"Symbolic ethnicity" is a term coined by Herbert Gans. It refers to ethnicity that is individualistic in nature and without real social cost for the individual. These symbolic identifications are essentially leisure time activities, rooted in nuclear family traditions reinforced by voluntary enjoyable aspects of being ethnic (Gans 424-429). "Symbolic ethnicity" is practiced and enjoyed by white Americans. It is a way for descendants of white Europeans to learn about and be proud of their heritage. That is not the case for non-whites who are grouped together by the white majority making ethnic identity difficult . This type of ethnicity is rooted in immigrants of European descent. It could be the Feast of Saint Anthony or Columbus Day for the Italians. The Kosciusko Day Parade for the Polish, the Puerto Rican Day Parade, the St Patrick's Day celebrations for the Irish, the Greek festivals and carnivals held at the various Greek Orthodox churches and German festivals that abound during Oktoberfest in the five county area in the course of a year. These are parades and celebrations are attended by county commissioners, mayors and governors and are usually televised on the local network. They are functions that celebrate the ethnicity of the people. In many cases, the participants dress in traditional garb and eat traditional foods. As Waters points out in her essay these people draw on what is called "specialness" which is taking the positive images of one's ethnicity while not having to deal with any of the negative features (Waters) in her paper Choosing Identities in America. White immigrants are able to be who they want to be ignoring the traits that they find unfavorable. Blacks and Asians in America are not ... ... middle of paper ... ...ation of black fraternities and sororities celebrated in Philadelphia, is often on the news for the transgressions of a few bad apples usually not even the fraternity brothers or sisters. The St. Patrick's Day Parade is on WPVI Channel Six every year in all of its pomp and circumstance. In order for there to be a change, it must be a change supported by the white majority. The country is getting closer to colorblindness. Celebrating the heritage of the homeland will be something enjoyed by whites, blacks and Asians. It will be a celebration of descendants of slaves, Jamaicans, Bahamians, Koreans, Chinese and Vietnamese to name a few. It will give America the opportunity to partake in the rich history and tradition these new immigrants have to offer. It will reassert American as the melting pot it once was for white immigrants on the early twentieth century.
Chinese immigrants were often discriminated against because they were easy to spot. They spoke a different language and, looked different physically. Irish immigrants, however, had an easier time blending in because they had physical features similar to Americans. They were not so easy to pick out in a crowd. Erika Lee says, “Immigrants have been excluded and restricted on the basis of their race, ethnicity, class, gender, sexuality, moral standing, health, and political affiliation, among other factors.” (Lee, p. 39) Lee is saying that Americans would do anything to discriminate against immigrants. If immigrants stood out because of physical features they could more easily be targeted by society. Those immigrants that could better blend in were more likely to be included within a society. Racially those who were different were not wanted in America, but why? Americans loved the idea of having one transnational race. When immigrants of another race would arrive and start reproducing with people of the white American race, cultures started to mix, racial lines became blurred. Erika Lee says, “It provided a powerful framework, model, and set of tools to be used to understand and further racialize other threatening, excludable, and undesirable aliens.” (Lee, p. 42) In this quote Lee is stating how with the exclusion of the Chinese, this further pushed Americans to be more discriminatory against immigrants solely based on race. This
Overall my goal was to see the function of race and ethnicity and how it relates to the sociological effects of these Afro-Latino groups. As a result, in some cases that I have studied, being an immigrant may mask one’s beliefs and tend to deny their true roots due to social tensions and pressure. Through my experience, in some cases I saw that being “black” or being “African” perceives negative connotations to some individuals and causes one to separate themselves from their roots. For the purposes of my study, while filling out the questionnaire, when an Afro-Latino approached the question in reference to their African roots, as an alternative, they would ignore the African portion of the question and respond by saying they are only Latino or Latina.
Many immigrant and minority narratives concentrate their efforts on the positive side of the American dream. These particular stories narrate a person's struggle and rise through the ranks of the Am6rican hierarchy focusing on the opportunities that seem to abound in this country. While these stories are well and good. they do seem to soft peddle the flip side of this country's attitude toward the immigrant and minority. America is a land of milk and honey and opportunity, but unfortunately most new officiates or unwilling participants in the American culture face an American nightmare that leaves its effects on the individuals, families and cultures for generations to come. America has its own deeply seated prejudices and stereotypes of people from outside its walI5 and these prejudices force some immigrants and minorities either to abandon former cultural ties in order to assimilate or to strap on the baldric of equality that changes their lives forever.
Racial identity and flexibility may be interpreted in a variety of ways, but first, it’s truly important to understand the meaning of both. Racial identity is defined as a sense of group or collective identity based on one's perception that he or she shares a common heritage with a particular racial group. On the other hand, racial identity can be considered as having flexibility, which can be defined as the ability to be easily modified. Racial identity and flexibility intertwine because they both complement each other. In Hua Hsu’s essay, “The End of White America?”
I have never been hyphenated as German-American, like many ethnicities are titled in ways such as Mexican-American, Asian-American etc. This leads me into talking about Symbolic Ethnicity, “Symbolic ethnicity is a term coined by Herbert Gans (1979) to refer to ethnicity that is individualistic in nature and without real social cost for the individual.” From the reading “Mary Waters, A Professor Of Sociology At Harvard University, Is The Author Of. Optional Ethnicities: For Whites Only? By Mary Waters (n.d.): n. pag. Web.” Why is it that it is so easy to obtain the “all American” title for someone who is Caucasian, but so difficult for a minority to identify as an
...silenced in this country, in order to have voice and be visible in society, one must strive to be a white American. They feel the need to embody and assimilate to whiteness because the white race has a voice and is seen, rather than silenced and unseen, in society. They are privileged with the freedom of not having to cope with the notion of being marked, silent, and unseen in society. This creates pressures for Asian Americans and immigrants to suppress their own cultural identities and assimilate to whiteness in an attempt to potentially be able to prosper and make a life for them in America. Asian Americans feel as though being who they truly are and express their unique cultural identities will alienate themselves even more than they already are.
