In our discussions over the past few weeks I found myself taking away the most from our conversation about “learned perception” from Linda Martin Alcoffs’ “Towards a Phenomenology of Racial Embodiment”. What stood out to me was the idea that seeing is not neutral. The way we perceive others is often influenced by ideas which we have learned throughout our lives. I assumed that even physical characteristics which seem like objective truths are usually perceived neutrally, but this is not the case.

We do not simply see a person and neutrally record what is physically there. What we see and how we interpret it are shaped entirely by what we have already learned.  These insights are developed over the course of a lifetime and come from culture, history, media, stereotypes, and previous experiences. In other words, there is no perception of what is visible that is completely free of value. Before we even consciously interpret what we see we have already learned to associate certain appearances with particular ideas. This becomes especially important when discussing race because racial stereotypes can influence how we perceive and interpret people before we know anything about them as individuals. 

Learned perceptual practice can be applied to many racist incidents. The key is to ask: How did existing insights affect what people believed they were seeing? 

The murder of Emmett Till demonstrates how these learned racial meanings can have devastating consequences. Emmet Till was kidnapped and murdered after being accused of behaving inappropriately towards a white woman. The assumption of guilt was derived from the cultural idea that Black men and boys are sexual threats to White women. As a result, instead of being perceived as a young Black boy, he was viewed through the racist stereotype, making him dangerous and threatening. 

Another example arises in the killings of Trayvon Martin and Ahmaud Arbery. Two similar situations in which Black men are viewed as threats while engaging in ordinary activities. Martin was walking through a neighborhood, while Arbery was jogging through one. Neither’s actions were inherently suspicious, yet both were perceived through assumptions that connected Black men to danger and criminal behavior. These cases demonstrate learned perceptual practice because what was physically visible was given meaning through existing stereotypes. It was not their race that made their actions threatening but instead learned ideas about Black men which influenced how those actions were interpreted.

Essentially, we do not see first and assign meaning afterward. What we have already learned influences the act of seeing itself. In this way, seeing is not neutral because what we perceive is shaped by the meanings, values, and assumptions we have already learned.

Growing up as a girl has been one of the most interesting experiences of my life so far. I’ve had some beautiful moments of girlhood that I wouldn’t trade for the world, but some moments still give me the ick when I think about them. To start, whether it’s being catcalled while shopping, stared at, or being followed somewhere, there’s always at least one person giving an unsolicited judgment on your appearance, cadence, or simply your existence as a woman/girl, no matter where I went. A lot of those judgements were targeted directly at my femininity, questioning and shunning the way I walked, dressed, behaved, or talked in a way that wasn’t considered ‘ladylike’ or ‘womanly ‘. Because I didn’t conform to this traditional, rigid, and destructive gender expectation that stems from toxic femininity, I was judged or looked down upon amongst people who held the ideal that women always had to be soft, passive, and altruistic – the ideal woman.

It has been consistently proven that the bar for being the “ideal woman” moves farther and farther away until eventually you realize that the bar was never meant to be reached. What I mean when I mention ‘the bar’ is the representation of the so-called ‘perfect’ amount of femininity a woman should exhibit, or what others would determine “being enough of a woman” to be, that society has depicted in media and societal standards countless times. When reading “Throwing Like A Girl”, I expressed a strong sigh of relief when I saw Young’s perspective on femininity, as unfortunately even in today’s society, there is still an unrealistic standard for women to be “feminine enough” and reach that bar. They stated, “it is not necessary that any women be “feminine”—that is, it is not necessary that there be distinctive structures and behavior typical of the situation of women.” This mention of how no woman needs to be feminine made me feel seen and heard. As the structure of femininity is constructed upon expectations that are both arbitrary and ever-changing, I found comfort in Young’s assertion that femininity is not an essential quality for women. The pressure to fit into a specific mold, whether it’s about how we move, speak, or present ourselves, becomes exhausting and, frankly, impossible to satisfy. Young’s essay reminded me that we don’t have to accept these limitations or internalize the criticism that comes when we refuse to conform. We can aim to achieve our own personal, healthy standards that don’t exist at the cost of our authenticity and mental health.

