"The conflict perspective addresses this deficiency by viewing the structure of society as a source of inequality, which always benefits some groups at the expense of other groups" (pg. 23)
When reading through chapter one I felt that David Newman was focusing on only one side of the situations that he was discussing. Throughout the chapter he hits the points that our society as a whole has a negative view towards things that one may find out of the circle of normality. For example, he continually brings up the fact that homosexual differences are basically not getting the recognition and respect that they deserve. I personally feel that homosexuality is getting a vast amount of recognition throughout our society, both pro and con. Growing up in Canaan, VT (the most north-easterly part of the state) I have a very different opinion then Newman towards topics such as homosexuality, race, and gender. Throughout the chapter I feel that Newman didn't express the views of people against same sex marriage, racism, etc. leaning towards a bias that if your not for what a certain group is for then your in the wrong, making a certain group of people benefit from another group of people giving them the upper hand.
I feel that Newman should have added the point of view from people that were against topics such as same sex marriage allowing those thoughts to open up into other peoples minds and maybe allowing people to better understand where they are coming from. In many discussions that I've had with people about controversial topics I feel that it always comes down to the same thing, people have their own beliefs and opinions. If another person doesn't agree with something you said they are going to automatically consider you a narrow minded person that isn't cultured. When in reality they have no clue if they are cultured or not.
1 comment:
I agree with you Ryan, I believe that we are all guilty of racism, it is too much a part of society for us not to have picked it up a long the way. I don't think it is always a bad thing but there are two different types in my opinion. People who because of race hold certain people higher than others, and those who simply recognize race and culture as being a part of society from experience; the good and bad. The later simply recognizes trends in a race from their community and thus creates racism when judging others by their races actions in society. Thus that comment about being called a name in regards to geography, although not a country or particular 'race' it is similar in nature. All of this looks extremely good on paper, but in the cities and places where the theories are put to the test it does not really work like that. - Jona Falencki
Post a Comment