As a European immigrant in the USA, I have encountered many new cultural phenomena in the last 4 _ years that have challenged me to perceive who I am differently. This experience has been even more polarized by the fact that I have lived most of that time in Los Angeles, a melting pot to be reckoned with. Coming to America, I expected these adaptations to my Irish self but the intensity of becoming cognizant of my label of 'whiteness' has mocked the limitations of my anticipations.
One of the biggest, growing debates today is the issue of immigration into the U.S. I just don’t understand why there’s such a big debate. I compare this issue to the issue of racism in the way that, no matter what you do, "they" are always going to be here, and it is only ignorance that keeps the issue ablaze. The fact that migrants are not mostly white these days, also makes the issue one more of race. As Charles S. Clark puts it in The New Immigrants, "In the 1990’s, Americans who grew up in a historically white, Anglo-Saxon society are having to adjust to a Polish-born chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, John Shalikashvili; to Spanish-language editions of People magazine on Seven-11 shelves; and to Buddhist temples and Islamic mosques rising in their communities." In the case of immigration, though, the ignorance is apparent in both the immigrant and the non-immigrant.
Identity is one of the main questions throughout all of our readings, because it is hard for people to accept who they are in society. Accepting their identity as a minority with little if any freedoms sparks many of the social problems which I will show happening in all communities and cultures. The main issue we will discuss is how social environments effect the search for identity. The Mexicans in the U.S. module gives us examples how Mexicans try to keep their customs while living in a discriminated environment by the Whites. This module also gives us examples how people are searching for personal identity while struggling with cultural traditions. Finally, the African-American module gives us more examples to compare with the Mexicans in the U.S. module, because these readings deal with Blacks finding personal identity also through discrimination from the Whites. To properly understand the theme of identity, we must first look the factors influencing it.
It is necessary, in order to grasp the role race has in immigration, to understand what exactly Americanness is. Based on the experiences of immigrants and the dominant culture of the nation, Americanness is the status attributed to an American citizen who is fully incorporated into the traditions, cultures, and lifestyle choices of mainstream America. On the surface, this appears to merely be an issue of musical preference, or religious beliefs. However, actual Americanness is transcendent and engrained in whiteness. Whiteness, curiously enough, does not necessarily relate to actually being white insofar as skin color is concerned, but rather, in being fully steeped in dominant American culture. Because of this connection, Americanness and whiteness are, essentially, one in the same.
Race has proven to be more than the color of someone’s skin. Race, through personal experience, is stigmas and stereotypes, limits and control, power, and opportunity. Race is about shades, hues, and pigments justifying bias actions. Does one race, because of something that cannot be changed, have an advantage over another? Does something as simple as the color dictate how one is seen in society and limit what one can and cannot do?
To most people ethnicity is shown by values, lifestyles, customs, and rituals that are personal to an individual ethnic group or religion. The feeling of belonging to a certain group is a basic need for mankind. In a sense, ethnicity can be separated into two particular categories, a unique social structure and culture heritage passed down from one generation to the next.
He mournfully tells his audience he has “moved away from the periphery and toward the center of American life, [he] has become white inside” (Liu 1). As a young chinese boy growing up in America, he was taught the way to assimilation was to abandon the language, culture, and traditions of his ancestors, and his essay is a remorseful reflection on the consequences of his sacrifice. Despite giving away so much, despite doing it all to ‘become white’, he will always be an outsider – race and skin color can never be the uniting factor of a community. Eric Liu goes on to talk about how “the assimilist is a traitor to his kind, to his class, to his own family” (Liu 2). Why does it need to be this way? The ‘a-word’ (assimilist) need not be a negative one, if only assimilation meant adapting to an ideology rather than one race’s culture. If that were the true meaning of assimilation, the idea that to assimilate is to betray would be eradicated. The current method of naturalization to American culture is unacceptable: The only thing that will unite Americans will be a common goal to promote good values and hard work within
In Globalization The Essentials, Ritzer says that all racial and ethnic statuses are products of social definitions based on seemingly objective traits (Ritzer.p264). Markus and Moya make a similar proposition, that race and ethnicity are not things that people have or are, rather they are actions that people do. they go on to say that race and ethnicity are social, historical, and philosophical processes that have been "done" for years. This idea is interesting in suggesting that people who claim a race or ethnicity are "doing race and ethnicity to themselves. It also suggests that people who use these categories to indentify groups, or as a basis of discrimination, are "doing" race and ethnicity to others. Stereotypes and other notions based on race and ethnicity are simply more ways people do this to eachother (Markus.et.al.p140) While there have been many previous "scientific studies" that "prove" the differences between races (such as the questionable study of measuring skull sizes to determine the IQ of a race), We now know that these studies were not accurate and were simply means by which to justify racism. Current studies have proven that there are actually no biological markers that are unique to one race or ethnicity(Markus.et.al.p144.). Unfortunately, as Ritzer cites, if men define a situation as real, the consequences of these situations become real.(Ritzer.p265) We can see today, that the consequences of the imagined race and ethnicity have become very real.
In the United States, “ethnics” came to be used at around Second World War as a polite way of referring to the Jews, Italian, Irish, and other people considered inferior to the dominant group of largely British descent. Since the 1960s, ethnic groups and ethnicity have become household words in English-speaking social anthropology[2]. In everyday language, the word ethnicity still has a ring of minority issues and race relations to it.