We’ve built our society, physically and socially, based on a standard that assumes that the people who operate in it are all capable of the same things or must be made capable of the same things through their own effort. Most sidewalk edges for example are built with the assumption that people can just walk onto and off of them, small buildings with less than three floors might not consider putting in an elevator because “its only one floor to walk up”, we create these things on the assumptions that we are all equally capable physically and socially. We scrutinize people who cannot perceive the social queues we create with no set up or warning things that seem organic and natural can be completely foreign to some people, we judge peoples ability to finish tasks on time and effort on set standard or call them lazy and undisciplined if they cannot making it their failing and not a problem of if the task and the tools to solve it were right for them even if the task is as simple as ordering coffee. we have created a society that forces people to have to fight to prove that they are different that they have different needs and challenges , you need a paper to justify why you need help and must navigate a massive obstacle course of bureaucracy to obtain it. Our society places the problem on the individual instead of the system its created and with every passing year we discover more about ourselves we continue to have to fight these battles to justify existence, I hope in the future we create a more fluid society that adjusts to people instead of the idea of people it has created.

In today’s time you many people expressing their concern with an emerging panopticon-like society that we might have to live with in the coming years, with the installation of flock cameras and increasing amounts of surveillance that is being added into everyday routines. But what most people aren’t aware of is that this phenomenon has been an issue for years even before the announcement of cameras being added inside of the latest model AirPods. In my opinion, I think the only reason why these things are becoming such a big issue now is because overwhelming amounts of surveillance are starting to affect the ‘normal’ groups of people.

It can be argued that lots of minorities have experienced the feeling of prying eyes watching every little move that they make, forcing them to overcorrect every little action that they do. We see this happen a lot in sports and how a lot of people react to athletes of color. In the book Citizen by Claudia Ranken, we see how Serena Williams is constantly expected to perform a certain way and if she’s ever seen as ‘stepping out of line’ she is met with constant backlash from the facility she plays for and on social media. In the 2012 Olympics, she celebrated her gold medal by doing a celebratory dance and almost everybody has assumed that she was doing a crip walk, which is a dance associated with a gang. Most people with common sense would know that she was NOT crip walking, and she was just simply celebrating her win like anybody else would. The controversy of her celebration was blown out of proportion, and she was criticized for being unprofessional. It feels like a lot of people were watching her excessively, waiting for her to mess up so that they could jump down her throat and spout ignorance without being labeled a racist (although, I would say that assuming that anytime a black person dances has something to do with a gang kind or is). Another example of this happening in sports is how Lamar Jackson is treated in by fans and the NFL. While I’m not that much of a football fan, his record shows how he is a very good and capable quarterback. Despite that, he is constantly faced with ridiculous amounts of criticism whenever his team messes up with something or loses a game. He also gets ranked very low compared to more mediocre quarterbacks, and it’s to the point where it’s obvious that he’s being below the other players that are more aesthetically pleasing to the American eye (white).

It’s ironic that everyone is suddenly concerned about the overwhelming amount of surveillance technology being added into everything even though this was never something that was brand new. In a way, society had created their own panopticon specifically for the groups of people who were deemed as odd or unusual and tech companies decided to expand that to include everyone else.

Why is the world we live in so rigid in it’s practices. So much so to the point that it doesn’t want to accommodate those are whon’t what we would call an unimpaired or non disabled person. This idea of the world and society not wanting to help those who can’t help themselves is very wonderfully explained through “The social model of disability”. This model essentially says that being impaired means that society cares enough about your impairment that you won’t be classified as disabled. Whilst being disabled means being too difficult to help or too annoying. But because of Societies unwillingness to actually help the disabled. They stay disabled. And are ostracized from the communities they call home and are also generally treated like they’re something to avoid or be scared of.

But this idea of disabled people being something to avoid or to outright be hateful against isn’t a very new thing. It’s just how society has always been. And probably will continue to be in my lifetime. I do not know if that is the correct outlook to have about something like this. But to fundamentally change the way the world sees those with impairments and disabilities to the point that they aren’t seen as others, and only for their disabilities, seems like a monumental task. But however that doesn’t mean we should have a negative outlook and that things can’t get better. But all that this means is that it will just take more work to actually get change to occur .

Okay, I might’ve exaggerated the title a bit, but I was saying some pretty controversial things for a three-year-old.

When I first started my education journey at the age of 3, apparently I was scared of the other children in my class because they weren’t Indian. 

Just typing that sentence makes me feel foolish because I can’t even imagine myself feeling that way. But unfortunately, that is the truth. After my first day at Montessori school, the first thing I said to my dad was, “Pappa, I don’t want to go back to school; everyone doesn’t look like us and I’m scared.” I promise I wasn’t a bigot; I was just an unaware 3-year-old.  

