Othering That Allows the Majority

¶ … Othering that allows the majority or the mainstream group to create boundaries based on race, gender and class. It is critical to understand that Othering is not always perceived as a positive force or phenomenon. In fact in most cases than not, Othering is seen as a negative illustration of stereotypical images of certain racial group. In this article, the author, who is herself a Latino or more specifically a Chicano discusses the process of othering while her identity and image were torn between two different identities of race that mainstream group assigned her based on her skin color. While she was a Latino, she was often seen as a European because of her fair skin. However since she knew she belonged to another, rather minority, racial group- this distorted her self-identity. On the one hand she felt like she was treated as an equal when she was seen as a European but on the other, she couldn't overlook the disparities and discrimination endured by her Latino peers and this forced her to study the process of Othering and to ask such important questions as: "Who is designated Other? By whom? How? Under what conditions? And with what consequences?"

The author has not described Othering as a general force but has specifically focused on the Latino nursing faculty and their teaching practices. In the beginning of the research she presented the hypothesis that the process of othering could be both exclusionary and inclusionary and it could affect teaching practices of the Latino faculty. A vast body of literature was studied for the research and author starts with two important but seemingly disparate definitions of othering. The author presents the definitions offered by Weis where he saw Othering as "that process which serves to mark and name those thought to be different from oneself." And by Charon who feels that "It is through others that we come to see and define self, and it is our ability to role take that allows us to see ourselves through others." These definitions are different in the way in which they see the process. This subtlety cannot be overlooked and the author also acknowledges the difference. In the first definition, Weis blames others for starting the othering process while Charon takes the responsibility for the development of othering. He feels that every individual constitutes this image for himself by noticing how different he is from others.

Another very important aspect that the author introduces to the process of othering is role taking. The author uses Charon's definition to explain that role taking is a critical part of interaction and of understanding the feeling, sentiments and views of others. If this essential ability to empathize is missing, it becomes difficult to interact with people of different gender, race or class and stereotypes may become the only framework in which people would view others. Charon defines role taking as: "Role taking is imagining the world from the perspective of another. As we imagine, so we act; we use what we imagine to deal with the situation we confront." The author makes it very clear that in the absence of role taking, stereotypes prevail and are reinforced. These stereotypes can seriously hurt the sentiments of various other groups and these are essentially what make this process negative in nature. The author attributes the development of negativity in the process of othering to a plethora of feminist literature that saw othering as an exclusionary process and hence deemed it negative. In many cases, this section of literature focused on stereotypes and how they damaged a woman's view of herself. One of my own examples would be Toni Morison's the Bluest Eye. While it was not Latino literature, it is a very apt example of exclusionary othering. The author was regularly bombarded with literature that treated othering as a negative force but she refused to believe that there was only one side to the story. The author realized that othering was indeed a very dynamic process, which could often be positive if its complexities were grasped intelligently. The author thus divided the process into exclusionary and inclusionary as she saw some marked differences between the two routes. She noticed that in exclusionary process, relationships were often used to suppress and dominate one person while in inclusion; relationships were used to create awareness and consciousness.

The author has explained her views in very succinct and clear terms. She has made it clear that her focus is nursing faculty and their teaching practices that are allegedly influenced by othering. But also made it known that throughout the nursing literature, she didn't find the word othering used anywhere. Though the literature discussed marginalization and discrimination, the process of othering was not recognized. The author does a great job of explaining the whole process and its two sides in the beginning, which set the tone for later research. The researcher doesn't start with nursing faculty in the beginning but tries to explain the process of othering in general so we can understand what this force means. She then goes on to explain the two ways in which this process can be studied and this opens doors for clear understanding. Once this foundation has been laid, then author goes on to use this for nursing faculty and its teaching practices.

The author explains the exclusionary process by using Burgess' understanding of othering. Burgess concurred with Weis or we can say that both had similar views on the subject since they saw it as a negative phenomenon that tended to destroy self-image and identity. According to Burgess, "societal process is the organization, disorganization, and reorganization of a society, community, or social group. It is often this societal process that creates and maintains the identities of those defined as Other." However while Burgess' definition doesn't include the process by means of which mainstream standards are created, the author herself is very clear on the subject. She elucidates: "Within every society there are also those who control the process of defining the situation. The cultural mores of a society are maintained through its institutions -- economic, educational, religious, political -- and are reflective of the society's dominant values."

In other words, we can say that every country has its own institutions, which work in a manner that supports the mainstream and somehow suppress the minority. This is interesting view and one that few would be able to contradict. While institutions do not necessarily try to take a stand against the minority, it is only natural and universal that every force and structure are designed for the majority or with the majority in mind. For example those who manufacture scissors are not against left handed people but since right-handed people are the majority therefore they manufacture scissors with right-handed people in mind. This is true that such preoccupation with the majority tends to create problems for the minority but still it would be wrong to assume that minority was deliberately ignored.