Social construction PDF

Preview

Summary

how language shapes identity, discursive constreuction...

Description

Name: Alessandra Gazal Assessment: Essay 2 Subject: Identity Tutor: Grace Torcasio ID number: 1064785 Word Count; 1864

There are many types of social construction. Briefly explain what is meant by “discursive construction”. Next, select any one of the social identity categories we have covered in the course so far and explore the extent to which and the ways in which discursive construction shapes the social position and experience of people classified in this way.

Ones identity is heavily reliant on racial identification which is discursively constructed through historical and social representations, creating a web of relational properties contingent to race. Discursive construction understands the dialectical relationship of acts and social structures which form social hierarchies of privilege and subordination. Through looking at the binary oppositions of ‘white’ and ‘black’ racial groups, this essay will dissect the ‘social meaning of colour’ (Haslanger, p. 236). Thus, displaying the historical and social contingency of race, highlighting the mechanics of similarity and substitution lending itself to discursive construction. This will be analysed both in the past and present era’s to acknowledge the changing and evolving social structures in which ideas of race and racism as coeval counterparts (Haslanger p. 239) embed themselves within society. In doing so, this essay will simultaneously question the effectiveness of discursive construction in more modern times.

Identity is argued as a longing for ‘fable composition’ (Wodak, p. 14) in which individuals desire to integrate permanence in their life, in order to create a feeling of belonging, which is given through race and heritage. However the clear divide of racial groups argues that races are destructive toward the individuals that are apart of the minority. Discursive construction is able to debunk representations of race by identifying the core of racism as a network of associative attributes that perpetuate racial dominance.

The utilisation of Paul Riceour’s philosophical theory of identity helps to understand the relational complexity of race through discursive construction. The term ‘Salve veritae’ meaning ‘Nothing is authentic’, determines both objects and ideas as being derived from a pre-conceived understanding or past representation. This is extrapolated through discerning the concept of ‘sameness and selfhood’ seen through two semantic factors; quantitive and qualitative identity, which allows the plausibility of discursive construction. Quantitive identity is two occurrences of the same thing, which are grouped in a collective, creating a numerical identity. Qualitative identity is the sameness in physical and aesthetic attributes, such as clothing and appearance. These two factors place identity into a superficial collection of signifiers and representations of these qualities, enabling the creation of racial groups. In terms of race, colour and biological factors creating a superficial understanding of an individuals identity, enabling society to easily marginalise and create systems of difference. Making these divisions among people along with the dimension of colour, favouring ‘white’ to ‘dark’ skinned. Regarding race to be solely physical and thus disregarding the ‘heritage’ aspect of race, which brings about the formation of identity.

The ideology of discursive construction aligns with Focaults theory that discourse is formed through power and dominance in which white people have organised. This leads to the meaning of ‘truth’ to be understood through the white male gaze (Berger, p. 1). In conjunction with Focault, the utilisation of Paul Riceour’s philosophical theory of identity helps to understand the relational complexity of race through discursive construction The term ‘Salve veritae’ meaning ‘Nothing is authentic’, determines both objects and ideas as being derived from a pre-conceived understanding or past representation. This is extrapolated through discerning the concept of ‘sameness and selfhood’ seen through two semantic factors; quantitive and qualitative identity, which allows the plausibility of discursive construction. Quantitive identity is two occurrences of the same thing, which are grouped in a collective, creating a numerical identity. Qualitative identity is the sameness

in physical and aesthetic attributes, such as clothing and appearance. These two factors place identity into a superficial collection of signifiers and representations of these qualities, enabling the creation of racial groups. In terms of race, colour and biological factors creating a superficial understanding of an individuals identity, enabling society to easily marginalise and create systems of difference. Making these divisions among people along with the dimension of colour, favouring ‘white’ to ‘dark’ skinned. Regarding race to be solely physical and thus disregarding the ‘heritage’ aspect of race, which brings about the formation of identity.

