Principles Essay: Critical Reflection and Application
Part 1
The results for my Sexuality IAT showed a strong automatic preference for straight people compared to Gay people. Bias is a predetermined against or towards someone. According to Kandola (2009), we are all capable of bias, particularly people that do not think of themselves as biased. Kandola (2009) devised three ways of holding bias from his research. The first is that we notice differences. The second is how we interpret the world around us, and the third is focused on how we socialize in groups (Kandola, 2009). The most applicable way of holding bias to the results of my Sexuality IAT is how we socialize in groups. I was unaware of any potential biases I might hold before taking my first IAT. I am thus surprised at the results for various reasons, including that I have always considered myself neutral on matters of sexuality.
Although I identify as a straight person, I am aware of how the gay community has grown in the past two decades. More people are coming out as gay, even as prejudice against them persists. I know several gay people, but they are not in my social group. I have different social groups, including family, neighborhood friends, clubs, and school colleagues. I do not think I have interacted closely with gay people within these social groups.
Additionally, my bias could have stemmed from my strict religious background. Homosexuality is not a subject we ever spoke of at home, and my strictly religious parents would not condone interactions with gay people. Therefore, it is no surprise that I consider straight people as part of my in-group, and I view gay people as part of an out-group. While I accept the people’s differences within my in-group, sadly, I view gay people as a homogenous group. This view of homogeneity may also be why I do not fully understand the different types of gay people. I do not hold any negative thoughts about gay people, and maybe interacting with them would help change any misconceptions I may have about them.
My bias could create coercive power relations between fellow students, my teachers and me, and my future professional colleagues. Kandola (2009) opined that our socialization in groups could lead to discrimination where contributions from in-groups are valued more than out-groups. In my case, my in-group may have unknowingly sidelined gay students rather than being their allies. Similarly, coercive power relations exclude specific individuals/groups (Cummins, 2009). The school environment is harsh, especially for minority groups like gay people, and showing them support would go a long way. Besides being an ally for gay students, I could help advocate for them in school. I can encourage collaborative power relations by turning the mirror to myself, as Kandola (2009) suggested, and tackling my assumptions about gay people. It would also help if I educated myself and my in-group more about gay people to understand them better. Further, I could encourage others to challenge the school administration to strengthen their policies to affirm gay students and staff (Dwedar, 2016).
Part 2
Privilege makes specific individuals/groups dominant over others. However, when such privileged individuals/groups do not acknowledge that their privilege is what forges this dominance, it results in unearned power McIntosh (1988). In most instances, their privilege benefits them at the expense of unprivileged and underprivileged people. Because unearned power is silent and invisible, privileged people often deny it exists. They also do nothing to revoke unearned power or even redistribute it. Any attempts to shine a light on the disadvantages caused by privilege are quashed by those wielding unearned power (McIntosh, 1988). This does not mean that the privileged are oblivious to the inequalities resulting from their privilege. They are aware but choose to fight solutions to inequality that threaten to minimize their conferred power.
Equity literacy can be promoted only if the privileged, with their unearned power, can acknowledge that there are invisible systems of dominance. The first step in promoting equity-literacy is taking apart and redistributing the unearned power gained through privilege. Equity-literacy is all about inclusion, which can be achieved by removing dominant views and challenging the status quo (Bali, 2016). Recognizing the silent or subtle examples of inequity is not the only way to promote equity-literacy. Gorski (2016) suggests challenging inequity in the short term and finding ways to do so long term, despite the resistance that may arise. This resistance is often the work of the privileged who fear being challenged lest it jeopardizes their hold on power (Bali, 2016).
Much like unearned power, coercive power relations can also propagate dominance when power is exercised to the detriment of subordinates (Cummins, 2009). Other than individuals and groups, countries can also wield such power resulting in negative consequences. According to Cummins (2009), coercive power relations are exclusionary. They contribute to legitimizing decisions that cause dominance over specific individuals/groups. Such exclusionary tendencies can be seen in the Australian government’s colonial legislation seeking to curb Chinese immigration. Australians could only condone Chinese immigration (inclusion) so long as the latter remained subordinate. This is evident in how the Northern Territory had initially welcomed Chinese businessmen, only to turn against them after the Chinese became more successful economically (Fong, 2018). As the dominant group, White Australians used their power to create legislation limiting Chinese immigration. The results of these unfair legislations include the Chinese losing their businesses and many leaving Australia (Fong, 2018). White Australians sought to maintain their dominance over the Chinese and used their privilege and power to ensure the same.
Core democratic principles include freedoms of speech, religious beliefs, political participation, expression, and fundamental human rights. According to Song (2020), multiculturalism envisions a world where minorities can retain their identities within a dominant group or society. More often, minority groups have to assimilate into dominant groups and lose their culture. Rather, multiculturalism advocates accepting cultural differences instead of assimilation, but it does not disregard assimilation. Somewhat, multiculturalism eases its pressure while calling for the recognition of minority cultures within dominant groups (Song, 2020). multiculturalism is essential in a truly democratic society by ensuring the protection of minority cultures. People from minority groups can be accorded rights and freedoms in a genuinely democratic society without assimilation.
References
Bali, M. (2016). Unpacking Terms Around Equity, Power, and Privilege. Retrieved from https://blog.mahabali.me/pedagogy/critical-pedagogy/unpacking-terms-around-equity-power-and-privilege/
Cummins, J. (2009). Pedagogies of choice: challenging coercive relations of power in classrooms and communities. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 261-271.
Dwedar, M. (2016, December 7). Like Walking Through a Hailstorm: Discrimination Against LGBT Youth in US Schools. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/12/08/walking-through-hailstorm/discrimination-against-lgbt-youth-us-schools
Fong, N. (2018). Significance of the Northern Territory in the Formulation of “White Australia” Policies, 1880–1901. Australian Historical Studies, 1-19.
Gorski, P. (2016). Rethinking the Role of “Culture” in Educational Equity: From Cultural Competence to Equity Literacy. Multicultural Perspectives, 221-226.
Kandola, B. (2013). Day of Learning 2013 – Binna Kandola: Diffusing Bias. Retrieved from Facing History & Ourselves: https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/video/day-learning-2013-binna-kandola-diffusing-bias
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Retrieved from https://www.oregon.gov/das/HR/Documents/whiteprivilege_peggymcintosh.pdf
Song, S. (2020, September 20). Multiculturalism. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/multiculturalism/