Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
A compilation of various organizations, communities, and movements focusing on social issues such as race, gender, disability, sexuality, and human rights. The list includes entities like Solidarity, Diabetes Daily, The United Methodist Church, Calvary Chapel, and many more. Some entries are specific to certain demographics, such as the Black People Network, Asian Women Magazine, and the Asian Women's Shelter. Others address broader topics like Human Rights First, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the National Museum of African American History and Culture. The document also includes various educational and advocacy groups, such as the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Asian American Journalists Association.
What you will learn
Typology: Schemes and Mind Maps
1 / 123
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Quantifying The Matrix of Domination by Marian Azab
A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the DegreeMaster of Arts
Approved April 2011 by the Graduate Supervisory Committee: H. L. T. Quan, ChairMichael Stancliff Thomas Keil
May 2011
i
This paper is seeking to use exploratory factor analysis to construct a numeric representation of Hill Collin's matrix of domination. According to Hill Collins, the Current American matrix of domination, or the interlocking systems of oppression, includes race, gender, class, sexual orientation, religion, immigration status, disability, and age. The study uses exploratory factor analysis to construct a matrix of domination scale. The study launched an on-line survey (n=448) that was circulated through the social network Facebook to collect data. Factor analysis revealed that the constructed matrix of domination represents an accurate description of the current social hierarchy in the United States. Also, the constructed matrix of domination was an accurate predictor of the probability of experiencing domestic abuse according to the current available statistics.
The idea of the matrix of domination was introduced by Patricia Hill Collins in the 1990s. According to her, the current American matrix of domination, or the interlocking systems of oppression, (Collins, 2000) includes race, gender, class, sexual orientation, religion, immigration status, disability, and age^1. Of course, these specific systems of oppression are particular to this moment in the history of the United States. These systems are expected to be different in other societies and in other moments in the history of the United States. The matrix of domination is vital to the understanding of the relations of power, oppression and social domination. It “insures densely configured identities that take shape around people’s diverse subject positions as simultaneously privileged and oppressed individuals” (Rogers & Lott, 1997: 498). For example, immigration status is experienced differently based on where a person falls on each of the other systems of oppression; an immigrant farm worker and an immigrant college professor have very different experiences. In the same manner, a female immigrant farm worker’s experiences are different from her male counterpart. There have been attempts to utilize the framework of the matrix of domination to better understand the complex “blends of privilege and penalty
(^1) Some might argue that Hill Collins dedicated most of her theoretical work to studying gender and race. However, this paper treats the eight systems ofoppression as equal components of the matrix of domination.
among subordinates (of a specific system of domination) who occupy diverse positions in other systems of domination” (Rogers & Lott, 1997: 497). For example, Balcazar examined “learning disabilities as they co-occur with other sociopolitical minority statuses” (2007:145) to better understand how experiencing disability differs by race, class and gender. Lambert explored “how living at the intersection of social locations such as race, gender, class, (and) age affects the lives of adolescent (and) young women both before (and) after diagnosis of HIV” (2007: S40). Hill Collins introduces a different idea. When discussing social blackness, which, according to her, is a place in the power hierarchy that is assigned to some people, mostly black and what she identify as “black by proxy,” she argues that instead of "studying" black people to find what place in the social hierarchy they occupy and why, studies should start by investigating the different places on the social hierarchy, who are the people assigned to it, and why (2009). This paper is an exploratory research that seeks to generate numeric description of the different places in the social hierarchy. It uses exploratory factor analysis techniques to quantify the current American matrix of domination into scores that represents the respondent’s unique place in the social hierarchy using the self reported degree of discrimination or lack of discriminations that the person experience. In the constructed matrix of domination, the high scores represent higher positions in the social hierarchy.
