Marginalization in Rabbit-Proof Fence
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Values, norms, and meaning are socially constructed. Such social construction through social institutions is used to shape identity, often dictating what is considered truth within a particular culture. At the same time, it is often the dominant, powerful classes of society or culture that control social institutions that dictate such meaning. At the same time this can privilege some members or classes of society, it can also marginalize others. As Pease and Fook share of FoucaultÆs definition of discourse, he viewed them as ôhistorically viable ways of specifying knowledge and truthùwhat it is possible to speak at a given momentö (1999, p. 14). This is true primarily because of the shifting meaning of values, ethics and truth. To me, critical social theory is the search for justice in social judgments in ways that construct a sustaining context for fairness and future possibilities. In director Phillip NoyceÆs (2002) Rabbit-Proof Fence, we see that social justice, conviviality, and future possibilities are often undermined through social institutions for non-dominant groups or cultures. This analysis will analyze this condition in Rabbit-Proof Fence to illustrate critical social theories that pertain to such marginalization. From power and control to setting norms, social institutions are often dominated by the wealthiest groups in society. This is certainly true in American culture, where largely Protestant, wealthy, white males continue to con
. . .
nguage subject and object come into existence together, in a reciprocally situated situation (1994, p. 53).
Neville, however, believes he makes meaning and we see this in the way he thinks he is doing good but treats the ôotherö as ôinferior.ö While in the history of social work such terminology or rhetoric was commonplace, todayÆs social workers must critique such efforts as biased, akin to MargolinÆs views on the rhetoric of empowerment which is ôquite different from earlier social work language, which simply described impoverished and minority people as inferior. The current languages shifts its emphasis to the social workerÆs own æcultural sensitivityÆ. Instead of discussing client defects, the new discourse focuses on social work virtues û on its empathy, sensitivity, courageö (in Moffat, 2004, p. 101).
If social critique theory attempts to find essential judgments in constructing context in society for conviviality, one would think the educators in charge of the girls might consider the pain inflicted on these children from being ripped away from everything that they know to become menial laborers. Unless the valuation was that the aborigine are of less worth and of less feeling than Europeans, one could not avoid cons
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Daisy Gracie, Rabbit-Proof Fence, Fence Western, Esteva PrakashÆs, Native Americans, Pease Fook, Introduction Values, ScholarsÆ Press, Everlyn SampiÆs, Moore River, rabbit-proof fence, social institutions, noyce 2002, critical social, molly daisy gracie, molly daisy, social critique, mixed-race aboriginal, future possibilities, aboriginal children, social justice, mixed-race aboriginal children, essays postmodernism social, eds essays postmodernism, postmodernism social canadian,
Approximate Word count = 2058
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
