![[ Return to APA Home Page ]](http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/pix/new.gif) Search
Site
Map
Contact Us
National Office News
Letters to the Executive
Director
Meetings & Divisions
Secretary-Treasurers
Central
Eastern
Pacific
Annual Meetings
Paper Submissions
Travel Stipends & Grants
Governance
By-Laws
Board of Officers
Board Meeting Minutes
Committees
National Office
History of the APA
Reprinting Policies &
Permission Fees
Profession
Data
APA Statements
Average
Faculty Salaries
Advertising
Advertising
Advertising
in JFP
Schedules & Deadlines
Resources
Conferences, Seminars
& Calls for Papers
JobSeeker Database
Teaching Committee's
Online Resource Center
Streaming
Video
Philosophy
in the News
Prizes & Awards
Web Resources
Department Web Sites
Other Organizations of
Related Interest Publications & Merchandise
Publications
&
Merchandise
list
APA Newsletters
Other Publications
Schedules & Deadlines Member Services
Membership Info
Becoming a Member
Members Only Section
Login
Member Section Index
Services:
Membership Directory
Resources:
Jobs for Philosophers
APA Newsletters
Member Home Pages
Proceedings & Addresses
Grants, Fellowships and Prizes
Sabbatical
Housing
|
APA
Committees
Philosophy 102: Racism
and Sexism
Philosophy
102: Racism and Sexism
Consider this syllabus a contract; you are responsible for the (piles
and piles of) information in it. NOTE: there are assignments in here
that I may not discuss in class. You are still responsible for handing
them in on the due days, even if I never breathe a word about them in
class. Feel free to ask any questions you have about information in
this syllabus. Reread it regularly during the semester.
Instructor
Lisa Heldke
Old Main 106A, Extension 7029, email heldke@gac.edu
Office Hours: M 10:30-11:30, W 3:30-4:30, F 9-10:30; other times by
appointment
Teaching
Associate
Bethany Mueller
Phone _________, email bmueller
Designated
Writing Center Tutor
Angela Janda
Email ajanda
Texts
The only text for this class is the thick photocopy packet, available
in the bookstore.**
[NOTE FROM THE APA: This course packet is now available as a textbook
from McGraw-Hill. See http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0072882433/qid=1075150733/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-0587329-7766228?v=glance&s=books
or search on Lisa Heldke on amazon, as it is not yet listed under its
title, which is: Oppression, Privilege, and Resistance: Theoretical
Readings on Racism, Sexism, and Heterosexism, by Lisa Heldke (Editor),
and Peg O'Connor (Editor)]
Bring the
relevant text to class every day; we will be doing a lot of textual
work, and it is very difficult if everyone doesn't have access to a
copy.
Time Commitment
Plan to spend a minimum of two hours outside of class for each hour
in class. That is amount of time you should spend on reading and carefully
thinking about the assignments. Weeks in which you are writing formal
papers will obviously require more time, as will weeks when you attend
outside activities and are writing informal papers. At the least, then,
you need ten hours per week to spend on this course. If you don't have
that kind of time, this isn't a good course for you.
About The
Course
This is a philosophy course, a course in theory. More specifically,
this is a course in theorizing about: 1) systems of oppression, privilege
and their interrelationships, and 2) systems of resistance to oppression.
Humans have created complex and pervasive systems for marking, separating
and ordering human beings. Two of the most pervasive of these systems
are race and gender. Race and gender systems are all encompassing in
their application; no one can reach the age of five without already
having some (often very clear) sense of themselves as belonging with
some people ("the boys," "Asian Americans") and
being different from, separate from, others ("the girls,"
"white people"). And no wonder: induction into one's race
and gender category begins at birth. (What's the first question often
asked about a new baby?)
Of course these categories have not been constructed for recreational
purposes-and individual humans usually have limited power to create,
enforce or change them. One central reason why there exists such a thorough
and fail-safe system for placing individuals into race and gender categories
is that these categories enable the maintenance of a pervasive system
of oppression. In plain terms, we live in a society in which it's very
important to establish clearly what race and gender you are, because
it is largely on these bases that your place in society's hierarchy
will be determined.
The point of this course is to try to understand, in theoretical terms,
how oppression works. We'll also use theory to try to understand the
flip side of oppression-privilege. (Some of us are privileged by virtue
of our race and/or gender, just as some of us are penalized.) And finally,
we'll examine some theoretical frameworks for engaging in individual
and collective resistance to the privilege/oppression system.
Please note: this course will not focus on contemporary issues per se.
If you are primarily interested in studying contemporary social phenomena,
there are other courses that would be more interesting and useful to
take. Our focus will be theory. Nevertheless, my hope is that you will
come to see theory as useful for analyzing your own experiences, and
I will give you assignments that give you ample opportunity to make
connections. Why do I emphasize that this is a theory course? Because
every term people leave disappointed that we didn't talk more about
contemporary issues. I want to make it clear at the outset that contemporary
issues are not the focus in philosophy.
While this is a philosophy course, it is perhaps unique in that many,
if not most of the writers we'll read are still alive. This means we
won't be reading the canonical works one usually encounters in a philosophy
class. That's partly because classical philosophers haven't said much
about the issues we'll consider (and partly because they were often
examples, rather than analysts of racism and sexism). We'll read a wide
variety of contemporary literature, some of which is quite well known,
and some of which is very new (for philosophy) and fairly obscure. Most
is written by academics (professional philosophers and other kinds of
theorists), while some of it is written by people far removed from academia.
All of it is theoretical-which simply means that all of it will help
us in our projects to develop general, flexible explanations of the
workings of race and gender, of racism and sexism, and of anti-racism
and anti-sexism.