The history of white colonisation arguably forms the basis of discursive construction which enables the perpetuation of racism (Lyman and Vidich, p. 24). White colonists held the belief of biological determinism (Staples, p. 37) in which race holds an innate, non-malleable and inherent gene function which established cognitive function, forming a large superficial disparity between white and coloured race. Although no essential biological subject exists in race, as scientifically proven (Templeton, p. 24) the reduction of race to its simplest form of ‘colour’ highlights the dichoticmous relationship of good and bad (Richter qtd by Wodak p.19) which socialites both poles and formed the underlying factors of discursive construction. colonisation allowed the establishment of ‘raw natives’ and the ‘centres of civilisation’ and brought about institutionalised slavery as the earliest form of racism. This regarded coloured people as primitive, animalistic creatures which saw the emergence of racial colonial psychiatry (Fernando, p. 3) used to justify poor treatment as they viewed ‘black insane’ to be inscribed in bodies rather than in minds (Swartz pg. 141). Privilege white experience and exploitation among these races bought about social and economic inequalities that, argued by Hall, is the reason for modern mistreatment. The black race was identified to be outside of representation and thus proposed that ‘we’ may only understand their experience by placing ourselves into what constitutes what whit people are (Hall, p. 7). Binary oppositions has created a social construction of us/them, white/black, sameness/other which puts restraint on the

first time over the other (Miron & Inda, p. 85), this ancient hierarchy forms the basis of discursive construction and perpetuates racism.

This mistreatment has pervaded the modern understanding of black races. Figeuora introduces the two- fold issue of racial identity for black youth as a result of white, Caucasian dominance. Firstly the mistreatment over time has resulted in less educational access, lower socio-economic status and living space (Figeuora p. 72). Ones living space has patterns of residential living in which causes stratification between the races, producing inequality (Reardon & Bischoff, p. 1093) as it is instrumental in defining ones life and socio economic status. This is seen through the American act 1956 that broke up black neighbourhoods and led to further disinvestment in these area by indirectly subsidising the development of white middle class suburbs. Not only does this highlight institutionalised racism, but furthers the oscillation of the poles by placing white people in a place of privilege (Stephenson, p. 124)

Secondly Figueroa illuminates how discursive construction is judged off ones appearance of biological sameness and aligned with stigmas superficially. This is seen through the example of people being simply ‘dark skinned’ to be interpreted as black youth and deviant criminals, through the utilisation of ‘racist frames of reference’ (Smiley & Fakunle, p. 6) which identifies how there are patterns of racial discourse which put people into positions of superiority and inferiority. This falsely identifies the existence of race through stereotypes which proves the social construction and contingency of race. These intertwine into society with social structures, based on discursively constructed themes. Therefore the idea of ‘racial malleability’ as put forward by Jennifer Roth Gordon, illuminates how we witness representation and associate it with racial movement (Gordon, p. 296). Goffman and Garnkel introduce the analysis of role-playing and self-masking to conquer institutionalised prejudice (Maynard, p. 277) The emergence of this as a social practice is seen

through the example of other cultures, specifically Latin American (Alim et al, p.22) to look and sound white as a technique to ascend institutionalised racism, through language, speech and clothing. This is identified recently with police brutality in American against innocent black men. In 1910 a man shot a young black boy by mistaking him for a hold up man and justified this by saying “this boy was probably large for his age”, thus proving discursive construction due to how they have been racially framed and shot due to their appearance when being completely innocent (Gershon, 2018). Highlighting the instability of race as it is live on the daily basis and how white privilege is still favoured and the white police offers have received no repercussions for these actions.

The outstanding white privilege that society turns a blind eye too, has been formed through the media which masks itself truth through discourse. The media plays a large part in these stereotypes to metapragmatically regiment some form of semiotic display which include not only which shapes public perception. Hall constitutes that the media plays a large part in social construction, and that these ideas regulate society. As major operations till led by white caucasian men. Maintain and stabilise power and dominance in which these are discursively constructed ideologies this Images of ‘blackness’ and ‘browness’ are constructed and arrogated to influence and promote stereotypes such as black people in state of crime and gangs, people believe crime is the only thing ‘black’ people do (Taylor 2002).

