Harboring Humanity As time moves on the world has plenty of opportunities to improve and make changes. The world has an abundance of dilemmas, but equality should no longer be one of those dilemmas. Equality is seen as a part of humanity and if there are limits to equality, then there are limits on humanity. In the story, The Lesson by Toni Cade Bambara, the topic of equality and socioeconomic status are often discussed. According to the American Psychological Association the definition of socioeconomic status is, “the social standing or class of an individual or group. It is often measured as a combination of education, income and occupation” (socioeconomic status). The story is about an educated African American teacher who takes her barely …show more content…
This should have been held true for all men and women no matter the color, the class, and the education. All humans have to right to pursue happiness and as the author Bambara stated, that means have the equal opportunity to earn as much money as those in the upper socioeconomic class (696). In fact, in the story Bambara makes it apparent the ridiculous amount of money the toys were worth. Bambara said, “Imagine for a minute, what kind of society it is in which some people can spend on a toy what it would cost to feed a family of six or seven’” (696). One might question if it is humane that a toy costs as much as a family’s food. Is it humane? Should something so frivolous be the same amount as something so vital? Lastly, is this factor of inequality limiting or encouraging humanity? The answer to these questions are no this is not humane and no a toy should not cost more than the food for a family of six or seven, and inequality is harboring humanity. It does not make any sense to separate the different socioeconomic classes because when everyone has a steady cash flow and a glowing opportunity at an education the economy hits a golden streak for everyone, and …show more content…
When Native Americans are being made fun of and constantly reminded that their ancestors were torn apart and made out to be savages by the White men, it is hard to pick up the pieces and move on. Native Americans shouldn’t even be associated with savages or racial slurs, but that is what is happening when Natives are being seen as Mascots. For example, at one point OSU was playing against a team with a Native American mascot and they had on a banner, “Send them home on a trail of tears” (Charles). The Trail of Tears is not an event to be made a mockery of, because it moved the Cherokee tribe from their homeland state of Georgia to the state of Oklahoma, and over 4,000 Cherokee people died during the removal (Trail of Tears, PBS). This shows that even though a minority socioeconomic group is working towards advancement in the world of the majority socioeconomic group, but some people in the majority socioeconomic group will find anything and do everything to keep the barriers between the two
Team mascots that depict a certain type of group is wrong and should be changed. It is degrading and hurtful to far too many people to keep them from staying the same. Native Americans or any other race or ethnicity should not be stereotyped in a way that degrades them in any way. All teams that have mascots that are named after a certain race or ethnicity should be changed.
“In the 21st century America, to name a sports team after an African American, Asian or any other ethnic group is unthinkable, so why are Native Americans still fair game”? (Shakely 522) Jack Shakely, former chair of the los Angeles City/county Native American Commission as well as president emeritus of the California community Foundation, effectively argues that removing Native American names and mascots from college and professional teams is the right thing to do. Indian mascots for sports teams are offensive to many Native Americans because they are portrayed as savage cut-throats or act like fools. Jack Shakely argues his point in the article, “Indian Mascots- You’re Out!”
In his Sports Illustrated article, “The Indian Wars,” S.L. Price argues that there is no easy answer to whether or not the use of Native American mascots by high school, college, and professional sports teams is offensive. “It's an argument that, because it mixes mere sports with the sensitivities of a people who were nearly exterminated, seems both trivial and profound -- and it's further complicated by the fact that for three out of four Native Americans, even a nickname such as Redskins, which many whites consider racist, isn't objectionable.” Whereas Price provides ample evidence that his claim is true, I disagree with the way it was presented and I still insist that Native American names and mascots are offensive. “The Indian Wars” troubles me because of (a) its pronounced bias, seemingly intent to distract from the history and implications of mascots as it derails efforts to challenge them; (b) its use of polling and representations of opinion; (c) the impression it undoubtedly leaves on its audience that mascots are unproblematic, particularly because indigenous people say so; and (d) the legacies of such inappropriate and inaccurate renderings for public debate and social justice. The Sports Illustrated article leaves much out.
Logos in professional sports like the Cleveland Indians with the added features to the logo has caused a lot of conflict in the past and today. Most schools or franchises that have Native American mascots have tribal people who will stand up for the name and say that you can have them as long as they are not doing anything that people would find offensive to the culture of the Native Americans. A college in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, Central Michigan University, has a native tribe name for their mascot, the Chippewas. However, the school does not have an offensive logo, doesn’t have anyone dressed up at sporting events, or for activities around campus.
There is a lot of controversy surrounding elementary, middle and high schools using Native American mascots because it gives them stereotypes of the tribe or people before they learn about them. It is felt that it would give them stereotypes of the Native American people being fierce and wild people who kill and hunt. The problem with this is that for many Indian tribes, that is the case. In the case of the Seminoles, they have an entire war named after them, and people want us to believe that they did not kill. The arguments provided by people opposed to these mascots also state that it is racist and demeaning to the tribe.