For some context, until that moment I was mostly surrounded by South Asian faces, because I lived in India. But when we moved to New York, my parents decided to put me in Montessori school, and that was my first interaction with American society, so seeing people with different faces that weren’t Indian caught me off guard. If I’m being honest, I don’t even remember feeling this way because I have no memory of it. That’s why whenever my parents would bring this up to joke around, I was always confused as to why I must’ve felt scared. 

After learning about the idea of phenomenology, I realized that my experience connects to this concept. Phenomenology focuses on how people’s experiences and the way they interact & interpret the world are based on their own lived perspectives. At that age, my understanding of race was very limited and mainly focused on my lived experiences, which consisted of living in India with my grandparents, walking around the neighborhood, and talking to our neighbors. My world was overwhelmingly Indian; my knowledge of the rest of the world was incredibly limited. 

This experience also relates to the concept of Race and the Visible. Race is a visible feature, but the meaning we give race is through humans and their lived experiences. At the age of three, seeing people who looked different from what I was used to, and because it was a completely new experience, it led to me being scared because everything was unfamiliar.

This makes me reflect and think that race is something that is given meaning through humans; it’s just a visible trait, just like our hair, nose, and lips. My experience in school at first, might’ve felt like a major difference to me but over time it became normal. Even though it sounds corny, at the end of the day, we are all human, and we have more similarities than differences, so the few things that are different about us should be celebrated, and everyone’s lived experiences should be valued.

Collectively, the culture of society placing subconscious restrictions on women’s motility places a conscious hesitation and unexpressed movement that women inhabit. A very thorough reading, “Throwing Like a Girl” by Iris Marion Young, demonstrated great examples and analysis of the way society perceives the movements of women which waterfalls to women’s own perceptions of themselves to conform to those of society. Young emphasizes that our movements and sense of space are often not limited by ability, but by social expectations and subjectivity that teach them to be restrained, cautious, and self conscious. Therefore, the summarization is a culmination of how Young mentions that “A woman often does not trust her body to carry her where she wants to go.” In contemporary society it is specifically a learned restriction and/or lack of confidence.

The Phenomenology of how women move is very specific in Young’s writing because she provides very explicit examples and ways in which women move in a restricted way and how they learn their bodies are perceived as objects not jsut a subject. Women tend to experience their bodies being looked at or judged (object) instead of something they control and act through(subject). This leads to less confidence and assurance in feeling like actions aren’t “fully theirs.” Another strong point that came across to me was Young’s comparison of Immanence vs Transcendence. Immanence is particularly about staying contained, limited, passive, and restricted; correlated with femininity and women. Where as transcendence is about acting outward, confidently using space; correlated a lot with masculinity and men. These behaviors are shaped by society and expected to be a social norm that is acted out specifically towards ones gender. These examples lead towards Young’s example of spatial awareness, “The woman lives her body as object as well as subject.” What this quote portrays is the paradox of how women tend to stay within a small safe space, waiting for things to come instead of moving towards. This is a sense of shape that is created by social limits and not just physical ability. How women see the world affects how they move in it and vice versa.

One specific quote that I specifically felt inclined to write about and I related to that the author wrote: “These modalities of feminine bodily existence have their root in the fact that feminine existence experiences the body as a mere thing.” Young does a phenomenal job about emphasizing the social expectations on shaping the body. When I was younger I was very intrigued as to why women were perceived in a much different but furthermore weaker manner than men. It was peculiar to me because I could factor in a lot of circumstances where I felt women were mentally and physically tougher than men. Although, biologically men have certain physical ability’s women don’t, I think that how we perceive ourselves is subjective. The first step is consciousness and awareness of one’s abilities without the bias of society fogging our view. How we view ourselves clearly correlates with how we act and perform. A lot of our internal dialogue translates to our external actions. If our movements are restricted than our perception of space becomes restricted as well. How we view ourselves and the world around us blatantly react with our perceptions and actions of ourselves towards the outside world.

What does it mean to merely view our bodies as an object and how can this affect us? Furthermore, can these patterns change, and how? A lot of these actions and perceptions that are shaped by society quite simply lead to a power dynamic and polarization of men and women towards social power. Social norms and expectations are taught at a young age and it is now a situation for contemporary society and new-age to recognize and act on. The mere consciousness that women are essentially taught creates a mistrust within themselves and a lack of confidence. Rather than natural ability these limitations brought forth by many years of society create and reflect broader inequalities in power and freedom in all aspects of our common world whether that’s in day-to-day life, politics, cultural views, and relationships.