Course
Goals
This course fills the requirements for both a writing credit and an
Area C (Meaning, Value and the Historical Perspective, or HUMAN) credit.
In order to meet these requirements, it has two goals: 1) to enable
you to become familiar with a body of philosophical ideas and theories
about racism and sexism; and 2) to give you the opportunity to develop
some philosophical skills in thinking and reasoning, both orally and
on paper. I consider myself obliged to fill these two goals in this
class. If at any time you think either skills or content is suffering,
I urge you to talk with me. (This is, after all, your education.)
I also have another goal. I want to contribute to the transformation
of society; I want this to be a more just world by the time I die. One
of the ways I think I can contribute to that is by creating spaces in
which people can think together about important questions. So, my real
goal in this class is for you to think hard, read a lot, and engage
with each other, not because you have to, but because by doing so, you
might take us a little way down the road to more social justice.
The following components of the course are designed to help you meet
these goals.
Course
Components
You must complete all assigned coursework in order to pass the course;
failure to do so will mean failing the course. Here are the specifics:
1. Participation
(10% of final grade) Your regular, active presence in class is expected.
"Active presence" includes making productive contributions
to discussions, and also being an engaged listener. Time in class will
be a mix of large- and small-group discussion, with small pieces of
lecture thrown in as the need arises. You'll assign yourself a participation
grade for the class, based on your own assessment of how well you achieved
specific goals you set. See the page of this syllabus labeled "Discussion:
Goal Setting" for your first assignment.
2. Attendance:
I regard all absences as "excused"; that is, I assume that,
as busy, responsible adults, you will occasionally find yourself unable
to attend class, whether it is because of illness, transportation problems,
special events, family crises, etc. I do not differentiate among these
reasons, and expect you to be responsible for your attendance. In a
discussion-based class, however, missing class discussion is missing
coursework that cannot be made up. (It's like missing a quiz that you
can't take at a later date.) Therefore, absences affect final grades:
a. 1-4 absences: no effect
b. 5-8 absences: grade will be lowered one full letter
c. 9-11 absences: grade will be lowered two full letters
d. 12 or more absences: subject to my discretion, you may fail the course.
In connection with the course, each of you will choose and attend six
lectures, meetings, workshops or other public Gustavus events that address
race and racism, gender and sexism or sexual preference and heterosexism.
You'll write brief (two page) informal writings about these events.
See the page entitled "Attending and Writing About Public Events"
for details.
3. Focus
on a Social Change Organization: Each of you will select one activist
organization (national or regional-not Gustavus) whose primary aim is
to challenge some aspect of racism, sexism or heterosexism/homophobia.
During the course of the term, two of your informal papers will focus
on this organization, as will some of your informal writings. By focusing
on a real organization, you will learn to analyze theories to see how
useful and reliable they are in the ordinary world. Your knowledge of
the organization will also give you another meaningful way to contribute
to class discussion. See the page labeled "Choosing a Social Change
Organization" for more details, and for your first informal assignment
about the organization.
4. Formal
Papers (60% of final grade): You'll write three formal papers during
the semester. Assignments will be designed to give you practice on various
skills used in philosophizing (e.g. accurately summarizing an author's
arguments, analyzing the quality of their arguments, constructing your
own arguments, connecting theory to practice). They will also give you
a chance to think more deeply about particular issues raised in class.
For the first two formal papers, we will spend one class period in a
writing workshop, during which you will critique one of your classmates'
papers. Drafts are required.
See the schedule at the end of the syllabus for paper writing due dates.
Dates are somewhat tentative; they're subject to change, but not without
notice. Each of you has one free one-week extension on one paper (except
the final). On the day the paper is due, you may tell me "I'm taking
my extension this time," and you may turn the paper in one week
later. This offer may only be used once-NO OTHER LATE PAPERS WILL BE
ACCEPTED-so plan accordingly.
Here is a tentative list of paper topics (subject to change in light
of people's interests).
a. In Paper 1, you will attempt to ascertain how the organization you've
chosen defines oppression. You will interpret and explain the organization's
definition in light of the definitions you'll study during the first
segment of the course.
b. Paper 2 will construct an analysis of a form of privilege from which
you benefit (race, gender, sexual orientation), utilizing the analyses
of privilege you read in the second segment of the course.
c. Paper 3 will again explore the organization you chose. In it, you
will propose a strategy for resistance to oppression and privilege that
you believe the organization should employ. You'll use the theories
of resistance you'll read in the last segment of the course, and also
your own research into the work of the organization.
5. Informal
Writing (25% of final grade) In addition to writing formal papers, you
will also do a significant amount of informal writing in the course.
Informal writing is designed to get you in the habit of thinking through
your ideas by writing about them. Therefore, informal writings needn't
be as "clean" or polished as your formal papers. Their aim
is to give you a chance to work on some ideas without having to worry
too much about the mechanics.
A second aim of informal writing is to give you opportunity to try out
your ideas on your classmates. Thus, some informal assignments will
be designed to be distributed to everyone, or to be read aloud and talked
about in small groups during class. I want to encourage lots of conversations
among the members of the class, both inside and outside the classroom.
Make it a point to respond to your classmates this term when they say
or write something you agree with, disagree with, don't understand,
find interesting, or want to hear more about.
Grading informal writing: Informal writing will be graded on a "percentage
of work completed" basis. E.g. if you do 94% of the informal assignments,
you get an A. Bethany and I read and comment on, but don't grade individual
assignments.
Handing
in informal writing: ALL informal writing goes to Bethany IN CLASS.
NO work will be accepted late, or outside of class. (It's just too confusing
for the bookkeeper.)
Varieties
of informal writing: Informal writing will come in three main varieties:
a. Occasionally, I'll ask you to write something during class, or outside
of class for the next day's class. It might be a question or response
to a question, it might be a response to a reading, or to how class
is going. These writings may be the foundations for small group discussions,
or I may just collect them and redistribute them randomly, to give you
an idea of what other people are thinking. (I might ask you to write
about how your organization would think about a particular issue, for
example.)
b. Theory into practice: writing about public events: You'll write six
two-page papers about public events you attend. These papers are designed
to help you identify the ways theories of oppression, privilege and
resistance are at work in the world, and to make connections between
what you're learning in class and what others are saying about these
issues. (See "Attending and Writing About Public Events" for
the details.)
c. Your work to evaluate your classmates' drafts counts as informal
writing.
A note
on plagiarism: If you pass off someone else's words or ideas as your
own, you have plagiarized-whether you do so intentionally or by accident,
and whether you do so in a formal paper or an informal writing. That
is true whether you quote directly, or paraphrase someone else's ideas.
That includes ideas in books, exchanged in conversation, or on the web.
Please consult a style manual, me, Bethany, Angela, the Writing Center,
or someone if you have any questions about what constitutes plagiarism
in your written work. (I have a handy sourcebook called Writing With
Sources that I'd be happy to show you.) Suffice it to say, plagiarism
is a violation of college policy, and is also a violation of the policies
of this class. If you plagiarize, you will receive a zero on that assignment,
and I will report the incident to the dean. If you plagiarize a second
time, I will give you an F for the class, and inform the dean of the
reason for the grade.
Access
to education: Every student has a right to be able to learn in this
class. If you have learning disabilities, please see me NOW about ways
we can make the class work for you. Bring any documentation you have
about your learning disability.
Racism
and Sexism Assignment Quick Reference Guide
Handy! Klip-n-save for your wallet!
Requirement
Where do I find out how to do it? How much is it worth; how is it graded?
Formal papers 1. Syllabus: "Formal Papers"
2. Assignments handed out a week in advance Three papers, 60%; letter
grades assigned by me
Informal writing 1. Syllabus:
a. "Attending and Writing About Public Events"
b. "Choosing a Social Change Organization"-your first assignment
2. Assignments given in class, on email
3. First draft evaluation forms, handed out with formal paper assignments.
All assignments together, 25%; graded on a percentage-of-work-completed
basis
Participation Syllabus: "Discussion: Goal Setting" 15%; self-graded,
based on your assessment of progress
Attendance Syllabus: "Attendance" Grade drops after more than
four class absences
Social Change Organization 1. Syllabus
2. "Choosing a Social Change Organization" Built into formal
and informal writing grade
Attendance @ public events Syllabus: "Attending and Writing About
Public Events" Built into informal writing grade
Note: You must complete all assignments in order to pass this course.
COURSE
SCHEDULE
Schedule
Dates to Note:
· February 10: Classes begin
· February 14: All-college conversation (we'll attend this in
lieu of regular class)
· February 17: Discussion assignment due
· February 21: Select your organization and submit your one-page
description of it
· Paper 1
a. March 12: Assignment distributed, discussed
b. March 17: Draft workshop
c. March 21: Final due
· March 28: half of your writings about public events must be
handed in
· March 29-April 6: Spring Break
· Paper 2
a. April 9: Assignment distributed
b. April 16: Draft workshop
c. April 23: Final due
· April 18-21: Easter Break
· April 30: MayDay! Conference (we'll attend in lieu of regular
class)
· May 21: Last day of classes
· ???: Final scheduled; we'll use this for a last, more informal
class session
· Paper 3
a. May 16: Assignment distributed
b. NO IN-CLASS DRAFT WORKSHOP; DRAFTS ON YOUR OWN
c. May 24: Final draft due in my office by 5 p.m.
Reading List/Rough Schedule
I've listed
more readings than we can cover. That means we have some flexibility;
we can eliminate things that people are less interested in. That, in
turn, means that it is up to you to keep track of which reading we are
doing when. I've noted the approximate number of days we will spend
on each section.
A. Theorizing
Forms of Oppression
1. Oppression:
General Theories (4 days)
Paolo Freire, Chapter 1 of Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Sandra Bartky, "On Psychological Oppression"
Iris Young, "Five Faces of Oppression"
2. Oppression
Axis 1: Racism (3 days)
bell hooks, "Overcoming White Supremacy"
Rodolfo Acuna, "Occupied America"
Ward Churchill, "Encountering the American Holocaust"
Ward Churchill, "Proposed Convention on the Prevention of Genocide"
Michael Omi, Howard Winant, "Racial Formation"
3. Oppression
Axis 2: Sexism (3 days)
Heidi Hartmann, "Towards a Definition of Patriarchy"
Carole Sheffield, "Sexual Terrorism"
Marilyn Frye, "Oppression
Michael Kimmel, "Inequality and Difference"
4. Oppression
Axis 3: Heterosexism/Homophobia (2 days)
Charlotte Bunch, "Not for Lesbians Only"
Timothy Beneke, "Homophobia"
Cheryl Clarke, "The Failure to Transform: Homophobia in the Black
Community"
Suzanne Pharr, "Homophobia: A Weapon of Sexism"
B. Theorizing
Forms of Privilege
1. Privilege:
A General Theory (1 day)
Alison Bailey, "Privilege"
2. Axis
1: White Privilege (2 days)
Peggy McIntosh, "White Privilege and Male Privilege"
doris davenport, "The Pathology of Racism"
Ruth Frankenberg, from the Introduction, White Women, Race Matters
3. Axis 2: Male Privilege (2 days)
John Stoltenberg, "How Men Have (a) Sex"
Alice Walker, "Coming Apart"
4. Axis
3: Heterosexual Privilege (2 days)
Bruce Ryder, "Straight Talk: Male Heterosexual Privilege"
Devon Carbado, "Straight Out of the Closet"
C. Complicating
Theories of Oppression and Privilege
1. Challenging
Dichotomous Thinking (3 days)
Mari Matsuda, "We Will Not Be Used"
Ana Castillo, "A Countryless Woman"
Francisco Valdes, "Notes on the Conflation of Sex, Gender, and
Sexual Orientation"
Anne Fausto-Sterling, "The Five Sexes"
2. Recognizing
Multiple Axes of Oppression (3 days)
Angela Harris, "Race and Essentialism in Feminist Legal Theory"
Edna Bonacich, "Inequality in America"
Marlon Riggs, "Black Macho Revisited"
June Jordan, "Report from the Bahamas" (last two pages are
reversed)
3. Being
Both Privileged and Oppressed (3 days)
Patricia Hill Collins, "Toward a New Vision
Timothy Beneke, "Gay Sexism"
Audre Lorde, "Age, Race, Class and Sex"
D. Theorizing
Resistance
1. Resistance
Strategy 1: Education
Lawrence Blum, "Antiracism, Multiculturalism, and Interracial Community"
Tia Cross, Freada Klein, et al., "Face to Face, Day to Day-Racism
CR"
Paul Hornacek, "Anti-Sexist CR Groups"
Leonard Schein, "Dangers"
2. Resistance
Strategy 2: Disloyalty, Disobedience, Traitorousness
Audre Lorde, "The Uses of Anger"
Vine Deloria, "Indian Humor"
Adrienne Rich, "Disloyal to Civilization"
3. Resistance
Strategy 3: Separatism and Identity Politics
Marilyn Frye, "Willful Virgin"
James Boggs, "Black Power: A Scientific Concept"
4. Resistance
Strategy 4: Revolution
James Cone, "Toward a Constructive Definition of Black Power"
pat parker, "Revolution"
bell hooks, "Feminist Revolution"
5. Resistance
Strategy 5: Coalition
Bernice Johnson Reagon, "Coalition Politics"
Elly Bulkin, "Breaking a Cycle"
Manning Marable, "Beyond Racial Identity Politics"
Mari Matsuda, "Standing Beside My Sister Facing the Enemy"
6. Resistance
Strategy 6: Neither/Nor
Kate Bornstein, "This Quiet Revolution"
Gloria Anzaldua, "La Consciencia de la Mestiza"
Karin Baker, "Bisexual Feminist Politics"
DISCUSSION:
GOAL SETTING
This page contains a writing assignment DUE IN BETHANY'S HANDS FEBRUARY
17
About Discussion
in Philosophy
Being able to discuss an idea with others--being able to follow a line
of argument, to contribute relevant information, to formulate and express
an opinion, to ask questions of clarification and challenge--is an extremely
important skill for philosophers. Often it is only through discussing
someone's argument with others that you really come to see how it works,
to see its strengths and weaknesses. The same is often true of one's
own arguments; not until you try to explain and defend them to others
does one really develop all the nuances of one's own position.
If we are rigorous and honest with each other in our discussions--demanding
clear, well-thought-out answers of ourselves and each other--we can
come to better understandings of what we believe. Just as writing clearly
makes us think more clearly, so too do speaking clearly and listening
carefully.
Discussion
and Your Grade: Your Assignment
Because I consider discussion to be such a central part of doing philosophy,
and because one of the ways I can show it is important is by grading
it, I calculate class participation into your final grade. (It will
be worth 10 percent of that grade.) However, because I also believe
that I am not always in the best position to know the ways in which
a student is contributing to the class discussion, I ask students to
assess themselves, and to tell me the grades they believe they have
earned.
To give yourself a starting point for thinking about participation,
write one or two pages in which you do the following:
1. Discuss how to create a discussion atmosphere in which participants
think hard and learn something. (Don't be satisfied with flabby talk
about how good discussions leave everyone feeling happy; try to think
of a discussion when you've come away having learned something. What
was it like? Was it necessarily comfortable?
2. Describe what is required of a good discussion participant.
3. Assess your own abilities in light of your analysis. What do you
do well?
4. What would you really like to do better? Be specific. GIVE YOURSELF
ONE OR TWO SPECIFIC GOALS TO WORK ON DURING THE SEMESTER. Be realistic.
Think about what you can actually accomplish in a semester, and place
that in the context of larger, longer-term goals you may have for yourself.
Keep one copy of this for yourself, and turn another copy in to me on
February 17. Look back on this document over the term. Jot down ways
in which your definition of good discussion changes, and also how you
see your own abilities developing. You will use this analysis, with
its revisions, to grade yourself at the end of the term.
I make a note of your goals, and work during the semester to create
opportunities for you to achieve them. It's up to you to put effort
into taking those opportunities, and also making your own.
ATTENDING AND WRITING ABOUT PUBLIC EVENTS
This page describes six informal writings due over the course of the
term
Attending
Events
During the course of the term, you will attend six public Gustavus events.
These events may include, but are not limited to, lectures, plays, movies,
organization meetings, conferences, or workshops. Each event must fill
the following criteria:
· The event focuses on an issue of race and racism, gender and
sexism, sexual identity and heterosexism and/or class and classism.
· There must be an opportunity for you to engage in discussion
with other people present at the event. You have to have some opportunity
to speak and/or listen to others present. (A movie should include a
discussion session afterwards, for instance.) This is almost always
a given at any education related event, so this shouldn't limit your
options.
