unconsciously, either to ourselves or to others (Harvey, 1999).
"Oppression must involve some type of physical or psychological injury, though it may well not be accepted as injury by the ones who are oppressed" (Cudd, 1994, p. 25). So harm can be imposed without being self-conscious limiting one's "freedom of preference in accordance with other in one's culture" (Cudd, 1994, p. 25).
"Oppression is a kind of harm that each participants of group suffer by virtue of their membership in that group. injury that comes to folks because they belong to a group that they directly identify with, so the harm attaches with their very self-image" (ibid). Individuals are not oppressed as individuals but because of the membership to a particular group, such as contest, gender, impairment or sexual orientation. Keith Vaz MP might not be regarded as being oppressed although black men in society are. He gets the same restrictions as other black men who have less power in society and will have road blocks to cross that other white men take for privilege.
The third conditions, is what Cudd identifies as the 'privilege group' (Cudd, 1998). She makes the idea that an person that has regular membership to a group which advantages from the oppression is advantaged by their connection and position. However, don't assume all individual person in the group will be intentionally or knowingly benefiting but they gain from the regular membership to that group.
Oppression must involve some kind of coercion or push ((Cudd, 1994). Coercion is the lack of ability to make free choice. Cudd goes on to make clear that "coercion is not the absence of all choice, but a lack of the right type of choices, particularly, voluntary selections" (Cudd, 1994, p. 27). Cudd shows that this is exactly what clarifies injustices of oppression.
A further dimension
My concept of oppression will give attention to Ann Cudd's coercion criteria with some deviation. Not absolutely all coercion might be looked at immoral as a conclusion towards injustices of oppression. You can find other types of oppression, more simple kinds which evenly are not coercive such as mental oppression. Prilleltensky and Nelson reference Sandra Bartky who suggests "To get psychologically oppressed is to be weighed down in your thoughts; it is to have a tough dominion exercised over your self-esteem. The psychologically oppressed become their own oppressors; they come to exercise severe dominion over their own self-esteem. Differently put, emotional oppression can be thought to be the 'internalisation of intimations of inferiority" ((Isaac & Prilleltensky, 2002, p. 13).
In this admiration there is no make or coercion; individuals will have the ability to make free choice in making decisions, therefore the lack of voluntary choice is not affected. Individuals who are psychologically oppressed become their own persecutors. The options can be found to them but they are only likely to make decisions and choices which their culture or community needs of them. You will find other kinds of components of oppression at the job which are strong, fluent and interact, as oppression doesn't take place in isolation but many pushes come together in order to hold people in circumstances of oppression (Frye 2005).
Oppression is well noted throughout background and in books. Particular references are created to slavery of the treating African slaves, the holocaust and the hurting and torture of Western Jews. The organized discrimination against erotic minorities including gay and lesbians ((Cudd, 2006). The disproportionate use of 'stop and search' against black minorities being seven times much more likely to be ended by the police likened whites ((Muffler, 2006).
The above instances make reference to the way in which physical ill-treatment is used to subjugate particular groups of people. However, the most effective and effective way a world can propagate oppression is by something of non-physical means changing into an activity of what we call negative labelling or commonly referred to as stereotyping.
There are many studies undertaken which identify the consequences of stereotyping on particular groupings. This consists of how these sets of individuals self-categorise themselves into positive or negative stereotyping which in any event causes negative and detrimental effects. Michael Hogg refers to a study carried out by Jost and Elsbach recommending the hyperlink between stereotyping and vitality differentials as a poor force within social relations which results in distortion, control and fake awareness of the oppressed communities actuality ((Hogg, 2002). The component of control is imbedded in to the awareness of the individuals being stereotyped. Altshuller identifies the following quotation by Jost and Banaji "people that have electric power can control ideas, values, and stereotypes in the same way they control other interpersonal and materials resources and can in so doing instil a 'false awareness' in the powerless in a way that the powerless become complicit in their own downside" ((Altshuller, 1999, p. 325). The poor become accepting of their position to be oppressed and psychologically become their own oppressors by self-limiting their opportunities and life chances. Cudd makes the next point, "it is not that they (the psychologically oppressed) will choose oppression to justice, or subordination to equality, rather they will like the kinds of public roles that tend to subordinate them, make them less able to choose, or provide them with fewer selections to make" (Cudd, 2008, p. 114).
There has been varying degrees of research analysing the partnership between oppression and stereotyping which support studies that individuals who are adversely stereotyped adopt the stereotyping. This in turn sets into action self-defeating beliefs which evolves into limiting factors in being able to access life opportunities. In a report conducted by Devos and Banaji they refer to how stereotyping causes a kind of phenomenon that results in self-stereotyping ((Banaji, et el, 2005).
However, stereotyping distorts the truth of the lived activities of people who are being stereotyped. Sayers shows that "the media influences our perceptions and these perceptions then affect our behavior towards stereotyped groups (Sayre, 2009, p. 318). So for example if we see a rebellious young teenage black adolescent, we may understand him/her as getting a violent culture compared to a white civilised Western european culture. Instead of challenging institutional oppression we use blame to transfer the focus of responsibility (Cudd, 2006).
Stereotyping can be harmful in different ways. According to the theory of stereotype danger ((Laurie A. Rudman, 2008) "the lifestyle of such stereotypes means that anything one will or any of the one's features that conform to it make the stereotype more plausible as a self-characterisation in the sight of others, and perhaps even in one's own sight" (Steele and Aronson, 1995, p. 797).
A further dimensions to stereotyping is direct situational danger that arises through negative stereotyping. This relates to the risk of being cured or judged in a stereotypical way or even perhaps self-fulfilling the stereotype.
