|← Cultural Anthropology||Prejudice: Ellis's Experience →|
This article describes the claims fostered by multiculturalism. It associates multiculturalism with identity of politics and the politics of difference and recognition. Multiculturalism is said to be associated the claims of language, race, religion, ethnicity and nationality. The various groups are reported to act in different ways for identification reasons. Barry also outlines that the diverse behavior brings out uniqueness in culture.
The author of this article tries to justify the need for identification by providing the following reasons. First, he affirms that individuals claim to advocate for liberty to choose what they want, at the time they want it so as to enhance community life and collective goods. Secondly, it claims that the individuals involved have the option of autonomy. The members of various cultural groups are said to have an access to their own cultures and practices it at their own will. Barry also reports that state support on some cultures may tend to be discriminatory for others. Through the multiculturalism, all the culture gets their rights to show up. The other reason is that the minority groups get their view. Lastly is the postcolonial theorists view.
However, the Barry doesn’t fail to criticize the multiculturalism practices as well. He argues that this issue brings differences among citizens in terms of trading, migration, war and imperialism. Secondly is the fact that the involved group conscience does not allow them to accommodate the other groups freely. The third reason is that there are distinctions in terms of political differences and distributions formed on the basis of their cultural interactions. In addition, Barry outlines that multiculturalism undermines the existence of equal opportunities based on their differences. Some group will need to be better than the other. Lastly, the minorities are undermined and their favor not guaranteed. The practice is seen to be majorly political.
Phillips, A. (2010). Gender and Culture. California, CA: Polity Publishers.
In this book, Phillips states the advantages as well as the disadvantages of involving different gender in various tasks. He also points out on the role of culture in the coexistence of various gender and the advantages associated with it without overlooking the limitations. In the book, it is pointed out that some cultures are too strict for a gender while others provide an ideal condition for them. The latter is that the disadvantaged group has no say to the current situations as their weapons of disagreeing with the set cultural practices are cubed. Philips points out the issue of exploring a particular group for certain tasks given that they are not light. He also discusses the disadvantages of controls given to a particular group over the other citing that it hinders the groups by hiding their potentials. Philips further asserts that having some traditions and cultural practices affects mostly the female in the education sector, specialization in their career paths and the problem associated with working freely in their employment positions. The gender differences discourage the freedom of one group while encouraging the other. This leads to variations in life achievements.
The book also argues the merits of such practices citing that they provide an ideal condition for various tasks to be performed. For instance, men are said to be good at performing harsh jobs that require a lot of energy. Their physique and ego allows them to meet this without any predicament. The book also points out that the association of a particular gender with specific roles gives them the advantage of building self confidence in their endeavors. Some people get jobs that are rejected by a particular gender and benefit from it. Philips outlines that disparity kills motivation and builds conflict between people. He concludes by saying that such gender stereotyping and disparities may reduce the performance of people in various tasks.
This article debates on the advantages and demerits of single sex education to children. Stanberry asserts that there are many issues that affect the child’s learning profile and preferences. These issues include the child’s nature and parental as well as the societal nurturing of the child. In this article, Stanberry argues that those parents who don’t want their children to be in mixed schools cite reasons such as distraction and peer influence. It is argued that teachers can use the single sex to properly educate their scholars with the full advantages. Some claim that the learning conditions may favor some students as compared to the others. Others also say that it is beneficial over the gender wise domination of a class. It is also supported by the federal law and Margaret Spellings that allows the single sex education.
On the other hand, the article disagrees with the single sex education. First of all, it reports that not many teachers are trained to deal with single sex education. Secondly, the gender education is not common for the globe. The third reason is that single sex education limits the chances that the scholars at one time in work will freely coexist with their fellows of the opposite sex. In addition, Stanberry explains that a higher percentage of girls in class improved their performance by lowering classroom disruption and fostering a better relationship with fellow learners. He further describes that single sex education limits academic disparity that can be achieved in a mixed school. Lastly, the American Civil Liberties Union argues that single sex education is discriminative.