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...

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.

In the same manner it would be wrong to accuse institutions for being against the minority in any sense though it is true that a little more thoughtfulness could solve a lot of problems.

By reading this article, I realized that I had often viewed othering as a negative process. My view of others is not based on any media-deluged messages and neither are they influenced by stereotypes, rather I am one of those who agree with role taking because I do that all the time and it helps me interact with others more easily and without discriminating. But by and large, I had viewed this process as an ugly reality and one that needed to be restructured or reformed. However I now understand that othering need not be exclusionary. It can be inclusionary too and in such cases, it would help each group better understand the others and itself by developing awareness and consciousness.

Reference

Mary Canales. Othering: Toward an Understanding of Difference. Advances in nursing science/June 2000