not static. A person’s immigration status, class, sexual orientation, disability status, age, religion, and in some cases gender, could change throughout the years. However, the individual’s score on the constructed matrix of domination is representative of the person’s place in the social hierarchy at the time that the survey was taken. The constructed matrix of domination is intended to be a valid snap-shot of the current social hierarchy in the United States. This paper is a methodological paper that seeks to operationalize and validate the abstract framework of the matrix of domination. For that reason, the paper seeks to validate the constructed matrix of domination by investigating who occupies the different places on the constructed matrix of domination and the unique combination of privilege and penalty, or disprivilege, that grants each person her or his specific place in that numeric social hierarchy. If the constructed matrix of domination proved to be an accurate description of the literature and the observed social hierarchy, in that the individuals who score higher on the constructed matrix of domination are members of the dominant groups in society, and those who score lower are member of the oppressed groups, then the matrix of domination is valid. Also, if the constructed matrix of domination proved accurate in predicting current social phenomenon then it could be used as a valid tool in statistical analysis. Establishing the validity of the constructed matrix of domination scale is critical because if a valid scale was not created, findings about the social life using the constructed matrix of domination scale as a predictor
variable will be of limited use in testing theory and formulating public policy. For example, once there is a valid construct that represents the social hierarchy, researches could investigate whether certain policies or political and social actions are favored by people who are on top of the social hierarchy, or by those who are at the bottom. For example researchers could have a greater understanding of who is more likely to be engaged in the different types of social activism, who is more likely to vote for a certain ballot measure, or support a certain war or a specific public policy. This will open the discussion to include the have-nots, the oppressed, or people who are lower on the social hierarchy, as a group because they will not be an abstract idea any longer. The constructed matrix of domination will help identify them as a coherent group in society, a group that follows certain patterns and has specific characters, specifically, low scores on the constructed matrix of domination. This paper used the exploratory factor analysis technique to construct the matrix of domination. It launched an on-line survey (n=448) to collect the necessary data. The survey was distributed through the social network Facebook. After creating the constructed matrix of domination, the paper tested if the constructed matrix of domination matches the literature. In agreement with the current literature, the results showed that the individuals who scored higher on the constructed matrix of domination were members of the dominant groups in society. For example, the person who scored the highest on the constructed matrix
Chapter One THE MATRIX OF DOMINATION AS THE INTERLOCKING SYSTEMS OF OPPRESSION According to Patricia Hill Collins, the matrix of domination is the interlocking systems of oppression that includes race, gender, class, sexual orientation, religion, immigration status, disability and age. The main contribution of the idea of the matrix of domination is the introduction of a “both/and” conceptual tool to replace the “either/or” way of looking at the social world. It “moves us from the additive, separate systems approaches to oppression and toward […] the more fundamental issue of the social relations of Domination” (Collins, 1990). The definition of the matrix of domination includes two main ideas. First, it deals with the idea of oppression; it states that there is some form of social oppression based on race, class, gender, sexual orientation, religion, immigration status, disability, and age. Second, it discusses the interlocking nature of these systems of oppression. Instead of starting with one category, gender for example, and then adding in others such as age, sexual orientation, race, social class, and religion, Hill Collins sees these distinctive systems of oppression as parts of one overarching structure of domination (1990). This paper will discuss each of these points in the next section.
Oppression Hill Collins points out that a fundamental characteristic of the matrix of domination is the “categorization of people, things, and ideas in terms of their difference from one another, black/white, male/female, reason/emotion,(which) gain their meaning only in relation to their difference from their oppositional counterpart” (Collins, 1986:S20). These differences imply that one category is “better” than the other and deserving of a dominant position in the social hierarchy. Racism, sexism, and most other forms of discrimination are the result of rational self-interest, based on the dominant group’s “desire to preserve benefits and privileges that come with being a member of the dominant group,” (McViegh & Sikkink, 2005:499) and being on the top of the social hierarchy. Social hierarchy is produced through the deliberate division of society into oppressed and oppressors. The privilege of the dominant group is tied to the oppression of the oppressed groups (Constantine, 2002).The oppressed groups are given the undesirable status of the collective “other.”The status of being the other implies being other than or different from the assumed norm of white male behavior” (Collins: S20). Otherness means being different, invisible, yet “sticking out like a sore thumb” (Andersen& Collins, 1998:23). For example, Hoagland mentions of heterosexualism and White Supremacy that one only makes sense in terms of the other. Heterosexualism is constructed as white women are framed in counter point to women of color.
a group whose members are considered inferior, by some beneficiaries of said oppression, because they are members of that group. This inferior position must be related to or cause by certain ideology that justify this position, which is not normal or inevitable (Abberley, 1987). Oppressive societies such as the United States institutionalize racism and other systems of oppression in four main domains: first, the social structure of power, such as institutional racism, is set up and organized to reproduce a system of inequalities that does not need daily maintenance to exist. This is a structure, into which the oppressed are born and will leave behind when they die. For example, social institutions such as banks, real estate, schools, and stores are all structured to benefit the people on top of the social structure. Second, societies use disciplinary rules and regulations of everyday life to uphold the social hierarchy instead of challenging it. Social hierarchy is organized through bureaucracies that rely on practices of surveillance which prevents any sudden change from occurring. Third, societies use culture to manufacture the ideas that justify the social hierarchy through mediums such as the media, family, and religious institutions. Finally, the domain of one-on-one interpersonal encounter shapes social relations among individuals in everyday life. These encounters involve social interactions where people accept social inequalities, between themselves and people who are higher and lower than them in the hierarchy, in their everyday life (Collins, 2009). For example, before slavery was outlawed in