Immediate situational hazard is another result of the negative stereotypes against an organization. That is the threat of the possibility to be judged or cared for stereotypically, or even self-fulfilling the stereotype. This stereotype danger, according to Stangor, "Can befall a person with a group individuality about which some negative stereotype is accessible, and for the individual to be threatened in this way he do not need to even imagine the stereotype. He need only know which it stands as a hypothesis about him in situations where in fact the stereotype is pertinent"(Stangor, 2000, p. 370).
There are many studies carried out checking out the relationship between stereotype threat and poor intellectual testing (Weiten, 2012). Differing people will react differently to situational menace. Individuals will either blame themselves because of their lack of accomplishments or internalise inferiority, both which leads to cutting down their rank and status in culture (Aronson, 1995). Internalising the blame brings about individuals not feeling they have the ability or confidence to achieve success, therefore they tend not even to make any attempt. So for example, I've always wished to paraglide. It might not maintain my capacities, so haven't tried and never will. However, it will not affect my life opportunities, impact on my quality of life or leave me in an oppressed social position. Nevertheless, self-blame could cause to decrease and lower standard of living. If self-blame is used for our insufficient success on our incapacities, it could make it problematic to identify and challenge institutional oppression. Self-blame is the ultimate ingredient in retaining oppression.
Realigning the balance
In order to redress the balance, there are different ways to overcome oppression in culture and attain a more egalitarian society. This involves personal dedication in challenging oppressive structure. It needs re-structuring of set up institutions and the idea processes that influences them. It really is helpful to understand that simply making plans to encourage change will not help, although guidelines give some course reflecting where world is going, it generally does not simply "promote public justice and reduce oppression" (O'Connor, 2003, p. 20).
It is not really a far-fetched view, that stereotyping is employed to justify all types of harms on groups of individuals. Harm causes damage to one's capability. Therefore any harm that violates one's self applied and their development of real human capability is a violation of universal and human rights (Nussbaum, 2001). The impact and effect of negative labelling attacks and destroys his/her sense of personal image by violating their experiences. This violation occurs not only bodily but through years of 'training' and being subject to negative announcements, instilling a wrong consciousness and it is this which results in oppression.
All human beings have a right to live free from physical and mental violations which results in any form of injury. Each individual gets the right to dignity, self-worth, and to maximise their inside potential without worries of abuse. Through self-stereotyping, if we lack the self-assurance that we do not have abilities then we have been less likely to pursue and develop our features.
However, simply having basic people protection under the law is not sufficient to bypass the harm which oppression triggers. Challenging cultural dynamics, religious procedures and sociable norms which create the kinds of conditions for oppression to flourish should be confronted through education and providing information permitting individuals to make decisions and alternatives that not violate their sense of self applied.
Developing influential role models that advocate and create a collective identify irrespective of their individuality can assist in growing images of credible and honourable reps. Such individuals would help to counter the negative portrayal of groups which are likely to be exposed to some type of negative labelling.
The way to ending all varieties of oppression is by very good not a fairly easy journey. More often than not minority leaders hardly ever challenge the constructions or the machine but instead they adjust to increase their own usage of power. It is not uncommon that lots of minority leaders having positions of impact create the feeling of equality of opportunity which is reassuring to the privilege groups. However, this kind of representation could be damaging to the oppressed categories, as it distorts the truth of the oppressed, overlooking the very real problem with ethnic oppression. It has the chance of looking over the conditions and communal problems which keeps people in their underprivileged positions. Rather than focusing on readdressing the system, oppressed communities are ridiculed, blamed and stereotyped for their circumstances (Segal, 2009).
To overcome the impact of self-stereotyping, simply stopping cultural stereotype is insufficient. More must be done to increase individuals' potential and self-worth, so that each member of world can enjoy their true individuals rights. Social conditioning starts at an extremely early years, which defines our id and the realisation of the ability or having less it. If we focus on countering the detrimental stereotypes in our communities, then sketching our attention at children when they are young might be considered a start. This might include improving the grade of education and financing for the schools, but also ensure that financing is distributed equally to avoid creating a culture of differential treatment.
Education of adults is another aspect which would help out with reducing oppression. What is needed here's effective training that not only targets the future users of world but also on those people who are damaged by oppression and stereotype menace currently. Within this exists the task and the target at reversing the stereotypes and reconstructing specific functions. Re-establishing and re-developing the undermined capabilities is our most important process here. Education which raises the understanding and empower oppressed groupings should reap the benefits of public support. There is no hesitation that education itself is not simply simply a treatment to a intricate selection of dynamics such as oppression but it remains the most strongly established organization towards seeking recovery. An educational method originating and centred from the experiences of the oppressed is what is needed. In his publication, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire provides following estimate: "Just like the oppressor, in order to oppress, needs a theory of oppressive action, so the oppressed, in order to become free, also desire a theory of action. The oppressor elaborates his theory of action without the people, for he stands against them. Nor can the people-as long as they are crushed and oppressed, internalizing the image of the oppressor-construct independently the theory of their liberating action. Only in the come across of the people who have the brand new leader-in their communion, in their praxis-can this theory be built (Freire, 2007, p. 183). Having market leaders with integrity and institutional support will be the necessary elements in the finishing of oppression.
Greater understanding and consciousness should be progressed into making individuals drive self-employed from the negative identities, so that people have a population that is built on strong ambitious people. As part of a broader community, restructuring the functions which have been damaged and growing people to an equal threshold of using their potential and features. Pushing positive perceptions of identity would bring about opening up a variety of possibilities and experience which is crucial in undermining the negative habits of thoughts and feelings which cause internalising the oppression. Lowering the patterns of oppressive thoughts would be one of the first challenges towards making improvement in closing all kinds of internal and external oppression.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay