Chapter Summary (framework) 1

by Greg Sego
Social diversity typically refers to the differences between people or
groups of people. The differences are based on social categories such as
race, gender, sexuality, class, and others. These differences are made
evident by the groups appearance, practices, religious beliefs, language, etc.
The term "different" is in reference to that group being different from the
majority group, which is perceived as the societal norm. Therefore, it is the
norm that shapes one's notion of what is normal and what is different. Under
this social framework, inequality is inevitable and is a powerful social form
that shapes life changes for people much more profoundly than simply being
different.
Social identity is a multifaceted concept. However, it is important to
realize that when we ask ourselves who we are, the answer depends in large
part on who the world around us says we are. Who do our parents say we
are? What feedback do we get from peers, neighbors, teachers, even store
clerks or random peopl we come in contact with? Self identification is an
ongoing process of simultaneous reflection and observation, by which we
judge ourselves in the light of what we perceive others judge us in relation to
themselves.
As individuals, we have multiple identifiers, which makes self-definition
a complex task. The author for essay one recalls being a precocious child
who began to read at age three, this made her stand out among her peers as
teachers and others commented on her gifted reading ability. But she was
also the only Black student in the class; she increasing felt "othered" as she
got older. Therefore, there may be several ways in which we might be
defined as exceptional, but there are several categories of "otherness" that
we may simultaneously experience in our social setting. People are
commonly defined as "other" on the basis of race, gender, religion, sexual
orientation, socioeconomic status, age, and physical or mental ability. Each
of these categories has a form of oppropression linked with it. In each case,
there is a group that is dominant and a group that is considered subordinate
or targeted.
Its an intriguing fact that the parts of our identity that we focus on, or
capture our attention, are those that other people notice, and that reflect
back to us. If some aspect of ourselves is in allignment with the dominant or
advantaged social group, this aspect of our person typically escapes our
attention. The exercise that was performed on the first day of class confirms
this--we were asked to complete the sentence, "I am _____," with as many
descriptors as we could in a sixty second timeframe. No student that is White
included this in their list of descriptors (as this is the norm in our region).
Similarly, more women use their gender as a descriptor than men (supporting
that men are traditionally considered dominant). This supports the belief that
in the absence of dissonance, a dimension of our identity will escape
conscious attention. It is the targeted identities that hold our attention.
It is also noteworty that dominants do not typically know what the
experience of a subordinate is. In contrast, the subordinates are very well
informed about the dominant group. The subordinates seek out information
as a way to protect themselves as a targeted group (perhaps learning ways to

go "under the radar" and not draw attention to their uniqueness). Also,
information about dominant groups is readily available without looking. The
media, which is geared toward and managed by the dominant, provides a
continous stream of images, concepts, and ideas of the dominant group. No
one can argue that there are more images of white men and women in all
forms of media relative to people of color. In a recent news report, I heard
that the Oscars are being boycotted by some in Hollywood due to the obvious
lack of social diversity among the nominees for awards. Additionally, since
the media is controlled by the dominants, and these do not understand the
subordinates, the information about subordinates is often limited to
stereotypical depictions of the "other." The example is given of heterosexual
relationship depictions versus homosexual relationships on television. The
very limited portrayal of homosexual relationships are typically in the
comedic setting and propagate stereotypes, presenting extreme and overthe-top gay characters.
Social identity if affected at different levels of social interaction--at the
micro level (between individuals), at the meso level (within communities or
social institutions), and at the macro level (the overarching society and
culture). It is at the micro level that people usually feel the most comfortable
as themselves. It is at this level that we also best feel and experience the
process of identity formation, which includes identifying forces and events
that shape our lives. We also have more control of the process at the micro
level. It is at the meso level--at school, in the workplace, or another public
setting--that people experience the complexity, conflict and contradictions of
multiple identities. I found it interesting to ponder that the common
questions that we ask others when we first meet them ("Where are you
from?" or "What do you do for a living?") are really an attempt to categorize
others and determine their relationship to us. We may think that we are just
making polite conversation, or getting to know someone, but really we are
engaging in social classification.
On a macro level, social diversity and inequality has a great impact on
culture landscape. Classifying and labeling others is a way to distinguish who
is included and who is excluded from a group. Ascribing a certain group a
particular characteristic or quality leads to the assignment of social status,
power, and privilege (or lact thereof). The significance of such social
construction has been used to justify the conquest, colonization, domination,
and exploitation of entire groups of people. In American history, the Native
Americans were categorized by the European settlers as being uncivilized,
ungovernable, and brutes. Ascribing the natives such undesirable qualities
somehow allowed room to consent to genocide and ill treatment of this
"othered" group. Treaties made with the Native Americans were broken
without a twinge of the conscience of prominent and respected historical
American figures. The negatives traits assigned to the "Indians" were
baseless. This tragic aspect of racism has had far reaching effects.
Privilege exists when one group has someting of value that is denied to
others simply because of the group(s) they belong to. Reviewing the list of
privileges, personally I feel that I take many of these for granted. I focus on
my differences and perceived discrimination, but fail to realize that I am part
of a social framework that allows me privileges that others do not have
access to. For example, I never think that I might be taken more seriously, or
my words have more weight, than someone of a different race (saying the

same thing). I also had to ask myself how I view and treat disabled people-are my views affected by the dominant group?--honestly, I would say that I
am to an extent.
The "Cycle of Socialization" is a powerful one! Given the fact that it is
a step by step process, by the time we reach adulthood, we are deeply
entrenched in our culture and institutional influence. We are consciously and
unconsciously bombarded with messages about who should have the power
and who should not. We are afraid of being punished or "othered" by our
society. Therefore, it is a challenge to break the cycle of socialization and
make a stand for change.