![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thoughts wanted
Okay, I did the non-EC assignments. But I wanted to post something here regarding the second question ("How might the author of "Gay and Lesbian Studies for Everyone" define multicultural? How is his definition similar to or different from your definition?") to get your thoughts:
[student's post]
As we have endlessly exhausted, Duberman characterizes multiculturalism as "differentness and connection," indeterminate articles worthy of Duberman's spotty manifesto. This may seem like something of an aggresive attack on the very short piece we have read, but the final paragraph of this piece was the final nail in the coffin. It's hard to take an argument seriously when it simultaneously argues for fringe groups priding themselves on their identity and insisting upon respect of that idenity, and humanity moving "toward, rather than away, from one another."
I couldn't begin to define multiculturalism. Nor, for that matter, do I suspect self-proclaimed multiculturalists themselves have confirmed a consensus. There is a fine line walked in striving for a definition, a line dividing relativism and objectivity. This line being a conceivably eternal matter of contention, multiculturalism seems to be little more than a political contrivance. This is not to say that some of the ideas espoused by multiculturalists are not good, even great, but these ideas could more easily be titled "commonsense." My two cents.
[my reply]
Wow... I can't even begin to touch on what you wrote. Thank you for your post (even though it's required ^^;).
When you said that multiculturalism seems to be little more than a political contrivance, it made me think that made me think of something I don't believe I've ever put into words before. That is, that maybe multiculturalism is something to be aware of, but that perhaps the best way to strike a balance between recognizing our unified humanity and our individual uniqueness is by taking a "laissez-faire" approach. If you just let people live their lives, dealing with cultural situations on their own and as they come up without declaring either unified humanity or recognition of differences to be more politically correct, but at the same time taking care to avoid discrimination, the most healthy attitude would sprout on its own.
[student's post]
As we have endlessly exhausted, Duberman characterizes multiculturalism as "differentness and connection," indeterminate articles worthy of Duberman's spotty manifesto. This may seem like something of an aggresive attack on the very short piece we have read, but the final paragraph of this piece was the final nail in the coffin. It's hard to take an argument seriously when it simultaneously argues for fringe groups priding themselves on their identity and insisting upon respect of that idenity, and humanity moving "toward, rather than away, from one another."
I couldn't begin to define multiculturalism. Nor, for that matter, do I suspect self-proclaimed multiculturalists themselves have confirmed a consensus. There is a fine line walked in striving for a definition, a line dividing relativism and objectivity. This line being a conceivably eternal matter of contention, multiculturalism seems to be little more than a political contrivance. This is not to say that some of the ideas espoused by multiculturalists are not good, even great, but these ideas could more easily be titled "commonsense." My two cents.
[my reply]
Wow... I can't even begin to touch on what you wrote. Thank you for your post (even though it's required ^^;).
When you said that multiculturalism seems to be little more than a political contrivance, it made me think that made me think of something I don't believe I've ever put into words before. That is, that maybe multiculturalism is something to be aware of, but that perhaps the best way to strike a balance between recognizing our unified humanity and our individual uniqueness is by taking a "laissez-faire" approach. If you just let people live their lives, dealing with cultural situations on their own and as they come up without declaring either unified humanity or recognition of differences to be more politically correct, but at the same time taking care to avoid discrimination, the most healthy attitude would sprout on its own.