"Life is going to be different from now on...In Virginia you were white boys. In Indiana you're going to be colored boys.." (Newman, 31)

In chapter 2 of the Newman text, "Manufacturing Differences" it really brought to the surface for me all the lines people really do draw to separate themselves from others and just how many endless categories there really can be. As long as people are wanting to feel superior and dominant, there will always be more ways to distinguish groups of people. This mechanism of separation as a tool to one-up from another is seen in every form. Newman opens up with stories of two individuals who both experience a form of boundaries being crossed and things taken for granted. Gregory Williams lived a life of white identity until he turned 10 and found out that because his paternal grandmother was black, he was going to be considered black too. This news forced Williams to question and examine what makes someone black...and how does one suddenly make the shift from living to be white to suddenly being told you are black and everyone is going to treat you as black. The perception of others changed around him, nothing really changed inside him physically with his body though. This goes to show how society needs to have that boundary and line there, and imaginary classification system of race, that is seen so strongly with how people are judged, treated and thought of. If race is a biological myth and is socially constructed, but it holds so much value to who a person is and their identity in our society, then who are we really? From an essentialist's perspective "people's definitions and labels can change, but an individuals essence always exists." A constructivist would say that things are real simply because we give meaning to them. So who is right? Are peoples differences due to nature or nurture? Would admitting that we are all more alike than different as a human race really be so bad? What would society do with no one to blame or put down? How would we feel better without someone worse off? Newman comments that "our ideas about the contribution of genes, hormones, or anatomy ebb and flow with shifting political and cultural ideas....what's important, for our purposes, is not so much whether race,class, gender, and sexual identities have biological underpinnings but how we, as a society, come to define and value the relative contributions of biology and culture." I strongly agree with his comment. It is so important when looking at how people are divided and classed to look around at the environment and what is going on with other factors.
Robert Jenson wrote the article, "White Privilege Shapes the U.S." and it was very interesting to read this after getting a more statistical and factual analysis from the Newman text. Jenson interviewed a college applicant and asked his views on affirmative action and the student said he didn't believe in it. He said it was not fair, people needed to be on an even playing field. But when faced with the question that society itself if white dominated, and in itself is already an uneven playing field, the student responded in saying "That really doesn't matter." This was the crux of what Jenson was trying to point on in writing this article. How can someone be aware of the White privilege, but choose to ignore it and its meaning? To some degree the fact that a person has white skin alone, they could have all other things at a very unfortunate state, they will have advantage over non-white skinned individuals. Jenson says we need to evaluate the choices we make in what to do with this success we make as white people. Maybe some day we can start to level the playing field. I hope so. I strongly agreed with the tone and affect in both readings, they were dead on.