· It must be a different kind of event from the other five events
you attend. (For instance, you can't go to six Women's Center meetings.
Don't go to six movies. The idea here is to expand your horizons, to
try out a meeting, a lecture, a movie.)
· The six events should not all focus on, say race and racism,
but should be a mixture of issues.
Some additional suggestions and observations:
· Choose at least two or three events to attend that will place
you in a minority position with respect to your race, gender, sexual
orientation or class. (Examples here might include meetings of Q and
A or Asian Cultures Club or Pan Afrikan Student Organization or Women's
Center.)
· Watching a movie with your roommates does NOT count as a public
event
· Bethany will announce relevant events during class each week;
see her if you have questions about other events you think might count.
Events already scheduled for this spring include: Native American pow
wow, Martin Luther King lecture, Building Bridges conference, workshops
by Men Can Stop Rape organization.
Writing
About Events
For each event you attend, you will write a two-page (double-spaced,
typed) informal writing. In your writing:
· Identify the thesis, the main point, the essential issues,
or the gist of the talk, workshop, etc. (This is good practice at an
activity that you'll use for the rest of your life.)
· Draw out some connection(s) between the point of this event,
and an issue or issues we've discussed in class. I'll leave this purposely
open ended, because I can't predict the events you will attend, or the
issues that will come up at them. Feel free to be very inventive and
experimental in drawing connections. (Think of yourself as trying to
make a map for yourself, by drawing lines between the topics in class,
and the topics that arise at this event.)
· Head your piece with the date, the event, and the number of
the assignment (e.g. Event Writing #3, April 1, Asian Cultures Club
meeting.)
Due Dates
· You may turn in your informals to Bethany any day in class.
Some caveats:
· You can only turn in one of these writings a day, and
· You must turn in at least three writings by the midpoint of
the semester (March 28).
(Together, these two caveats constitute the "no bunching"
clause, designed to encourage you to spread out this writing over the
semester, instead of stuffing it all into a long night.)
This page
contains a writing assignment due TO BETHANY February 21
This semester,
you will be testing the theories you learn in class against an actual
organization aimed at challenging racism, sexism or heterosexism/homophobia.
What do these theories enable us to see about that organization that
we might otherwise not notice? What do they miss? How might we use the
experience of this organization to strengthen them? Focusing on a specific
organization is one very concrete way you will gain skill in connecting
theory to practice.
You'll focus on one organization for the entire semester, which will
give you the chance to explore it quite a bit, and come to understand
it in something more than just a superficial way.
Criteria
for Choosing an Organization
1. The organization must be outside the confines of Gustavus. It may
be a St. Peter organization, or it may be a regional, national, or international
organization.
2. It must be aimed at challenging some aspect of racism, sexism or
heterosexism/homophobia.
3. It must be an activist organization, aimed at some form of social
change/social transformation. (It may be conservative or radical/progressive
in its approach, or anywhere in between.)
4. You must be able to get access to considerable information about
the organization. That includes its mission, its projects, its goals.
You will have to write a paper in which you figure out how it defines
oppression, and another in which you make suggestions about how the
organization chooses to challenge oppression. Do you think you can determine
these things, on the basis of the information you have available?
5. It ought to be an organization in which you have some interest--something
that you care about, for whatever reason.
Having trouble finding an organization? See Bethany or me SOON for advice
and guidance.
Assignments
Involving Your Organization
1. Informal writing, due February 21: A description (one to two pages,
typed) of the organization you have selected, including:
a. Its purpose/mission
b. The means you have for investigating this organization (e.g. you
are a member or know a member; you have found an extensive web site
for the organization; there is a chapter in town/in Mankato/in your
hometown; there are articles on it in the newspaper; there are books
about it).
Need more information about how to choose an organization? Bethany or
I will be more than happy to help you. It is extremely important that
you choose carefully; you need to pick an organization for which you
can find enough information to complete subsequent assignments. NOTE:
you won't get more details about this assignment, or a warning that
it is due.
2. Miscellaneous writing through the semester: On occasion, I'll ask
you to write about your organization, in connection with an issue arising
in class discussion.
3. Formal paper #1, due March 21: How does your organization define
oppression--and how does that match up against a model or models of
oppression we've read in this class? (Detailed assignment to follow.)
4. Formal paper #3, due May 24: Propose some tools for resistance that
your organization ought to consider using. (Detailed assignment to follow.)
Racism
and Sexism Formal Paper Assignment 1
Yes, this assignment is very lengthy. And you know what?
It will answer a lot of questions if you read and think about it carefully!
Length:
5-7 pp.
Draft workshop: March 17
Due date: March 21 (be sure to include your critiqued draft)
Topic: An analysis of your organization's definition of oppression,
using theories from class
The Project
In your first paper, you will explain how the organization you have
chosen to work on for the semester defines oppression. To do so, you
will make use of ideas from at least two of the theorists that we will
have read in class so far.
· The assignment will most likely require you to extrapolate,
hypothesize, and otherwise deduce your organization's definition, given
what else they say about themselves. Most websites don't have a page
called "How We Define Oppression Here." You must get creative
in interpreting what the organization does say about itself, in order
to figure out what it would say about this question.
· The assignment also requires you to really work with the definitions
of oppression you've encountered-to move beyond the understanding you've
gotten of these definitions in class, and to come to a deeper comprehension
of them. Only then can you decide which ones best fit what your organization
is saying.
NOTE 1: the focus of this paper is oppression. Later, you'll have the
opportunity to talk about how the organization understands liberation
or social transformation. For now, focus on the way it analyzes the
problem.
NOTE 2: it's not your job, in this paper, to decide whether this is
a good definition of oppression, or whether this is the definition the
organization should adopt. However, you should make some notes about
these matters, because they may come in handy when you write your last
paper, in which you will be making recommendations to the organization.
