• What issue is meaningful to you? 

As a Criminology major, we learn about all different types of violence that occur within our society. The type of violence that was most impactful to me was domestic violence. Domestic violence is a major issue, especially during this pandemic were currently in. Personally, I think domestic violence is the most dangerous form of violence because it’s hard to predict, and it’s hard to escape from your perpetrator. An outrageous number of people are victims of domestic violence and something needs to be done to prevent it. 

Who needs to hear this message? 

Domestic violence is typically silenced. The victims don’t want others knowing they are being abused, and the perpetrators don’t want people to know as well for obvious reasons.  I think it is most important for the victims to hear this message to know they are not alone, and it is possible to safely escape. I also think a society at large needs to hear this message, because it needs to be made known how prevalent it is. Someone you are extremely close with could be a victim of domestic violence and ignorance to the issue fuels its existence. 

What genre would best convey your message? (Think about texts and formats in which you’re comfortable composing.)

I have watched a ted talk of a woman who was a survivor of being a domestic abuse victim. Her message was extremely impactful because it opened my life to a real person who experienced it. Since I have not personally been a victim of domestic violence, I don’t think that approach would be effective for me. I intend to write a paper regarding domestic violence and express my awareness and understanding of the issue. Also, I anticipate for my paper to be educational to those who are unfamiliar with domestic violence, and those who are victims of domestic violence know they are not silenced or alone. 

Blog 6:

Lynette Adkins is the author of YouTube video which encompasses interviews with students at UT, the University of Texas. The author of this video is not explicitly visible, rather her presence is implicit. The audio of Lynette Adkins is predominate in the video as she interviews several students. The information regarding the author is very limited because the video only entails her correspondence to the interviews, her personal responses are not included. Although the information about the author is limited, it is evident that she has an interest in the perspectives of minority groups.  This can be inferred because she initiated the conduction of interviews regarding this topic, and made the information she obtained public on YouTube. Additionally, the commentary she makes in the background has indications that she is in agreeance with the statements made by the individuals she interviews. Therefore, we know the morale, and opinions of the author. 

The purpose of Lynette Adkins YouTube video is to obtain perspectives of black students at a predominately white school. The course of interviewing black students from UT gives insight on their personal experiences. The students stated how they went into culture shock, felt uncomfortable, and unaccepted as a black student comprising 5% of the student population. For example, one student stated how she was insecure wearing what she wanted. Another student stated; “It’s frustrating in some regards, because I want to be part of the black community, but I don’t feel represented within that.”. On the other hand, some students expressed positive perspectives as a black student at UT. For instance, on student said, “the black community is a close-knit community within UT”. Another student stated how he was glad to meet people at his university. These statements demonstrate the purpose of this video as they bring light to the positive and negative perspectives experienced by students of minority.

The audience of this film are individuals that have access and utilize YouTube. YouTube is a highly prevalent video platform around the globe. The intended audience of this film is non- black, heterosexual individuals. This is the projected audience because they deviate from the interviewees, therefore unaware of the experiences encountered as a, homosexual/ pansexual black student. Furthermore, the perspectives alluded in the video will be made visible to majority to allow an understanding of experiences that differ from one’s own. Also, conscious awareness to the negative experiences may aid in reducing the likelihood of it occurring.

Lynette Adkins wants to make underrepresented voices heart but publicizing them on a well-known social media platform, YouTube. YouTube is effective because its available to anyone, people in all age groups, class, gender, race, etc. use YouTube, it is not seclusively accessible to certain individuals. 

The article “Critical Race Theory Counterstory as Allegory: A Rhetorical Trope to Raise Awareness About Arizona’s Ban on Ethnic Studies” written by Aja Y. Martinez displays resistance writing throughout the piece. Martinez takes a differential writing technique in comparison to what we have read thus far in class, wherein she utilizes fictional storytelling to represent a universal lesson or moral. This article is intended to “expose, analyze and challenge stock stories of racial privilege and can help strength positions of social, political, and cultural survival and resistance” (Diverse). Meaning, this narrative is meant to being light to underrepresented voices, specifically the voices of colored individuals.

The article; From Silence to Words: Writing as a Strugglenarrated by Min-zhan Luilluminates her personal experiences to demonstrate the identity struggle arising from a conflict between home and school discourses. The narrator grew up in China, attending a Chinese school uniform to the standardized Chinese language. Conversantly, at home her parents raised her to be educated and practice the English language.   “I knew she was referring to the way we had been brought up in the midst of two conflicting worlds – the world of home, dominated by the ideology of the Western humanistic tradition, and the world of a society dominated by Mao Tsetung’s Marxism” (pg 437). The significantly different worlds of which she lived during a single period of time caused the struggles she faced in her childhood.

