We have been on the topic of oppression, but I’m still not
clear on what that means for me as an international student. Frye says that
oppression is a limitation that does not benefit the subject limited. Being
forced by law to drive on one side of the road is not oppressive because lawful
driving benefits the driver. The limitation of women as is set by men benefits men only, therefore it is oppressive against women. Furthermore, Frye points out that if a barrier exists in “systematic
relationship” with other barriers or forces forming an oppressive structure, then
that barrier is oppressive; it cannot be oppressive just by itself.
After a friend heard Frye’s definition of oppression, he
asked me: “do you feel oppressed?” The truth is that I don’t, or maybe I don’t
know. No one has ever come up to me and said: I won’t do anything that would benefit
you because you are a foreigner, woman, non-white person. Am I really
oppressed? Are there structures in place in the power structure of our culture
that do not benefit me? Yes, definitely. I am not allowed
to get financial aid because I am not a US citizen. This barrier does not benefit
me but benefits US citizens. The barrier between foreign students and financial
aid serves the interests of US citizens who construct and maintain it; the
barrier immobilizes foreign students. This one barrier may seem like nothing
by itself; but when we view it in a greater context we find that it does exist and
helps maintain an oppressive structure along with all other kinds of barriers
against new-comers to the US culture. Frye argues that we cannot tell who’s
oppressed or oppressing by how loudly or how little the person complains.
International students hardly ever complain about their oppression (at least from my experience), but it does
not mean oppression does not exist. Their lack of complaints may be an indication that the
oppressive structure forces students to quiet their international side and finally
assimilate – we don’t know.
If women are oppressed as women as Frye argues, then
international students are in the same way oppressed as international students.
Being from another country, international students are automatically excluded
from the offering of financial aid in the US. They are constantly told if they
want free education they should go back to their own countries. After Frye, I’m
not confused anymore about whether international students are oppressed in the
US or not. Is this a way of victimizing ourselves? I think not. Saying that international students are the oppressed does not say anything about whether the system should be maintained or not. It just means that we are disadvantaged in this system in comparison to US students. Whether to fight for equality or not is not part of this particular discussion. This discussion determined that we are oppressed, now we need to determine if this oppression is justified, or should
we rather ask the question: is any kind of oppression justified? Should such relationships
exist where one party has the power to create the rules that benefit its own
party but limit the other party while the other party does not that power?
Frye, Marilyn. "Oppression." The Feminist Philosophy Reader. By Alison Bailey and Chris J. Cuomo. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2008. N. pag. Print.
Frye, Marilyn. "Oppression." The Feminist Philosophy Reader. By Alison Bailey and Chris J. Cuomo. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2008. N. pag. Print.
I agree, it's ironic that these brave International students are here on their own accord, to experience a new culture and broaden their horizons, yet they are forced to assimilate to American society. And those that don't are considered deviant and are not accepted in many typical social circles one sees in America, particularly in a clique-y college setting. It makes me wonder how I will be received when I travel abroad next year. I will no doubt come across numerous barriers, and I wonder how I will cope with these, or if I'll be too distracted in my new environment to even take notice. I also wonder if being from America (with the unconscious ingrained mindset that America is the greatest country in the world) will change my perception of who needs to change. Will I assimilate to the host culture like International students in America feel the pressure to do, or will I act as though everyone has to be like me in order to be "normal"?
ReplyDeleteI also understand what is being said about not receiving financial aid as an International student, but at the same time, I'm not sure that I totally find fault in that. With so many American students in need of financial aid that are more than likely going to stay in America and give back to this country in some way or another, can one blame the financial aid office for drawing the line at non-citizens? I value the opinions and new attitudes/experiences of International students, yet I can't help thinking that American students should get priority over those that are citizens of another country. Maybe this is evidence of my Americanized mindset, but even that in itself is worth noting.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really interesting take on international students and oppression - and a good example of oppression! In my opinion, many forms of oppression are not meant to harm another group of people, but to benefit their own - an issue of perspective I'd say… I think this is a great example. As Americans, the federal government wants to benefit its own people and while that may disadvantage other groups, it's a matter of priority and cultural values. Maybe it would be more constructive to view this form of oppression as a sort of privilege: native privilege maybe? The native American people enjoy the privilege of receiving federal financial aid and there may be an unconscious oppression against those who are not native to America…
ReplyDeleteIt is really intriguing to hear that the same kind of sexist oppression doesn't seem to exist in other countries. I wonder if it's a matter of cultural values… For example, the United States seems to value individualism more so than collectivist cultures like China and Japan. Perhaps that international value prohibits individuals to see oppression since they are more focused on group cohesiveness and community. Additionally, in this class we are viewing contemporary feminist theory through an overly American lens. I wonder how it might differ to consider it from other countries.
I think I would challenge you to be on the lookout for other forms of oppression you (and your people - women, international students, etc,) might experience and how they might differ from your home country. I bet there are more ways out there! Along with finding many randomly pertinent articles, I know this class has at least got me thinking of door-opening as a form of oppression… Something I would probably not have considered had it not been for Marilyn Frye.
bgbierdz,
ReplyDeleteCan you be clearer in what you mean by your definition of oppression? Do you intend for a total exclusion of harm to a particular group? If so, then every system that benefits anyone would be considered oppression. Additionally, it is not a matter of systemic intentions when it comes to a system of oppression, but whether or not a system actively brings a group down. More often than not, a system of oppression is not coordinated by a clearly definable group of oppressors (read my post).
