Equality In AmericaEssay Preview: Equality In AmericaReport this essayWhen I was seven years old my father used to always tell me, “do not let anyone stomp on you, always stand up for yourself no matter what, even if its against the system.” My father always told me that throughout my progress in life. Those words have greatly influenced who I am today. Growing in Saudi Arabia, I saw equality everywhere but in the public. In my house, my friends houses, and my relatives houses I lived an egalitarian environment. However, when going to school, there was obvious discrimination in the treatment of students from the Royal Family. They were feared by teachers, policemen, and everybody. So usually, when a student gets into a fight with a prince that student is basically going to be labeled guilty in the end, or if it was very obvious that the prince abused the other student, the prince would not receive any punishment. This was a recurring theme in all places of human conduct. In work places, streets, and even shopping markets. I have never accepted this and I do not accept until this moment. Since I was young, I was taught by my father that I have rights, human rights that I am entitled to and I have the right to fight for those rights. Therefore, one can only imagine the trouble I always get into as a result of this ideology. However, it was worth it. I have gained enormous respect from everybody. Because of my fathers upbringing, I have developed a very strong reputation that I never fail to live up to.
“When we sold the Black Hills we got a very small price for it, and not what we ought to have received. I used to think that the size of the payments would remain the same all the time, but they are growing smaller and smallerI consider that my country takes up in the Black Hills, and runs from the Powder River to the Missouri; and that all of this land belongs to me. Our reservation is not as large as we want it to be, and I suppose the Great Father owes us money now for land he has taken from us in the past” (Great Speeches by Native Ameicans 173)
Sitting Bull expresses his feel of injustice by the actions of the “white man.” He feels as if his liberty and rights were stripped away. This represents, to Sitting Bull, an unequal treatment the Indians. He expresses this unequal treatment through the way he approaches his problem. Sitting Bull is approaching his problem the same way that white people approach their problems; peacefully and by demanding his rights. This is significant because it shows how Sitting Bull, an Indian chief, is giving into the way of the “white man” and choosing to ask for his rights through what the “white man” considers as the “appropriate” channels.
“The pioneers of Southern California came, not from Arizona or Colorado or Utah, but from China, France, Germany, Poland, and Great Britain. I have discussed the Chinese and the mexicans, but other foreign elements were also involved” (Southern California 139)
McWilliams indicates that Southern California was not all American built. For the most part, foreigners built it. She indicates this to show the reader that Southern California was built by a diverse group of people, and most of these people were not even Americans, which means that they should all be equal. Also meaning that Southern California, and many other areas in America as well all have a Multi-cultural/ethnic base.
“You will find yourselves-as I know you already have-in dark places, alone, and afraid. What I hope for you, for all my sisters and daughters, brothers and sons, is that you will be able to live there, in the dark place. To live in that place that our rationalizing culture of success denies, calling it a place of exile, uninhabitable, foreign” (Why Freedom Matters 260-261)
When this was said, Guin was targeting the issue of gender inequality. However, she describes dark, strange places one might encounter. This is important because these dark places applies to any situation or place that one finds him/herself as a stranger. For example, a newcomer in a city, school, or a new work place, or whatever. To her it is important that people could cope with this dark place. This means that it is very important when people find themselves in a strange place, they should know how to survive and how to continue on living there, despite the foreign nature of the environment. This applies to America as well. As Guin explain, Americas culture is a “rationalizing” one that believes it is a complete success while in reality it is not and there exists many problems; and one of which is inequality; the feeling of being foreign.
In reality, the difference between the American and the other societies is that the American culture is largely based upon the Western culture, but the English, who are much more closely related to this system, has quite a much simpler, albeit still more complex system of thinking. This in turn applies very widely to America. The English have a great deal of common sense. They are far more concerned with the needs and aspirations of their fellow human race in general than with what their Western people have been fighting over, especially around women’s rights. This is often accompanied by more philosophical thoughts and conclusions, especially in regard to slavery.
The American concept of inequality does not end at its economic roots. There is a political divide as well, especially around voting rights, as well. People in these countries believe in what you do, but it generally can only go by what you get, not their values like their American counterparts.[2] So the more a person values what you do for others, the more often they have to justify these “values” to themselves by looking out for and supporting the social justice movement and their policies. So when it comes to equality, the British view is much more about a belief in the common good, while the Americans view values as being “consequential”.[3]
As for America, most of us consider it very important that we all take our rights seriously.
So what is the next step? Do you want to see more black and lesbian couples start a family?, or something to the point where there is a need for equal rights for all?
