Week 1 Assignment A-Johnson Privilege, Power and Difference

Week 1: Assignment A-Johnson, Privilege, Power and Difference

As I sat down and settled in to read Johnson’s article, I performed my usual task of thumbing through the material to see how long it was, how many chapters or sections made up the reading and then observed the date of the work. 2001, hmmmm, how old was I in 2001? What might have been my understanding of contemporary social issues happening in my community, country, or the world at the time.  

Well, I was 29 years old, working as a registered nurse. I found myself back in the academic setting taking courses and was pretty much happy, safe, and secure. While all the while, some social issues affecting the U.S. society were gender wage gaps, poverty, paid/unpaid family leave, prison overcrowding, prescription drug costs and mental health issues. 

With those social issues in mind, I started to read Johnson’s work. Immediately I recognized an argument that he presents. Johnson states, “All of us are the problem. There is no way to avoid that as long as we live in the world. But we could also make ourselves part of the solution only if we knew how.” His statement is powerful and points out that one static metric is world that we live in and do not have a choice to live in another.  So, if we are limed by the world in which we live, I was hoping to uncover possibilities to change those things that we can.  Johnson did not disappoint.  He insinuates that we can be part of the solution by changing the way we think and react to troubles.  Action may then assist an individual in getting “unstuck”.  Action can be progressive, linear, or sometimes circular depending on an individual’s ability to understand, process and structure a new way of reacting to a problem.  Reflecting on individual experiences while investigating other’s experiences allow individuals to initiate the wheels of change. 

Chapter one discusses the behavior of getting along.  Do we really get along? I think not, if the perception of getting along, and harmonious interludes are not investigated and evaluated on  an internal and global level how do we know if we are getting along?  By global I mean outside of one’s singular being, if that is the case, getting along can be ingenuine and harmful. In the case of racial dilemma and “getting along”, I agree we weren’t getting along as best as we could when the article was written or even now. Why don't individuals of a different race play well together? Is it segregation in such cases of housing or wealth inequity between races? Is the problem an inability to recognize the cause of incivility?  Johnson points to one common denominator, “fearing the unfamiliar.” The unfamiliar for many people is the variation on human nature, such as race. Until we unlock and provoke the ability to examine our own experiences related to race differences and how some experiences shape our thoughts and behaviors, getting along is impossible in most cases. We are ALL capable of relearning behaviors to promote the notion of getting along.

Moving on to chapter two, an important social phenomenon that is discussed is language. As social beings we use language as a medium to communicate. Being that a primary function of language is to communicate, when doing so are we clearly communicating and representing our thoughts and beliefs or are we saying just what the receiver wants to hear? Do we communicate differently depending on the audience, or what the communicator wants to gain from the conversation? Johnson’s discussion about language and naming the problem allowed me pause and really think about words that I use when discussing or debating a problem.  How about you? Are there problem words that you are uncomfortable using in certain circles?  Words like privilege, sexism, classism, oppression and homosexualism to name a few.  Johnson’s work provoked me to self-reflect. I am guilty of not naming the problem.  My guilty behavior is not done to deny/ignore the word or the problem, but rather not to offend or to spare the feelings of the receiver in the event of a past trauma.  I have a renewed perspective of communication…. naming the problem and becoming more comfortable discussing a problem in certain terms has the potential to connect the problem to a solution!! As Johnson stated in chapter one, “We can be part of the solution, change how we think and act”.  One step toward a solution is as easy as changing our language! I know that I will, how about you? 

Once I accepted and acknowledged my guilty behavior related to language and communication, I was excited to read more! Chapter three proved to be complex and hard to absorb with only one read. I went back over the chapter several times, I found myself frustrated and overwhelmed with the content.  Some of my frustration revolved around privilege.  Johnson states, “It allows people to define reality and to have prevailing definitions of reality to fit their experience.” He goes on to say that “Privilege means being able to decide who gets taken seriously, who receives attention, who is accountable to whom and for what.” In my practice as a registered nurse, I have often been quoted as saying “I have had the privilege of connecting with, caring for and healing patients as individuals assigned to my care”. I feel that perhaps I was using the wrong word, and instead the word should be duty to describe my practice, not privilege. Johnson describes privilege as being able to decide who gets taken seriously, who receives attention wo is accountable to whom and for what.  As a nurse I absolutely do not decide who is privy to receive my care.  

Upon conclusion of my reading, I am convinced that Jonson achieved his point, I believe that pervasive change may allow an individual or groups of individuals to change how people think about and act or react to social issues such as difference…. to include privilege and power.  I appreciate the opportunity to read and review Johnson’s work and am motivated to employ constructive and meaningful tactics to be the change, and to make change!