14 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2018
    1. Some have suggested that what is thought to be an anti-achievement peer culture among African American youth is actually a youth culture rooted in other aspects of culture - authenticity, hip-hop consump- tion culture, and "Black" ways of speakin

      WOAH.

    2. growing up in one's ethnic community - even if disadvantaged - can lead to school success, whereas growing up and being edu- cated among disadvantaged African Americans, for African American and second- generation children alike, can lead to poor outcomes through the problems associated with ghetto poverty and disadvanta

      These students need examples of success and positive reminders of ability to achieve while simultaneously receiving affirmation of their identity.

    3. This theory maintains that voluntary minority students see school success as a major means to upward mobility, believing that the strategies that hold for middle- class Whites hold for them, whereas involuntary minorities view the opportunity structure as primarily closed to them and their family members.

      It would be interesting to look at this idea specifically and track how this mentality changes from generation to generation. This NPR article from ages ago is a good introduction: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93861094

    4. Yet, for many first- and second-generation immigrant minority students, culture is depicted with relatively more maturity, defined by values and beliefs stemming from the strong influence of hard-working immigrant parents (for a similar discussion, see Slaughter-Defoe, Nakagawa, Takanishi, & Johnson, 1990

      Does this seem like it's suggesting that some cultures are less hard working than others? I understand that various views should be represented in introducing the topic but come on. Which of the groups listed above would actually say that they don't value hard work, achievement, and effort?

  2. Sep 2018
    1. Their conclusion was unanimous: the Human Genome Proj­ect revealed that the human species cannot be divided into biological races. ƒ I President Clinton famously announced, ‘I believe one of the great truths to emerge from this triumphant expedition inside the human genome is that in genetic terms, all human beings, regardless of race, are more than 99.9 per­cent the same.”7’

      What would be the consequences of having the political community accept this? How would anyone accepting this be translated into society? How can we dismantle this political construction without forgetting the trauma that has been experienced by marginalized groups?

    2. Scholars in a number of fields have puzzled over the ques­tion, How did the Irish, Italians, Slavs, and Jews “become white”?

      I think this would be interesting to apply to current standards of who is considered PoC and not. How is the category of whiteness complicated by fair skinned individuals who may reject the PoC classification? Could the reverse of this be applied today? What would be the consequences of this?

    3. before the eighteenth-century boom in the African slave trade, between one-half and two-thirds of all early white immigrants to the British colonies in the West­ern Hemisphere came as unfree laborers, some 300,000 to 400,000 people.”10At first, European settlers in the American colonies gave the blacks they shipped from Africa and the indigenous people they captured the same status as white indentured servants

      This claims that indentured servitude = unfree laborers = slavery. If this is true, why are the words not used interchangeably? They had the same status? Then why weren't they called the same thing? Am I missing some history here?

    4. Race is very real as a political grouping of human beings and has ac­tual consequences for people’s health, wealth, social status, reputation, and opportunities in life. The fact that dividing people into races has biological effects does not change the fact that this division is a political exercise. The * distinction between the two meanings of race—as a biological versus a po liticai grouping—is monumentally import

      This is exactly how we come to see PoC existence in predominately white spaces as resistance. The entire PoC existence is highly, highly politicized whether PoC like it or not

    1. Another option was simply to randomly bestow common American names such as Smith, Brown, and Clark.

      so representative of the gist of family names

    2. Head lice were by no means universal among recruits, but a general policy of short hair made dealing with the problem much simpler.

      smh not even reactive. no sense in having this except to increase whiteness

    Annotators