Briana,
Benefits to a group are not the criterion for oppression. Oppression is purely a limitation, according to Frye. She makes the point that even though a group may benefit from oppression—which, for example, women did in some respects as in the general courtship practices in which the man pays for the woman’s meal—they are still being oppressed. The criterion for oppression is a limitation of sorts. Frye expounds upon this in her definition of oppression near the beginning of her essay. The criterion for determining a particular force as an instance of oppression is by appeal to its role from macroscopic point of view in which the force is more obviously connected to a larger system of forces. So the example you present about driving regulations is incorrectly judged. It is not un-oppressive because it benefits anyone. It is un-oppressive because it not systematically connected with other forces that, as a whole, bring a group down. The systemic relationship you speak of is the criterion for determining any barrier/force/instance etc… as oppressive—or reciprocally, not oppressive.
As regards your ideas on foreign students and foreigners… I think this is an interesting idea, and I will take a little bit further. First, however, I need to make a point or two.
Almost every country has citizens and their citizens have particular benefits based on their citizenship status. Can you really claim that you are oppressed—in the sense you are claiming it—when you chose to forsake the benefits of citizenry in a country that provided those benefits for you? I’ll admit that the benefits are most likely not the same and that some might be better than others, but I am not concerned with this yet; if we pretend that all countries are the same and provide the same benefits my analysis will be easier for the moment. The U.S. might have put up its laws regarding citizenry in order provide for its economy, and to provide for its people who have committed lifetimes of work and wealth to their country. To be more clear, can you really expect to receive the same benefits in college—like financial aid—when you have not lived here, spent wealth growing here, paid taxes to the U.S. for years, and contributed to the country in some way prior to your application to go to school here? Should you have the same benefits as someone who has done those things? For all the U.S. government knows, you might just get an education here and go back to your home country. What incentive do they have to provide for you in that situation? What incentive does any school have?
Now, I do not think all benefits are the same, nor do I think there are not incentives to providing those benefits to foreign students. But I do not think this is oppression in the sense that you have illustrated it. Rather, this is the nature of particular economic systems. Capitalism is oppressive. Bartky claims as much in our reading from her. She borrows Marx’s ideas of alienation and essentially generalizes those ideas so that they apply to oppression more generally. To show that foreign students are oppressed, I think you would have to appeal to alienation and the issues with capitalism. Oppression is not inherent in U.S. policy, it is inherent in capitalism; but it just so happens that the U.S. is the powerhouse of capitalism.
Many times I have observed that international students are collectively oppressed. Specifically, I have witnessed the double-bind that Frye uses in her essay upon many Asian international students. For instance, it has always been a lose-lose situation when it comes to the act of assimilation into American culture. Besides from the fact that it is difficult to assimilate, assimilation brings upon the idea of abandoning one's own culture or heritage and wanting to be accepted into another culture. If an international student chooses not to assimilate, then s/he is being stubborn or not willing to adapt. However, if s/he adapts, then it is seen as abandoning nationality. Especially in many Asian society, heritage and culture are integral in daily life. Because I was raised in the United States (of Asian background), I can understand why many feel the need to assimilate and stray away from someone's heritage. However, I have been scolded many times for abandoning my family's traditions. While it is an ethnicity issue for an American, the issue is further troubling for international students. Many times I have seen and heard English speaking Americans gawk at Chinese or Korean speakers who prefer to speak their native language among friends. At the same time, native English speakers are judging international students for speaking English poorly. While some may find this to be a superficial example, it happens all the time on Rhodes campus. As well, there are other things that are inherently oppressive towards international students: exclusive Greek systems and many student-run organizations such as student government. This is just my experiences.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I agree with Pierce (however, not as sternly) on the topic of financial aid. Benefits to a few does not necessarily mean oppression to another. I am not saying that it can't be oppressive, it is just difficult to make financial aid a strong argument.
While I do sympathize with the inconvenience not receiving financial aid as an international student, I also very strongly agree with Pierce. I do not think it is a form of oppression, though it is certainly frustrating. International students are not being fooled or coddled; they are not receiving financial aid from the government of the country they are not a citizen of. It makes sense for the United States to not give money to international students because there is a good chance that the U.S. will not reap the benefits of that student's education. As Pierce rightly pointed out, many international students return to their home countries after attending college in the United States; it simply doesn't make since economically for the U.S. government to help pay for any student who wants to study here. On the other side of things, I would not expect another government to pay for my education in their country because I am not a citizen there.
ReplyDeleteI think being oppressed as a woman is very different from the issues you face as an international student. And as you pointed out, we sometimes do not notice the ways in which we are oppressed on a day to day basis because we have always lived in a patriarchal society. While I am still going to wake up tomorrow and put on makeup before class, I can recognize that it is one way in which I have been oppressed. I have been told since I was a child that women wear makeup in order to look pretty (for men, not for themselves) and most days I wear it mindlessly. So, to your point about whether or not you feel oppressed, I think it is sometimes hard to notice our systematic oppression when we have never known another system. I am constantly noticing new ways in which women are oppressed; it is one of the reasons I became a Gender & Sexuality Studies minor. When you wake up and start noticing the world around you and the way it tells you to be, it becomes hard not to get angry.