However the strength of discursive construction comes into question in a globalised, conservative world in which political correctness is idolised. The attributes lending itself to a certain racial groups have become blurred in society, introducing ‘colourblind racism’ (Bonilla Silva, 2002). In doing so, the meaning of ‘ reflexive racism’ (Reyes, pg. 462 ) removes the historical and systematic oppression that cause disparity between the races by focusing on the sole context of the individuals

reaction as opposed to the historical justification of inequality of prejudice, in which people refuse to acknowledge the role of systematic inequality. By removing associative signifiers it has shown the widely spreader concept of ‘crying racist’ reveals the interplay of linguistic metapragmatics and political pragmatics. Individuals decontextualise race through the regimentation of discourse and Frame the minority as the perpetrators. White people are seen to be claiming to be the victim and moral righteousness by labelling black people as racist who are enraged by reducing their speech to sound bites that claim racism. Use there emotions against people as a form of structural inequality

Thus, this proves that Haslanger’s theory of race and racism being coeval is understood. Through the identification of race and racism as being socially contingent, she understand that eliminivatism, arguing against the existence of race ( Pierce, pg. 31), would not be a suitable action to defeat racism, as that would lead to treating everyone as equal, when there is inherent historical and social inequality that still occurs in modern times. Therefore race and racism work in tandem, and ones view of what race is determines the racial alignment of people. Thus discursive construction is necessary to fix the inequalities, leading to structural and systematic equality in order to create and therefore, only then will we be able to abolish racism.

Overall, discursive construction forms the basis and meaning of race, which is historically and socially contingent. Through its development society is becoming progressive, but could reflexively work to reclaim white privilege, in which society has to be able to understand the evolving and ever-changing status of race.

Bibliography

Haslanger, Sally. “Gender and Race.” Resisting Reality. Social Construction and Social Critique. Oxford; Oxford University Press, 2012, 221-246

Wodak Ruth. The Discursive Construction of National Identity. [Electronic Resource]. Edinburgh University Press; 2009, 8-25

Alim HS, Rickford JR, Ball AF. Raciolinguistics : How Language Shapes Our Ideas about Race. Oxford University Press; 2016. 219-222

Reyes, Angela. “Racist!”: Metapragmatic Regimentation of Racist Discourse by Asian American Youth. Discourse & Society: An International Journal for the Study of Discourse and Communication in Their Social, Political and Cultural Contexts. 2011;22(4): 458-473.

Martinez, Lee Anne Phd. “Biological Determinism” Salem Press Encyclopedia of Health, 2014. EBSCOhost, exp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=http://search-ebscohostcom.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login.aspx?direct=true&db=er&AN=94416381&site=edslive&scope=site

Figeora, Peter M.E/ “Racist Frames of Reference.” Education and the Social construction of ‘Race’, edited by Routledge. Taylor and Francis 2012, 54-58

Pierce, A.J. “Reconstructing Race: A Discourse- Theoretical Approach to a Normative Politis of Identity.” The Philosophical Forum, no. 1, 2012, pg. 27-49

Rorty, Amelie Oksenberg, and David Wong. “Aspects of Identity and Agency.” Identity, Character, and Morality: Essays in Moral Psychology. MIT Press, 1997. 19-36.

Omi, Michael, and Winant, Howard. “Blinded by Sight’: The Racial Body and the Origins of the Social Construction of Race.” Law and Social inquiry, vol 41, no. 4, 2016, pp 1062-1068

Jeffrey S Adler. Shoot to Kill: The Use of Deadly Force by the Chicago Police, 1875-1920. no. 2, 2007, p. 233. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=edspmu&AN=edspmu.S1530916907202331&site=eds-live&scope=site....