Eligible
Theorists
You may utilize any of the theorists listed in Section A, "Theorizing
Forms of Oppression," on the syllabus. That includes the theorists
writing about heterosexism, which we've not yet gotten to.
A message from The Department of the Obvious: In order to use these
theorists, you are going to have to reread them carefully. I know, I
know; this is obvious, right? Good.
Audience
You'll write this paper as if it were to be read by a group of students
who know nothing in particular about either theories of oppression or
the organization you are studying-and who don't know you either. How
would you address such a group? (Hint: assume nothing is obvious.)
Additional
Details
1. Your introduction should include the group's definition of oppression,
as you have put it together from their materials.
2. Use the theory to illuminate the organization, not the other way
around.
3. Make the structure of your paper organic and integrated. Don't just
make it clear; make it have an aim. Your aim is to persuade us that
the definition of oppression you have attributed to this organization
is in fact the definition it would/could give itself.
Rationale
This paper will give you the opportunity to work on several different
skills, all of which will come in handy to you in any number of ways
in later life (and later in this very course):
1. Explicating a concept or theory. Your paper will necessarily include
clear, accurate and situationally relevant explanations of the concepts
that you are employing. (What's marginalization? What's genocide?)
2. Identifying theory in an organization's description of itself. This
is a big one, and it's tough. You have to play detective, drawing inferences
from what an organization does say, to what it would say about its particular
form of oppression.
3. Drawing connections between and among theoretical understandings.
You will have to find, and then explain, how the way that your organization
understands oppression is connected to the ways that our theorists understand
oppression. What concepts or pieces of analysis from the theorists are
most connected to your organization's definition of oppression? Which
ones don't fit at all? Which ones don't fit together smoothly?
4. Extending the scope of a theory or concept. Our theorists use various
concepts and tools to talk about the particular form of oppression they
are interested in, but those concepts can be extended to other forms
of oppression as well. For example, Churchill talks about assimilation
in connection with his discussion of racism. But you might find yourself
wanting to use that notion to talk about your organization's definition
of homophobia. Likewise, Bartky talks about mystification with respect
to women. Maybe you want to use that concept to talk about how your
organization defines racism. Think about how to make those extensions.
The paper also requires you to deepen your understanding of the foundational
concepts that you have encountered so far. That means reading, rereading,
and re-rereading the relevant texts, putting texts in conversation with
each other, etc. Think of your work for this paper as being like studying
for a test-only the test at the end is a paper. Do not make the mistake
of thinking you understand the theories well enough right now to write
the paper.
If you do it right, some of your most important learning will happen
during the course of writing this paper and the other formal papers.
Draft Evaluation
Monday, March 17 is a draft evaluation day. Bring two copies of a completed
first draft to class. You'll swap with each other, and evaluate each
other's drafts using an evaluation form (which you'll find at the end
of this assignment). You must have your paper evaluated by someone else
in the class-and to get informal writing credit, you must evaluate someone
else's paper.
The point of a draft evaluation is to make changes in accordance with
your commentator's suggestions; that is why we spend a day in class
doing it, and why we do it a couple days before the final paper is due.
I'd make two observations about this process, based on several years'
experience:
1. Pay attention to your commentator's remarks. Make the changes they
suggest! Time and again, students ignore each other's excellent advice-and
end up with lower grades because of it.
2. If you choose not to use the in-class evaluation day, that is obviously
your choice. But if you decide to procrastinate, please keep it to yourself.
Don't reveal it to me by coming to ask for an evaluation sheet on the
day the paper is due, or by turning in your paper and telling me that
your evaluator will be turning in your draft separately. This is known
in the trade as a dead giveaway, and it will make me irritated and I
will carry my irritation with me when I go to read your paper.
Ground
Rules: To Be Observed on Pain of My Refusing to Accept Your Paper
1. Turn in your draft, critiqued and signed by a classmate, along with
your final draft. Staple the entire lot together. Put your final draft
on TOP and staple everything else underneath. I'm not being finicky
here; there's simply no other way to keep one person's paper all in
one place, and to keep me from reading and evaluating a draft as if
it were the final paper.
2. Papers are due in class on Friday, March 21.
3. Papers should be five to seven pages, double-spaced, and typed.
Some Pre-Writing
Ideas
1. Think about audience: actively consider how you'll address the audience
I've specified.
2. Spend time gathering information about your organization, using both
its sources, and things that other people have said about it. Take careful
notes, so that you can later go back to evaluate what that information
means.
3. Try to draw some conclusions about what the organization seems to
assume or believe about the nature of oppression, based on what you
see it saying.
4. Identify concepts you think might be useful from the theorists we've
read. (Note: don't neglect concepts that clash with your organization's
definition. It can be very useful and illuminating to set up a contrast
between two ideas.) Here's where your glossary will be very handy; you
can use it to quickly locate concepts that you think might be of particular
value. But spend time reading around in the texts as well; something
you read earlier might now have a very different meaning to you, based
on subsequent reading.
5. Work to put these pieces together; what do the theorists say that
helps you to understand what the organization is up to? (Note: this
stage is similar to the stage you should be using in your six short
papers.)
First
Draft Evaluation Form
Use your own paper for this: there isn't really room on the form to
answer these questions
Author's
Name:
Critic's
Name:
1. Critic:
Be specific. Give the author concrete suggestions
2. Author: Hand in this critique, along with your first draft, when
you hand in your final paper. PAPERS UNACCOMPANIED BY CRITIQUED DRAFTS
ARE NOT COMPLETE.
State the
thesis of the paper. (It should address the question "how does
this organization define oppression?)