What’s a gay/lesbian relationship like? How have the US people responded to this topic? Do they continue to see the same basic issues as the rest of the world, or do they find that Americans are more tolerant and less accepting? If you want to find out just how much difference these issues can make, check out this list of gay “conquers”.[4]
What’s important to take note of in a debate is that gay and lesbian couples in America have two sides to the argument, no matter what anyone else thinks about their respective stances. If you want to understand how to make the US people less hateful, it is helpful to read the discussion here, where I talk about the difference between the two. If you want to know how they view human rights, they disagree. It may lead you to think that gay people are more likely to be killed when trying to get a job, but don’t go too far to saying that gay and lesbian couples would be at fault for that (or else you could argue the same thing with straight people).[5] If you think they know more about human rights rights than most people do, you could argue that if gay and lesbian couples weren’t at risk their civil unions would collapse or they wouldn’t have to find a better way to survive.
[13] In addition to being on the right, the two main groups that the US is now discussing in its civil unions treaty are the LGBT community and abortion. Gay and transgender civil unions are on target for the majority of its members due to it being the most common and recognized way of getting into government work, according to Pew Research. They are also on target for the majority of its lawmakers and activists.[6][7]
[14] A key concern for the US is in the creation of a “transgender identity” identity, which in fact it would make possible for trans and intersex persons to be considered by a federal court. They have the right to be recognized as such by the U.S. in court, but they can only do so if their parents or legal guardian agrees to the transition.
[15] While these are important issues for those who want to “reform the system,” I agree that they are also a much more complex issue and would be of profound importance to our current efforts. We could, at last, change the face of the LGBT movement, but that doesn’t mean we should simply ignore them.
[16] The American Civil Liberties Union is involved in civil unions as a policy group in both chambers, and the Supreme Court recently affirmed that they cannot stand for same-sex marriage (the opinion is headed by Justices Thomas & Blackmun) or same-sex marriage (judge Neil Gorsuch). Also in our legal analysis, however, that argument is being pushed by other organizations representing same-sex couples and states that support both types or want to change things. On the one hand, that argument means that the case is just a case of how to pass a law that doesn’t violate the fundamental rights of an entire state for the state to decide who qualifies and who doesn’t. On the other hand, it means that all citizens have the right to be treated similarly in various state laws.
[17] The legal interpretation of marriage’s four fundamental rights is somewhat complicated, but I agree that even though it is hard to deny the basic notion in that section, it also makes a huge difference in the way people treat the individual’s marriage rights. The only way the court addresses “legitimate homosexual conduct” in the same sense as any other private ceremony is by saying that heterosexual couples who are married “do not become spouses.” The first way to apply this definition is to talk about what is good for our country, that it must ensure that people enjoy equal rights for every person regardless whether or not they live in union with a partner. I would think that this is a different concern, since we are already using the word “equality” now, but the use of the word “conceal” makes the issue clearer. Because civil unions are not created by people of the same sex, these unions would be made legal by a separate right of the couple. Instead, it would mean that they would have some form of legal recognition, even if it did not directly affect everyone else and that everyone would be equal or recognized in that way on equal terms. A marriage that did not recognize same-sex family members in civil unions, however, could not be recognized without being married by a person of the opposite race. I agree that civil unions could be made legal under the same terms as marriage, but that was only when they were made legal by society’s founding community. In other words, they would be a “right”
In fact, most people outside of political movements are concerned with issues that go beyond the average American. But this does not mean that they should be excluded from society. Just don’t think the American people don’t understand how important it is to care about equality. You’d realize how important it is to care about it more with a young person, for years to come.[6] So if you find yourself in a position where you can’t care less about equality,
In reality, the difference between the American and the other societies is that the American culture is largely based upon the Western culture, but the English, who are much more closely related to this system, has quite a much simpler, albeit still more complex system of thinking. This in turn applies very widely to America. The English have a great deal of common sense. They are far more concerned with the needs and aspirations of their fellow human race in general than with what their Western people have been fighting over, especially around women’s rights. This is often accompanied by more philosophical thoughts and conclusions, especially in regard to slavery.
The American concept of inequality does not end at its economic roots. There is a political divide as well, especially around voting rights, as well. People in these countries believe in what you do, but it generally can only go by what you get, not their values like their American counterparts.[2] So the more a person values what you do for others, the more often they have to justify these “values” to themselves by looking out for and supporting the social justice movement and their policies. So when it comes to equality, the British view is much more about a belief in the common good, while the Americans view values as being “consequential”.[3]
As for America, most of us consider it very important that we all take our rights seriously.
So what is the next step? Do you want to see more black and lesbian couples start a family?, or something to the point where there is a need for equal rights for all?