“This paper is my attempt to fill up that silence with words, words I didn’t have then, words that I have since come to by reflecting on my experience as a student in China” (pg. 437). Min-zhan Lu narrative draws upon her childhood experiences to emphasize the impact and meaning underlying silencing speech. “Constantly having to switch back and forth between the discourse of home and school made me sensitive and self- conscious about the struggle I experienced every time I had to read, write, or think in either discourse” (Pg 438). Min-zhan Lu demonstrates the negative feelings of insecurity she suffered from while attending Chinese school. Standardized Chinese was unnatural and out of her comfort zone which required more thinking and the fear of mispronouncing words as it wasn’t practiced at home like her classmates.“First, my aunt was caught be her colleagues talking to her husband over the phone in English. Because of it, she was criticized and almost labeled as a Rightist.” (pg 439)”. The free expression of her identity was basically punished by the mainstream Chinese society and perceived as justified because it clashed with their viewpoints. As a result of this, she acknowledged language was silenced because of the restraint to speak her native language in an environment outside of her home.  

Min-zhan Lutook her negative experiences as a childhood and transformed her life in a positive direction. “For in spite of the frustration and confusion I experienced

growing up caught between two conflicting worlds, the conflict ultimately
helped me to grow as a reader and writer. Constantly having to switch back and
forth between the discourse of home and that of school made me sensitive and
self-conscious about the struggle I experienced every time I tried to read, write,
or think in either discourse. Eventually, it led me to search for constructive uses
for such struggle”. (pg 437)She gained life skills from her childhood experiences because she took them as a learning opportunity rather than a determent to her life. “Being the eager student, I adopted this view of language as a tool for survival. It came to dominate my understanding of the discussion on the social and historical scene and to restrict my ability to participate in that discussion” (pg 444. The meaning of this viewpoint stating language is “tool for survival” is derived from her childhood giving her an understanding of how the world operates in different environments. Consequently, she has the ability to analyze the social and historical context surroundings to decipher her ability to participate in discussion which eliminates the possibility for conflict. 

Furthermore,Min-zhan Lu reflects upon her experiences of being a student and China and how that shaped her as a college writing teacher in the United States.  “However, beyond the classroom and beyond the limited range of these students’ immediate lives lies a much more complex and dynamicsocial and historical scene. To help these students become actors in such a scene, perhapswe need to call their attention to voices that may seem irrelevant to the discourse we teach rather than encourage them to shut them out”(pg 447). Now as an educator, she considers the complexity among students to eliminate the replication of her suffered childhood experiences where speech is silenced on other students. 

Language is exceedingly complex because of its uniqueness across individuals, “The human use of language is not a simple phenomenon: sophisticated research in linguistics and sociology has demonstrated incontrovertibly that many long held and passionately cherished notions about language are misleading at best, and often completely erroneous” (SRTOL, pg 1). We are socialized to understand a unified “correct” way of writing and utilizing language which underlines the opposing viewpoints regarding the execution of standardized English in educational instructions.  The controversial question is; does standardized English restrict/ prohibit individuals to freely express themselves or is standardized English a systematically effective way of education?  

From a personal standpoint, I was born and raised in the eastern suburbs of Long Island. My neighborhood mainly consists of middle to upper class white families. I live in a very small town, which is why my school district is only eligible from kindergarten to eighth grade. Since I didn’t have a high school, I had the choice of three high schools within the closest in proximity to my school district.  The makeup of students in my school district was predominantly white, which remained consistent when entering a new school in ninth grade.  With that said, my childhood experiences lacked exposure to diversity, the students I was surrounded by and grew up with didn’t differ much from myself. The way my peers and I used language did not differ much from one another, even the type of music we listened to was pretty much the same. 

Growing up, my parents taught me to speak and write in accordance to standardized English educated in school. Therefore, my teacher’s way of educating language through a standardized approach was never questioned because that was MY normal. I never felt different about my heritage language because it directly coincided with standardized English taught in school and the peers I was surrounded by. I never used slang terms or expressions as a way of speaking, nor did I even have exposure to its existence to understand what they meant. I was sheltered, which inhibited my awareness and understanding of language that differs from my own. With that said, the way I was educated language through a standardized approach was never criticized.

It wasn’t until I was 18 and went to college when I acknowledged differences in language. My freshman year roommate is from PA, and the way she spoke differed from me. For instance, our first target run I told her “I’m going to wait on -line” and she was extremely confused because she thought I was referencing electronics, because she says “in- line”. Also, the boys that lived across the hall in my dorm building used all sorts of slang and I truly thought they were speaking a different language. 

The realization and awareness to language differences has fully allowed me to reflect on the position argued in the article; Students’ Right to Their Own Language(STROL).STROL brings light to the various social, cultural, and economic identity of students which have inherently different language composure than traditional American dialect. A stance is taken to encourage and embrace diversity by entitling students right to their own language, “We affirm the students’ right to their own patterns and varieties of language — the dialects of their nurture or whatever dialects in which they find their own identity and style”(pg 1).  Therefore, it argued that standardized English should be removed or modified as it is unjustly stripping ones individuality by enforcing education to be strictly uniform in accordance to American dialect. 

