CR#3 Dominant and Subordinate Identities

What? How are dominant and subordinate identities defined in Tatum’s article? What is the power relationship between the dominant and subordinate groups according to Tatum? (Remember to use textual evidence).

Dominant identities are those in control. They indirectly control the subordinate identities by setting “the parameters within which the subordinates operate” (Tatum). This may come in the form of stereotypes, discrimination, the creation of racially-targeted laws. Dominant construct social identities for each of the subordinate identities, a group of people who are generally the minority in that particular social setting. As dominant identities formulate their own definition of subordinate identities, it becomes the social norm. It is society’s, or the dominant identity’s, definition that presents itself as the reflection of the subordinate or minority. As young people, specifically adolescents, start developing their own sense of self, the begin to ask questions that “questions will influence choices about who one’s romantic partners will be, what type of work one will do, where one will live, and what belief system one will embrace” (Tatum). The walk of life for subordinates have already been predestined by the dominant identities in one way or another. For example, restricting certain racial or ethnic groups to live in a specific area and not providing the necessary funds for these communities to thrive and prosper with well-funded schools, healthy meal options, and healthcare facilities will ultimately result in poorer communities, reinforcing the stereotypes the dominant identities have put in place for the subordinate identities. However, when the subordinate performs above these expectations, Tatum believes that the dominant identities consider them as an anomaly, as she herself explained through an anecdote of her own personal experiences as being an articulate African-American woman, the subordinate identity anomaly, speaking to a white man, the dominant identity. The dominant identity refuses to acknowledge or give credit to the subordinate identity without acknowledging the subordinate identity the person possesses.

So What? How could the unequal relationship between the dominant and subordinate groups change for the better? Based on your reading of his NY Times article, what do you think Abraham Verghese would suggest?

In order for a better and more positive change for the future, the dominant group should stop defining and enforcing the identities of the subordinate groups. It’s because of their skewed definition that there is a division in the first place. It’s also important for the subordinate groups to “attend to your experience of dominance where you may find it-as a heterosexual, as an able-bodied person, as a Christian, as a man-and consider what systems of privilege you may be overlooking. The task of resisting our own oppression does not relieve us of the responsibility of acknowledging our complicity in the oppression of others” (Tatum). Because most dominate identities are an unspoken fact, they are subconsciously accepted and therefore the problem is not recognized as a problem. Verghese would suggest Americans to stop looking at global divisions and recognize the divisions that are present within the county. Both being Americans affected by the Hurricane Katrina, Verghese had “felt the same helplessness, knowing that the illness here was inextricably linked to the bigger problem of homelessness, disenfranchisement and despair” (Verghese). He would want America to address their own poverty and their own government’s refusal to help citizens in need because they are blinded by dominance. Third-world countries are seen the subordinates, however there are millions of people within the nation who are part of subordinate groups that the dominant identities have been constructing and reinforcing. There is now a thick barrier between dominant and subordinate groups within America because of this constant construction. Verghese believes that bridging the two sides and fulfilling the needs and removing the assumed identity that all Americans are living out the ‘American Dream’ will change the relationship for the better.

Now What? Referencing Calderon’s article, talk about how the perspective-taking can influence or even change the dominant-subordinate dynamic? And do YOU have anything to suggest from your own life experiences? (Remember to use textual evidence).

By learning a language or about a culture outside of your own can influence how the dominant-subordinate dynamic operates. As Calderon states, “power exists in language, too, where words create a foundation for understanding” (Calderon). Learning a new language takes time and dedication, and hopefully down the road, appreciation. Language is a mobile vehicle, delivering bright ideas from one mind to another and bridges understanding. I don’t necessarily have as an extreme personal example as in Calderon’s article, however I can imagine how lost and foreign English may have seemed when moving to the United States for the first time. My father and my older family members speak of this often, some of them still struggle with English after living in the U.S. for so long. The fact that Calderon had a supportive teacher who would assist him in advancing his English, in turn teaching his teacher her Spanish skills is a very beneficial relationship parallel to the idea of service. The sharing or equal exchange of culture is dynamic, meaning that both sides have something to offer and something to learn from the other. Simply understanding another person’s struggles does not automatically make it friendship unless they are understanding your struggles as well. This allows people to become “better able to understand (oneself), (one’s) family’s history, and the languages, cultures, and perspectives of community members” (Calderon). Actually changing perspectives with another and walking the path of life of another person is much different than what you may have initially thought. There may be assumptions, but assumptions that are defined by the dominant group can never capture someone else’s story in full.