Explain how race is a social construction. How is race different from ethnicity or nationality? Pose two questions for your classmates based on the reading.

Dicussion board posting needed in 5.5 hours from now regarding question above. See rubric attached and model answer. Must refernce reading to get full points. If you can not access the reading by downloading the book or finding it online, it will not work for me.

Book is: Race, Class, and Gender in the United States. Paula S. Rothenberg eighth edition

Model Discussion Board Posts

Here is an example from my Survey of American Diversity course. It is a 200-level course. Notice how the student utilizes and engages with course materials. Your responses need not be this long, however, this student exemplifies how you should utilize the readings and critically think about discussion board responses.

Example:

This week’s readings discussed the experience of both Japanese and Mexican immigrants as they came to live in America in the 1900’s. Although they were from different cultures, their experiences were quite similar in many ways. The Mexicans had an easier time entering the country than the Japanese. The Mexicans simply had to“…� report at the immigration office on the American side” (Takaki, p292). They did not have to plan, pay for and endure a long arduous journey across the Pacific as the Japanese. They were not tasked with making the decision to leave their families forever since the Mexican International Railroad (Takaki p. 294) made traveling to America more efficient. Financial hardships had pushed the peasant class of both Japanese and Mexican out of their native lands (p 232 & 293). The Japanese were being brought down by hefty taxes and the Mexicans were forced to become tenant farmers of their own land. Additionally, the Mexicans were fearful of a violent Revolution and came to America to “wait out the conclusion” (p. 294). Both groups were “pulled” by their dreams of opportunity (p. 233 & 293).

     Japanese and Mexican immigrants were able to establish their families in America. Japanese women were pulled to Hawaii by their husbands or through “ picture marriages”. The families labored on the farms together. (Takaki p 247 & p. 298). Families were the preferred labor force of planters (p. 247). Consequently, Japanese families came to live in Japanese work camps (p. 247) in Hawaii, which bore a striking similarity to the conditions described by the Mexican’s in a residence community know to them as “the barrio.” They found solace among the horrible living conditions by being able to share culture, language, food, and fellowship.

     In terms of education, both the Mexican and Japanese children were oppressed in the American educational system. “The planters, however, did not want the children of immigrant workers to have opportunities: they needed the second generation as plantation laborers. In their view, these children should not be taught beyond the sixth or eighth grade (Takaki, p. 250).” They wanted to raise the laborer’s youths into a class of subordinate adults and feared education would contradict their plans despite their parents plans to educate them beyond the labor class. In Japan, the Japanese were highly educated individuals, including the women (unlike the Chinese culture). English was a major subject in their middle schools. To have their own children not be afforded this same dignity in America must have been devastating for them.

     The American’s attitude toward the assimilation of these two groups was also quite similar. Despite their christening the American earth with their “sweat and tears”, they were constantly being thought of as foreigners. Their American born children were still called names like “Jap”, “shorty” or “greaser” by whites. It would appear that seeds of discrimination had been planted in the American soil as well. “They talk to us about becoming citizens, but if we become citizens we are still Mexicans (Takaki, p. 310)” One Japanese man replied to the Japanese future in America with the following; “How many sons of ours with beautiful bachelor’s degrees are accepted into American life? Men with degrees in chemistry and physics do research in the fruit stands of the public market. And they all rot away inside (p. 261).” It appears that they were able to successfully assimilate into their roles of subordinate laborers and not the role of respected American citizen.

      This inability to assimilate as an American citizen could be attributed to the concept of “permanent inequality” as defined by Miller (p. 110). It is clear by their continued oppression that the dominate group was not on a path to end the relationship of inequality as defined by the concept of “temporary inequality” (p. 109). According to Miller, the dominate group is responsible for defining acceptable roles for the subordinates. The dominate group has control of sustaining or eliminating oppressive activities, stereotypes and discrimination. In her article entitled “Oppression”, Marilyn Frye describes oppression as a “network of systematically related barriers” (p. 152) put in place by the dominate group to “mold, immobilize and reduce” (p. 150) the subordinate group. This can be applied to an example from this weeks reading. The Japanese and Mexican immigrants were reduced to farm laborers and immobilized by their job opportunities.  Farm work was seasonal and migratory, with laborers following crops (Takaki p. 298). Constantly moving, these immigrants were unable to establish themselves as citizens and not “ laborers”. Miller writes that dominants “impede the development of subordinates and block their freedom of expression and action (p. 111).” This is evident in their limiting of educational opportunities for the immigrant youth, both Japanese and Mexican. In another example, the Japanese laborers were given a number to be referenced by rather than their name. Takaki (p. 240-241) quotes a worker as stating “Every worker was called by number,…Always by the bango, 7209 or 6508 in that manner.” This is a classic example of a dominate group reducing (oppressing) a subordinate. They were reduced to a number and not a name. In another example, the dominate group tried to reserve their “skilled jobs” for whites only (Takaki p. 296). These are just a few examples of how our readings of Oppression and Domination and Subordination can be applied to the reading for this week.

Discussion Forum Rubric

Each week you will have a question to respond to that relates to the readings. Your responses in the discussion forum will be worth 40 points each and will be graded by the following rubric.

· Initial Post is worth a possible 20 points:

· 5 points for exhibiting a knowledge of and familiarity with the readings. The student’s post shows an understanding of the concepts discussed in the readings and is able to explain in their own words.

· 5 points for writing. The student is able to articulate a response to the question in a clear, concise manner with few grammatical errors. Initial responses should be 3-5 paragraphs in length.

· 5 points for critical thinking / originality of thought. The student’s post shows an application of the readings to the topic being discussed. The student draws new conclusions, or builds upon the work of the authors with their own ideas.

· 5 points for participation. All three posts should be made on time. I will not accept late responses when I grade.

· Response posts are worth 10 points each

· Do not reply with a simple “I agree,” or “I think you are right.” You should engage your classmate’s responses. Support your contentions with the readings.

· Be sure to respond to at least one of the questions posed by your classmate.

· Your follow up responses should not exceed 3 paragraphs.