Is the
thesis clear? How could it be improved?
What information about the organization does the author use to support
their thesis?
How well does this information support the thesis? How could it be made
stronger?
What theoretical tools from our text does the author employ? (List on
the reverse side.)
Does the author accurately represent the theories? How could it be better?
How well does the author use these tools to make and support their thesis?
How could it be improved?
Is the paper clear for someone in the intended audience? (Remember who
audience is.) How might it be clearer?
What were the strongest aspects of this paper?
What is
the most important thing this author could do to improve the paper?
Additional
suggestions or comments:
Racism
and Sexism Formal Paper #2:
Constructing
a Theory of Privilege
Summary
Length: 5-7 pp.
Draft workshop: April 16
Due date: April 23 (be sure to include your critiqued draft, SIGNED
BY YOUR CRITIC)
Topic: Choose either:
1. Write an essay analyzing white privilege, male privilege, or heterosexual
privilege that addresses some aspect(s) of that privilege not discussed
in the texts we read in class.
2. What is the relationship between masculinity and male privilege,
or between whiteness and white privilege or heterosexuality and heterosexual
privilege? Write an essay exploring the question.
OPTION
#1
Write an
essay analyzing white privilege, male privilege, or heterosexual privilege
that addresses some aspect(s) of that privilege not discussed in the
texts we read in class.
You will
have to formulate your own theory about what this form of privilege
is, how it operates, and how it is maintained, using the theoretical
tools you have gathered so far in this class, and in other areas of
your life. Here are some of the theoretical tools you can use:
1) You can use theories of the oppression of women or of people of color
or glbt persons as starting points for your portrayal of male or white
or heterosexual advantage. (In other words, look at the theories of
oppression from the first section of the course and manipulate them
to extract the corresponding theory of privilege from them.)
2) You can use the theories of white, male or heterosexual privilege,
and privilege-in-general, as sources of insight for your own theory
about an aspect of privilege that they do not address.
3) You can take a personal experience, media event, law, policy, or
stereotype and use it as the starting point for reflecting theoretically
on the pervasiveness of white or male or heterosexual privilege in our
culture.
One requirement
with Option 1 is that you must choose a topic that requires you to theorize
about your own privilege. (Translation: if you don't identify as a heterosexual,
then don't pick the assignment on heterosexual privilege. Ditto if you
don't identify as white, or don't identify as male. If you don't fit
any of these forms of privilege, but you still would like to do this
assignment, see me, and we can talk about a refinement of the assignment
to make it work.)
Observations
About Option #1
You will probably use a combination of the three kinds of tools to shape
your conception of privilege. The theories we have discussed will provide
the initial foundation for your ideas, but you will need to dig deeper
and shape concepts of your own. (Think about how Bailey did this, for
example, in coming up with her theory of privilege-in-general. She invented
concepts to illustrate what she saw around her.) Formulate your own
theory and support it with examples and arguments. Do not be afraid
to go beyond the obvious effects we have already discussed in class;
develop a new, more radical view! This should be an original paper,
intelligently informed by the other things you have read.
Remember that you are formulating a theory, not simply describing how
things are different for people who are privileged and people who are
oppressed by a particular. Emphasize structure and system, not isolated
acts. Other people should be able to use your theory to examine and
reflect on their own lives.
Also, think about how your theory shows how your privilege is a consequence
of the oppression of another group. How do you benefit as the result
of someone else being harmed by a system?
Don't worry about whether your theory is absolutely watertight and can
address every imaginable kind of situation. (Even the best theory can't
do that-but that doesn't mean it can't tell us a lot about our world.)
Present your position clearly and strongly, through arguments and examples.
Rationale-Option
1
1. To develop your skills in building original theory.
2. To practice assimilating parts of others' theories, and putting them
to work for your own purposes.
3. To think seriously about the nature of heterosexual privilege, and
to make it visible.
Audience-Option
1
This paper should be written to an audience that has some understanding
about theories of oppression and privilege. Imagine you are actually
writing to supplement the articles compiled for this class (if you are
successful enough in this project that may be where your paper ends
up!)
OPTION #2
Write a
paper that addresses this question: What is the relationship between
masculinity and male privilege, or between whiteness and white privilege
or between heterosexuality and heterosexual privilege?
This question
arises out of the title of Stoltenberg's essay. Stoltenberg suggests
that he must refuse to be a man (as he conceives of that identity),
in order to refuse to participate in the system of oppression that privileges
him. For Stoltenberg, then, masculinity is a tool or instrument of male
privilege; the one reinforces the other.
You may choose to explore the relation between masculinity and male
privilege. (Is there a connection? If so, what is it?). You may also
explore the connection between whiteness and white privilege. (Is whiteness
a social construction? If so, is it in the service of white privilege?)
Or you could look at heterosexuality and heterosexual privilege. (Is
heterosexual identity constructed in a way that works to shore up heterosexual
privilege?)
Note: if you are interested in this assignment, it would also be worthwhile
going back to look at Omi and Winant's model of racial formation. They
assert that NOT all racial formation is racist. By extension, this would
mean that they would say that resisting white privilege would NOT necessarily
mean "refusing to be white" in all senses of that term. (Whiteness
isn't only in the service of white privilege.)
Rationale-Option
2
1. To work on framing an argument, identifying the relevant sources
of it, when it doesn't come from just one identifiable location but
must be pieced together.
2. To develop skills in spelling out the consequences of particular
theoretical positions/arguments.
3. To develop systematic critiques of positions.
Audience-Option
2
Your audience is someone who has thought quite long and hard about the
matter of privilege, and has begun to ask questions about the scope
and limits of the notion. You might even think of a particular person
in class to whom you want to write-a person who has asked questions
or made claims that you think are related to this topic.
