They say that I am marked and my father is not, and we are both at fault of the country’s issues. While I can see the reasoning behind their justifications, I simply believe that they do not apply today. Tannen says that women automatically stand out due to their gender, but that is a given in a male-dominated environment. Had she been in a workplace that contained mostly women, only the men would stand out. Today’s society, albeit not perfect, is becoming more accepting of things that go out of the norm. My father, who frequently colors his hair and uses facial masks, would be considered marked among his brothers. I am marked not because of my gender, but because of my interests. It is not an issue of sex; it is that we must become more accepting of what people like and dislike and move on. When it comes to Coates, she is too critical of Anglo-Saxon individuals. There is still injustice today, such as police brutality and racism, but it cannot be blamed on a race as a whole. She is casting a stereotype on a diverse group of people and blaming them for problems his or her ancestors caused centuries before. It is not fair to condemn someone for something he or she has no control over. While I agree that the United States was built on slavery and looting, the former is unjustifiable. Her argument cannot even apply to people like my family and me, for while we are white-passing, we are not European nor were we born in the United States. Both Coates and Tannen are putting a label on people and masking their arguments as feminism. Feminism means helping to lift others up in order to obtain equality. While Coates is condemning white individuals for decisions their ancestors made, Tannen is doing exactly what she argues men do: judge a woman based on her appearance. For that, Coates and Tannen make a statement on faux feminism that has a negative effect on
They say that I am marked and my father is not, and we are both at fault of the country’s issues. While I can see the reasoning behind their justifications, I simply believe that they do not apply today. Tannen says that women automatically stand out due to their gender, but that is a given in a male-dominated environment. Had she been in a workplace that contained mostly women, only the men would stand out. Today’s society, albeit not perfect, is becoming more accepting of things that go out of the norm. My father, who frequently colors his hair and uses facial masks, would be considered marked among his brothers. I am marked not because of my gender, but because of my interests. It is not an issue of sex; it is that we must become more accepting of what people like and dislike and move on. When it comes to Coates, she is too critical of Anglo-Saxon individuals. There is still injustice today, such as police brutality and racism, but it cannot be blamed on a race as a whole. She is casting a stereotype on a diverse group of people and blaming them for problems his or her ancestors caused centuries before. It is not fair to condemn someone for something he or she has no control over. While I agree that the United States was built on slavery and looting, the former is unjustifiable. Her argument cannot even apply to people like my family and me, for while we are white-passing, we are not European nor were we born in the United States. Both Coates and Tannen are putting a label on people and masking their arguments as feminism. Feminism means helping to lift others up in order to obtain equality. While Coates is condemning white individuals for decisions their ancestors made, Tannen is doing exactly what she argues men do: judge a woman based on her appearance. For that, Coates and Tannen make a statement on faux feminism that has a negative effect on