English 110

This article is a very good example of covering, but it seems to show it in a different way than how we have been looking at it in class. For many years, there has been discrimination among the disabled community whether we see it or not. The article shows how this discrimination plays a big part in the covering of other persons besides yourself. People with disabilities are not given the same opportunity as everyone else because sometimes opportunity is not as accessible for them which causes them to stay in the dark most of the time.

One of the things that stood out to me was “At screenings of the Netflix documentary “Crip Camp,” at Sundance, audience members often asked why they had never been told the story of Camp Jened for young people with disabilities in the 1960s, and of the activism many of the campers pursued in the disability rights movement as adults….One theory is this: They didn’t want to know.” (Heumann, Wodatch). This is one of the many reasons that disabled people experience covering, but in an unintentional way. People without disabilities are not invested enough to actively include them: in turn, covers them from accomplishing things as easy as anyone else.

In most situations, people are pressured to conform into more generic groups to hide who you really are. We see in Kenji’s “The Pressure To Cover” that all of those testimonies were of people that stood out, but were held responsible for not their visible traits, but actions that revolve around what they believe in and who they are. “In such cases, the courts routinely distinguish between immutable and mutable traits, between being a member of a legally protected group and behavior associated with that group.”. Kenji says that courts do not make decisions based off of who the person is because if they did it would be unlawful. People are forced to conform to other ways of living because other people do not like the fact that they are different.

In the article “Want to Be Less Racist?”, Moises Valasquez-Manoff shows his interest in the racial attitudes of the residents of Hawaii and why they seem to view people of color in a completely different way than others. He touches on subjects about how when children grow up in places that are more populated by people with lighter or white colored skin, they involuntarily learn racist behavior whether it was taught ‘deliberately’ to them or not. The evidence that proves this was a social test done by Dr. Pauker, “She found that between ages 4 and 11, upper-middle-class children from mostly white neighborhoods around Boston increasingly viewed race as a permanent condition and expressed stereotypes about other racial groups: that blacks were aggressive or, on the flip side, good at basketball; that Asians were submissive and good at math. These children came from public schools in liberal areas.” (Paragraph 5, Manoff) This social experiment proves that because these children are in bigger groups of people that look more like them, are able to almost hunt in packs. This is an analogy that Manoff uses that I think is one of the biggest reasons why there is still racism today even if children are not taught much of the topic of racism at young ages.

On the other side of this story comes the enlightenment of the children who grow up knowing that everyone is different and unique in their own way. The reason for that is because almost every single person in Hawaii has drastically different ethnicities. Someone might be native Hawaiian, African and Philipino, while someone they pass on the street is German, French and Native American. You can never know by just looking at someone and what Manoff does, is he explains why this might be the reason for that. The social experiment that he includes that was run by Dr. Pauker was done with children in densely populated areas where the ethnic groups are vastly different as explained above. Then, she did the same experiment with the children from Hawaii and the results were much different. She explains that these children, while still acknowledging the physical differences in people, were able to look past the stereotypes that arise from physical characteristics everywhere else. “They recognized skin color, hair texture and other features commonly associated with race. But they did not attribute to race the inherent qualities — aggression or book smarts” (Paragraph 6).

Whilst reading Chabon’s, “My Son, The Prince Of Fashion” and Roxanne Gay’s, “Bad Feminist” I noticed a lot of similarities within the societal views of people and their passions. For starters, in “Bad Feminist”, Gay brings up the fact that she does not know whether being a feminist is a good or bad thing in todays world. She is more caught up in wanting to be considered a ‘good feminist’ which means she would be conforming to society’s view of the ‘good feminist’ traits. For example she says, “the right way to be a woman is to be thin, to wear make up, to wear the right kind of clothes (not too slutty, not too prude, show a little leg, ladies), and so on. Good women are charming, polite, and unobtrusive.” (Gay, Paragraph 2) She seems to believe that conforming to the set traits of a ‘good feminist’ is the only way to make her one, which completely contradicts what Abe in Chabon’s article believes someone should do when they are passionate about something.

Abe is a young man that is very indulged in the fashion industry, even at such a young age. He does everything in his power to make sure that he looks his best with up to date styles and brands.

Yes, Abe does make sure that he is looking the best with the most popular clothing lines and styles according to what everyone loves and lusts over, but he puts his own spin on it. That is why I think these two articles can relate at some levels, but mostly are on the opposite spectrum. There isn’t one line in the Chabon article that suggests that Abe wants to be a follower. From what I see he wants to learn and eventually be one of the trend setters. Unlike Abe, Gay seems to want to fit in rather than being that trend setter and that is where I think the line gets crossed between these two societal driven views.

There are so many possibilities for self-definition. However, in this context, Abe seems to be offered a lot at such a young age even though he says he is “working” for the clothes that he wears. He is awarded things and is able to take them and turn them into something great. Not many kids are awarded things from their parents because of certain situations and most of all, are not able to go to fashion week in another country. I feel like his opportunity was perfect for him because his family was able to give him what he wanted, and what he wanted is out of reach even for a lot of adults. There could be millions of other kids out there that are similar to Abe, but can’t afford his lifestyle. 

One thing that stood out to me was, “Abe almost always found a way to mention the leaf-raking and drawer-organizing, conscious of the atmosphere of privilege and extravagance that permeated the world of fashion..”(pg. 2) I feel he makes it a point to bring up that because he does his chores, he is able to keep up with his expensive lifestyle at 13 years old and is aware that most younger kids are not awarded anything and when they are it’s some spare change. I think he understands the opportunity that he has, but almost feels the need to justify the fact that he is a little spoiled. 

Abe is given a lot of freedom to express himself because of the choices that his parents make raising their children. To a point, most people are able to express themselves the way they want to, but there are certain limitations that come with that if they don’t have the opportunity that Abe does.