DRAFT EVALUATION
Wednesday,
April 16 is a draft evaluation day. Bring two copies of a completed
first draft to class (you'll probably only have time for one evaluation,
but bring two in case someone else doesn't have one). You must have
your paper evaluated by someone else in the class--and to get all your
informal writing credit, you must evaluate someone else's paper. Revisit
my comments about the importance of draft evaluations, posted on the
last paper assignment.
GROUND
RULES
(TO BE OBSERVED ON PAIN OF MY REFUSING TO ACCEPT YOUR PAPER)
1. Turn
in your draft, critiqued and signed by a classmate, along with your
final draft. Staple the entire lot together. Put your final draft on
TOP and staple everything else underneath. I'm not being finicky here;
there's simply no other way to keep one person's paper all in one place,
and to keep me from reading and evaluating a draft as if it were the
final paper.
2. Papers are due in class on Wednesday, April 23.
3. Papers should be five to seven, double-spaced, typed.
ON CITING SOURCES
Make sure
you do it. If you pass off someone else's ideas as your own, you have
plagiarized-whether you do so intentionally or by accident. That is
true whether you quote directly, or paraphrase someone else's ideas.
That includes ideas in books, exchanged in conversation, or on the web.
IT INCLUDES OUR CLASS READINGS AS WELL. (Don't have all the information?
Use your research skills to find it. If you fail, include the information
that you have; an incomplete cite is far better than no cite at all.)
Please consult a style manual, me, Bethany, Angela, the Writing Center,
or someone if you have any questions about what constitutes plagiarism
in your written work. (I have a handy sourcebook called Writing With
Sources that I'd be happy to show you.) Consult the syllabus for my
policy on plagiarism.
Draft Evaluation
Use your
own paper for this: there isn't really room on the form to answer these
questions
Author's
Name:
Critic's
Name:
3. Critic:
Be specific. Give the author concrete suggestions
4. Author: Hand in this critique, along with your first draft, when
you hand in your final paper. PAPERS UNACCOMPANIED BY CRITIQUED DRAFTS
ARE NOT COMPLETE.
What were
the strongest aspects of this paper?
State the thesis of the paper. (Make sure you can clearly identify a
thesis in the paper, and that the thesis addresses the assignment directly.)
Is the thesis clear? How could it be improved?
How does the author support their thesis? Distinguish between:
a) Facts, observations, examples; and
b) Theoretical claims from other authors
How well does this support the thesis? How could the support be made
stronger?
Does the author accurately represent the theories they use? How could
it be better?
How might the organization of the paper be changed to make it a more
understandable and convincing paper?
Is the paper clear for someone in the intended audience? (Refer to assignment,
to find out who audience is.) How might it be clearer?
Additional suggestions or comments:
Racism
and Sexism Formal Paper Assignment 3
Length: 5-7 pp.
Draft workshop: ON YOUR OWN
Due date: May 24, by 5 p.m. in Lisa's office (be sure to include your
critiqued draft)
Topic: An analysis of your organization's definition of oppression,
using theories from class
The assignment:
· In this paper, you attempt to persuade the social organization
on which you focused your first paper to adopt certain strategies of
resistance.
· You argue that certain theoretical approaches to resistance
best suit the organization, given its mission, its understanding of
oppression, and its projects. Consider yourself the helpful salesperson
at the outdoor store, counseling the customer to choose the pack and
contents best suited to that person.
· You must advocate for at least two different approaches to
resistance.
· You must explain how the strategies you propose fit together,
and why these make for a good combination for this organization.
Audience:
You will write for representatives of the organization. Some observations:
· While a representative of the organization should know its
mission and projects, you do still need to draw the connections between
the mission/projects and the strategies you advocate. This will help
with the plausibility and persuasiveness of your recommendations.
· Identify a particular person, or a particular set of persons,
or a particular layer of the organizational structure, and target your
paper specifically to them. (Don't write generically to "members
of NOW," for instance. Really think about who you want to address-who
you think you can write to effectively)
· Think about who YOU are, as well as who your audience is. Who
in the organization would it be most appropriate for YOU to address?
What sort of tone/style would you adopt with such a person? (For instance,
how will the tone of your paper differ, depending upon whether you are
writing as a white ally to the president of the NAACP, as opposed to
if you are writing as a Latina who is a member of the campus Women's
Center, writing to other members of the Women's Center?)
Rationale
and criteria for evaluation:
· Accurate explication of theories and strategic approaches to
resistance
· Connection between concrete projects/mission of the organization,
and theories of resistance you choose
· Persuasiveness of argument
· Clarity
· Sound structure and organization
· Grammar
Draft
Evaluation Form-Third Paper
Author's
Name:
Critic's Name:
5. Critic:
Be specific. Give the author concrete suggestions
6. Author: Hand in this critique, along with your first draft, when
you hand in your final paper. PAPERS UNACCOMPANIED BY CRITIQUED DRAFTS
ARE NOT COMPLETE.
State the
thesis of the paper. (It should address the question "what strategies
of resistance are most useful for the organization given its mission,
definition of oppression, and projects?)
What information
about the organization does the author use to support their thesis?
How well
does this information support the thesis? How could it be made stronger?
Does the author accurately represent the theories? How could it be better?
Are the
arguments for the adoption of particular strategies compelling? If not,
what would help to make the case?
What were
the strongest aspects of this paper?
How might
the organization of the paper be changed to make it a more understandable
and convincing paper?
Is the
paper clear for someone in the intended audience? (Remember who audience
is.) How might it be clearer?
Additional suggestions or comments:
|