What’s a gay/lesbian relationship like? How have the US people responded to this topic? Do they continue to see the same basic issues as the rest of the world, or do they find that Americans are more tolerant and less accepting? If you want to find out just how much difference these issues can make, check out this list of gay “conquers”.[4]
What’s important to take note of in a debate is that gay and lesbian couples in America have two sides to the argument, no matter what anyone else thinks about their respective stances. If you want to understand how to make the US people less hateful, it is helpful to read the discussion here, where I talk about the difference between the two. If you want to know how they view human rights, they disagree. It may lead you to think that gay people are more likely to be killed when trying to get a job, but don’t go too far to saying that gay and lesbian couples would be at fault for that (or else you could argue the same thing with straight people).[5] If you think they know more about human rights rights than most people do, you could argue that if gay and lesbian couples weren’t at risk their civil unions would collapse or they wouldn’t have to find a better way to survive.
[13] In addition to being on the right, the two main groups that the US is now discussing in its civil unions treaty are the LGBT community and abortion. Gay and transgender civil unions are on target for the majority of its members due to it being the most common and recognized way of getting into government work, according to Pew Research. They are also on target for the majority of its lawmakers and activists.[6][7]
[14] A key concern for the US is in the creation of a “transgender identity” identity, which in fact it would make possible for trans and intersex persons to be considered by a federal court. They have the right to be recognized as such by the U.S. in court, but they can only do so if their parents or legal guardian agrees to the transition.
[15] While these are important issues for those who want to “reform the system,” I agree that they are also a much more complex issue and would be of profound importance to our current efforts. We could, at last, change the face of the LGBT movement, but that doesn’t mean we should simply ignore them.
[16] The American Civil Liberties Union is involved in civil unions as a policy group in both chambers, and the Supreme Court recently affirmed that they cannot stand for same-sex marriage (the opinion is headed by Justices Thomas & Blackmun) or same-sex marriage (judge Neil Gorsuch). Also in our legal analysis, however, that argument is being pushed by other organizations representing same-sex couples and states that support both types or want to change things. On the one hand, that argument means that the case is just a case of how to pass a law that doesn’t violate the fundamental rights of an entire state for the state to decide who qualifies and who doesn’t. On the other hand, it means that all citizens have the right to be treated similarly in various state laws.
[17] The legal interpretation of marriage’s four fundamental rights is somewhat complicated, but I agree that even though it is hard to deny the basic notion in that section, it also makes a huge difference in the way people treat the individual’s marriage rights. The only way the court addresses “legitimate homosexual conduct” in the same sense as any other private ceremony is by saying that heterosexual couples who are married “do not become spouses.” The first way to apply this definition is to talk about what is good for our country, that it must ensure that people enjoy equal rights for every person regardless whether or not they live in union with a partner. I would think that this is a different concern, since we are already using the word “equality” now, but the use of the word “conceal” makes the issue clearer. Because civil unions are not created by people of the same sex, these unions would be made legal by a separate right of the couple. Instead, it would mean that they would have some form of legal recognition, even if it did not directly affect everyone else and that everyone would be equal or recognized in that way on equal terms. A marriage that did not recognize same-sex family members in civil unions, however, could not be recognized without being married by a person of the opposite race. I agree that civil unions could be made legal under the same terms as marriage, but that was only when they were made legal by society’s founding community. In other words, they would be a “right”
In fact, most people outside of political movements are concerned with issues that go beyond the average American. But this does not mean that they should be excluded from society. Just don’t think the American people don’t understand how important it is to care about equality. You’d realize how important it is to care about it more with a young person, for years to come.[6] So if you find yourself in a position where you can’t care less about equality,
“I will let the world see sir what justice there is when it is govern by the race prejudice men! just because she is of the chinese descend, not because she dont dress like you because she does. Just because she is descended of chinese parents I guess she is more of a American than a good many of you that is going to prevent her being educated” (Letters 186).
Mary Tape felt that her rights were violated and this is reflected when looking at her quote. Her equality rights were violated and that is why she is very furious, because “race prejudice.” Then, she attacks the boards American identity by stating that her daughter is more American than them because they were unconstitutional in their actions of racism and inequality.
“One summer day, demon officials and China Man translators went form group to group and announced. Were raising the pay-thirty five dollars a month. Because of your excellent work, the Central Pacific Railroad is giving you a four-dollar raise per month. The workers who didnt know better cheered. Whats the catch? said the smarter men. Youll have the opportunity to put in more time, said the railroad demons. Two more hours per shift. Ten-hour shifts inside the tunnels. Its not ten hours straight, said the demons. You have time off for tea and meals. Now that you have dynamite, the work isnt so hard. They had been working for three and a half years already, and the track through Donner Summit was still not done. The workers discussed the ten-hour shift, swearing their China Man obscenities. Two extra hours a day-sixty hours a month for four dollars. Pig catcher demons. Snakes. Turtles. Dead demons. A human body cant work like that. The demons dont believe this is a human body. This is a chinamans body. To bargain, they sent a delegation of English speakers, who were summarily noted as troublemakers, turned away, docked” (California Uncovered 21).
Kingston is showing how in America injustice was