the United States, raping black teenagers was regular occurrence, and the masters thought of their female slaves as cattle (Williams, 1991). These actions were normalized through the socially constructed popular ideas about race and gender. The notion of the superiority of the white man was institutionalized through the system of slavery. Shcwalbe suggests that, oppression occurs when one group in society seeks advantage by defining another group as morally and/or intellectually inferior, this practice is coined, the “oppressive othering.” Othering could create a pattern of interaction that reaffirms the ideology of difference. For example, middle class volunteers at homeless shelters could view the residents’ complaints as a sign of ungratefulness, which in turn could cause more angry responses from the residents, reaffirming the volunteers’ ideas that residents are ungrateful (2000). In that way, the middle class volunteers reaffirmed their unfavorable opinion of the, much lower, homeless class and legitimized their superior position. On the other hand, the impression that the elites possess powerful worthy selves- no matter the reality- can induce feelings of trust, awe, and/or fear that help to legitimize inequality and deter dissent (Fave, 1980). For example, the politicians’ wives try to create the impression that their husbands are strong and moral, hence deserving of being elected (Schwalbe, 2000). Oppressors have the power to create an illusion of moral and intellectual superiority that cement their
material circumstances. Race is not only a socially created classification scheme that describes differences between groups. It characterizes social relationships between groups having unequal levels of power. The significance of racial ideologies and categories is not in their content but in how they affect social interactions and social stratifications (Doane & Bonilla-Silva, 2003). According to the hegemonic view in the United States, the Protestant, White, heterosexual, able-bodied, middle-aged, upper class, US-born, male, culture is at the end of the evolutionary process. This cultural domination is facilitated by “powerful erotic archetypes in which deep prejudices are “felt” rather than reasoned, and thereby naturalized rather than beheld” (Williams, 1994:26). For example, Williams writes that white European tourists come to the States and visit the black churches as a part of their tour. They attend the ceremonies with obvious disrespectful attitude, such as being dressed in a tennis outfit, or leaving in the middle of the ceremony. It is as if the white people are looking at wild life or “the Lost Link” (Williams, 1994:25). In this case the white tourists pay for the “experience” of being in a black church. The church people’s lives are invaded and disrupted by white people who think that black churches are exotic enough to be watched for entertainment. The Black churches are considered lower on the evolutionary path, lower enough to be entertaining to watch (Williams, 1994). The Critical Race Theory (CRT) suggests that in addition to the hegemonic white supremacy ideas about cultural hegemony, racial
minorities in the United States suffered on other dimensions such as: juridico- politically - Jim Crow, the three fifth clause, blacks has “no rights that white man was bound to respect-” economically -the white American wealth historically rests on red land and black labor, exploited labor-; and somatic sphere - one is alienated from one’s own skin (Crenshaw, 1995). Intersectionality Intersectional approaches view institutionalized racism, social class relations, gender inequalities, and nationalism expressed on both sides of state power as analytical constructs that explain the social organization in general. This approach focuses on uncovering connections among systems of oppression organized along axes of social class, gender, race and nationalism. Within paradigms of intersectionality, any specific social location where such systems meet or intersect generates a distinctive group history or experience (Collins, 1998). Intersectionality explores how people with multiple group identities navigate their everyday lives. For example, despite the popular idea of a default disabled person as asexual and child-like white males, the reality is that disabled individuals have different genders, races, and sexual orientations. Similarly, the Intersectional approach is crucial to the understanding of women who identify as both disabled and queer (Whitney, 2006). Because of the interlocking nature of the matrix of domination, a person’s place on one dimension such as race, could affect how this person experience her position on another dimension such as
the top is dependent on the exploitation of those at the bottom […] the survival of those at the bottom is dependent on what they call “the social largess” of those at the top” (Zinn & Dill, 1994:5). According to the Critical Race Theory (CRT), the oppressed suffer from two types of subordination; first, symbolic subordination: social and political inequality; second, the material subordination: economic inequality. The material subordination’s effects lasts for generations and cement the oppressive social order. For that reason, the eradication of formal barriers, such as segregation, meant more to those whose oppression was primarily symbolic. It did not alleviate the suffering of those who were suffering lasting material disadvantage, so it did not end, or decrease oppression (1994). Suffering material subordination limits the oppressed political participation and renders them chronically weak which nurture the current systems of oppression. Social control Freier discusses the different ways that the oppressors use to control the oppressed in his book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”. He argues that, the oppressors are constantly conquering the oppressed by deploying calculated propaganda aimed at the masses. The masses are under constant attack by myths about what is normal and what is just. They are told that they have equal opportunity to the oppressors, and that their status in life depends on how hard they work, indicating that their lower status is their own fault. The constant media attack on the oppressed is designed to keep them under control. The oppressor
divides and rule in many ways, such as dividing the country into “local communities” and into leaders. The oppressors, pretending to seek harmonious existence with the oppressed, talks to representatives of the oppressed, tries and succeeds in preventing the oppressed from causing any real problems to them because the “representatives” are mostly traitors of their own class, and they basically work for the oppressors. Manipulation, in the form of pacts between the oppressors and oppressed is other part of the oppressors plan to control the oppressed. Cultural invasion impose the oppressors’ vision of the world on the oppressed. The oppressed come to see reality through the filter of the oppressors’ culture not through their own (2000). The matrix of domination works by rendering some people disposable. Disposable people are easily controlled and necessary for oppression to work. There has to be group/or groups in every unjust society that are considered lower, subordinate, and “disposable” (Bales, 2004:232). The oppressed are coerced into a situation where they have very few options in life, and any of the supposed options exposes the oppressed to penalty, or deprivation (Frye, 1983). So, disposable people are in the oppressed position because the oppressors planned on putting them there. New argues against this point, she claims that oppression could occur without a clear beneficiary, she rejects the idea that oppressors have clear strategy to keep the oppressors in their place, instead she talks about oppression being the product of a routine of oppression that is tolerated by all