Sports organizations that have ethnic team names and mascots have been a controversial hot topic for decades. Professional sports franchises like the Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and Washington Redskins have maintained significant presence and fan base in their respective leagues, but disputes over the perceived racial offensiveness of their names has surrounded them. Some Native American activist groups and political figures think ethnic team names and mascots are disrespectful to their culture and defame the historical legacy of their ancestors. They view the name “Redskins” as a racial slur, and the cartoonish-looking Chief Wahoo mascot for the Cleveland Indians as mockery rather than flattery. Despite the fact that sports franchises know their brand is offending ethnic groups, they have refused to change their team names. Native Americans have experienced psychological distress, lower self-esteem, and a lower sense of achievement because of the offensive and stereotypical names/logos of these teams ("Washington Redskins: Do Offensive Team Names Endanger Public Health?"). This begs the question, should sports teams with potentially offensive names and mascots be required to change their identities in order to be more racially sensitive and politically correct?
Privilege is thinking something is not a problem because it’s not a problem to someone personally. It’s difficult to see a situation for what it is when it’s not specifically affecting a person. In the article “Indian mascots — you’re out,” author Jack Shakely discusses that the cultural appropriation of Native American mascots in college and professional sports teams is treated like a minuscule matter, but removing the mascots would be “the right thing to do.” Shakely expounds his first experience of conflict with his background and supporting the Cleveland Indians. The article is an opinion piece from Los Angeles Times, published on August 25, 2011. Although it isn’t recent, it’s indubitably timely. The appropriation of Native American culture
Redskins, Seminoles, Tribe, Indians, what do they all have in common? They are all athletic team names under scrutiny by people who deem them as being racist. For years, people have argued over the fact that these names and/or mascots are being used in a negative way. Some have been changed while others are still being argued over. Teams with these mascots should not be forced to change their names because the majority of Native Americans are not even bothered by these sports names.
After watching the Teach Us All documentary on Netflix, it opened my eyes to many of the issues regarding educational inequality. The study looked at schools in Little Rock, New York City, and Los Angeles to show us the current state of U.S. education and how far we have come since the school desegregation crisis. The thesis of this documentary is that since the efforts of the Little Rock Nine, our belief is that educational inequality has improved when in reality, it hasn’t improved and the actions of our country have had negative effects. Teach Us All emphasizes the need for unity and collective action to improve our education system for the kids in poor communities that are in the most need. Our country has devoted all the resources to the middle and upper class for education and are taking money away from where it needs to
Education has been historically considered as an equalizer of society in America, allowing the opportunity for even the disadvantaged to reach success. Race was once the strongest factor in determining future achievement, but today Stanford Sociologist, Sean F. Reardon, says income level has become more consequential (Tavernise). President Barack Obama was one of the lucky few able to overcome the obstacles he faced growing up being both African American and underprivileged, but most children are not as lucky (Rampton , Nawaguna). In The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, by Rebecca Skloot, the Lacks family lived in poverty and struggled to perform well in school, resulting in many of them dropping out even before high school (Skloot). The success gap between high and low income students in the U.S. has increased significantly in recent years (McGlynn). The educational achievement of students is significantly affected by their home life, and those living in poverty are much more likely to fall behind academically than children coming from affluent families.
Where would you consider yourself with your ranking in America 's social classes, are you upper class, middle class or even lower class? This is actually very important when it come to you receiving opportunities and in a sense special treatment. I’m referring to of course social inequality which is still very much alive in America and still affects a lot of families mostly in a negative way. This problem in America has grabbed the attention of two authors, Paul Krugman who wrote “Confronting Inequality” and Gary S. Becker and Kevin M. Murphy who wrote “The Upside of Income Inequality”. However, they both have different views on inequality Krugman believes that social inequality is only negative while on the other hand, Becker and Murphy believe
Jean Anyon’s “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work” claims that students from different social classes are treated differently in schools. Anyon’s article is about a study she conducted to show how fifth graders from the working, middle, and upper class are taught differently. In Anyon’s article, she provides information to support the claim that children from different social classes are not given the same opportunities in education. It is clear that students with different socio-economic statuses are treated differently in academic settings. The curriculum in most schools is based on the social class that the students belong to. The work is laid out based on academic professionals’ assumptions of students’ knowledge. Teachers and educational professionals assume a student’s knowledge based on their socio-economic status.
Mickelson, R. A. & Smith, S.S. (2004). Can education eliminate race, class, and gender inequality? In M.L Andersen & P.H. Collins (Eds.), Race, class, and gender: An Anthology (pp. 407-415). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
In many low income communities, there are teachers that are careless and provide their students with poor quality education. These teachers are there just to make sure that they keep receiving their monthly paychecks and act in this way because they believe that low income students do not have the drive, the passion, or the potential to be able to make something of themselves and one day be in a better place than they are now. Anyon reveals that in working class schools student’s “Work is often evaluated not according to whether it is right or wrong but according to whether the children followed the right steps.” (3). This is important because it demonstrates that low income students are being taught in a very basic way. These children are being negatively affected by this because if they are always being taught in this way then they will never be challenged academically, which can play a huge role in their futures. This argument can also be seen in other articles. In the New York Times
The next reason we’ll be looking at are the stereotypical images commonly seen in literature and mascots. Mainstream media such as “Dances with Wolves”, “The Lone Ranger”, and “The Last of The Mohicans” and mascots in professional sports teams like Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and Chicago Blackhawks all include representations of Native Americans that for some, are offensive. With this in mind, ...