Personally, I have mixed feelings about this. I do feel it is unfair and restrictive to implement a standardized approach to language when various forms of it exist. Almost as if we are systematically forced to operate as robots. On the other hand, since language is exceedingly complex as stated earlier, it would be chaotic and difficult to educate language if there wasn’t a guideline and structure in place to follow. Although I did not personally feel victimized by standardized English restricting me from free expression, I do think it is unfair for those who were. I believe some sort of medium should be implemented that encourages language diversity, but has a guided structure for efficiency.

            Pratt’s “Kill the Indian, Save the Man” exemplifies Indian savagery and civilized whiteness. Pratt argument entails killing all those of the Indian race as his justified understanding of saving them as well as the society; “all the Indian there is in race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man” (Harvard University Press, 1973).  Pratt’s ideology is interpreted as a solution, wherein Indian’s are being “saved”.  In actuality, this phenomenon is dehumanizing, exploits racism, and is blinded to the negative impacts posed on Indians. 

            Zitkala-sa’s personal narrative subverts Pratt’s binary and civilized whiteness. Zitkala- sa provides direct insight of Indian life, culture, and perspectives.  Zitkala- sa directly undermines Pratt’s dehumanization of Indian’s by stating; “but we were driven, my child, driven like a herd of buffalo. To further explain, she recognizes she is treated as an animal (herd of buffalo) with conscious awareness of being human. On the other hand, Pratt’s theology of “saving the man” incorporates dehumanizing Indians by transforming humans into animals. 

            According to Pratt, unified implementation of civilized whiteness is the justified way of fundamentally operating a society. Consequently, Indians are stripped from their individuality and forced to conform into “whiteness”.  Zitkala-sa brings light to this problematic aspect that Pratt fails to recognize by stating; “I no longer felt free to be myself, or to voice my own feelings. The tears trickled down my cheeks, and I buried my face in the folds of my blanket”.  

Zitkala- sa’s narrative manifests the fear and violence experienced by Indians, which is the result of Pratt’s mission of “saving” them.  The oppressors are classified as “paleface”           , and the fear and anger toward paleface is noted throughout the narrative. For example, “There is what the paleface has done! Since then your father too has been buried in a hill nearer the rising sun. We were once very happy. But the paleface has stolen our lands and driven us hither. Having defrauded us of our land, the paleface forced us away”, demonstrating how violence is projected through the murder of her father and resources are unjustifiably revoked. Additionally, fear is a prevalent aspect of Indian life “Thus, when my mother left me by myself that afternoon, I sat in a fearful mood within our tepee. I recalled all I had ever heard about Wiyaka-Napbina; and I tried to assure myself that though he might pass near by, he would not come to our wigwam because there was no little girl around our grounds.”. Furthermore, signifying how fear is extremely dominating because home is typically ones comfort and safe haven, but in this instance fear is still prevalent.  

Freire’s takes a stance regarding oppression within a society in his novel The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. The passage assigned to my group begins with “The pedagogy of the oppressed, animated by authentic, humanist (not humanitarian) generosity, presents itself as a pedagogy of humankind”, and ends with  “One aspect of the reply is to be found in the distinction between systematic education, which can only be changed by political power, and educational proj-ects, which should be carried out with the oppressed in the process of organizing them.”. The principles Freire explains within this particular passage circumference the operations and execution of oppression. 

Freire argues oppression is derived from the egoistic interests of the oppressors withheld by individuals of authority and power, “Pedagogy which begins with the egoistic interests of the oppressors (an egoism cloaked in the false generosity of paternal- ism) and makes of the oppressed the objects of its humanitarianism, itself maintains and embodies oppression”To further explain, those in power such as government officials, law enforcement, etc. structure society to operate systematically based off their beliefs, interests, and personal gain. Therefore, the interests of those who do not withhold power are disregarded. Consequently, the remaining population is disadvantaged because their beliefs and interests are not accounted for, fueling the fire and regulating oppression. Additionally, oppressed individuals operate and conform in accordance to an unequal and bias system intact by authority. To exemplify, the government encompasses educated individuals wherein they create and implement laws that the country must obey regardless of it goes against one’s interest of belief. Freire argues this principle is an “instrument for dehumanization”, due to the abuse of power stripping the ability to freely express the differing quantities contributing to the unique make-up of every human. 

Subsequently, Freire explains a potential solution towards eliminating oppression. He presents a revolution that offers a collaborative approach of operating a society.  Freire opines; One aspect of the reply is to be found in the distinction between systematic education, which can only be changed by political power, and educational proj- ects, which should be carried out withthe oppressed in the process of organizing them.”.Meaning, inclusion of those oppressed allowing their insight on organizing the ways of which systems run. Therefore, the interests of all beings will be accounted for, rather than those of power. 

            Personally speaking, I agree with the concept Freire explains in the passage listed above. I believe the U.S. government operates in this fashion wherein those of power determine the functionality of the country. In light of so, the majority of the population has no say regarding the implementation and execution of laws and policies. Additionally, I believe a collaborative approach that Freire presents would eliminate issues that stem to the cause of oppression.