The Unclean Minority
Los Angeles is usually identified as a city of sunshine, clear skies, beautiful weather, and consistency. Los Angeles is Los Angeles and never changes. What happens when change is brought upon Los Angeles though?
In the Introduction of Fit to Be Citizens, Natalia Molina discusses the history of marginalized ethnic and racial groups in the Los Angeles area and the connections between the fear of the unknown and stereotypes. With increased amounts of immigration to the Los Angeles area, originally by Japanese and Chinese immigrants and then by Mexican immigrants, multiple stereotypes formed. The city of quartz that racist white Los Angeles knew was being “smudged” and “dirtied” by immigrants. Why have immigrants had a history of being classified as dirty? Molina suggests that the mistreatment and financial inequalities that immigrant minority groups faced such as “inadequate medical care, exposure to raw sewage, and malnutrition” (Molina 2) led to white Angelenos adopting the mindset that ethnic and racial minorities are dirty and diseased people.
Unfortunately, many people still hold this same mindset about immigrants. Our president, Donald Trump, is a prime example of this, saying that all immigrants from Haiti have AIDS, exclaiming that Mexican immigrants are rapists, and questioning why the United States has so many immigrants from "shithole" countries. The idea that nonwhite immigrants are disgusting and unclean is still a very popular idea throughout the United States.
Molina says that the stereotyping of nonwhite immigrants as dirty comes in part from systemic health and financial injustices (or racism in general), but I also think that the ideas of change and challenging the status quo plays a big role in the labeling process.
I have some questions I would like you to answer to help flush out my thoughts:
I have some questions I would like you to answer to help flush out my thoughts:
- How might the fear of change aid in the stereotyping of immigrant minorities as unclean and hazardous? Why is change "dirty"?
- Does this idea of the marginalized being “dirty” extend beyond race? What about religion, sex, sexuality, gender identity, and socioeconomic status?
- What are some contemporary examples of the “fear of immigrants”, specifically in Los Angeles?
I think a lot of this fear of change and “aliens” comes from when the white immigrants first came to America. They came to this new land with advanced weapons, machinery, diseases, and more and were able to conquer people that looked different than they did. Then, the white Americans rode this wave of pride when they defeated Britain and gained independence, they felt like nothing could stop them. They ran things the way they wanted them to be run, they lived the way they wanted to live, and they lived above all others.
ReplyDeleteA lot of people fear change because they fear the unknown, and they don’t know who these new people are, and one of the only ways they thought they would feel safe is if they put them in a box of stereotypes so that they can more easily control them. People can be susceptible to what they hear in the news, especially if it is backed by what seems to be “scientific facts.” For example, the majority of the eugenics movement was built around false scientific evidence that was made up in order to support the eugenicists ideas. The idea that the marginalized are “dirty” definitely extends beyond race. Practically any group that is not part of the majority is seen as different, odd, alien. The Industrial Revolution is a great example of the lower class being seen as “dirty” and not-deserving of basic human rights. Women throughout history have been painted as mischievous and impure. LGBTQ+ people are turned away from lots of people because they are seen as “dirty.” People are afraid to acknowledge that there are people who are different than them, people that look different, act different, and think different. They are afraid that they can no longer control those people.
I think that the word "dirty" in this sense is relatively synonymous with the idea of an "other" - something that is against the norm or the majority either by choice or by circumstance. Because LA's image is so directly tied to a promise of good health (thinking of the flood of people coming here to avoid or fix their TB - the air is great for the lungs!) I think that making comments on the relationship between different minority groups and the health of the city was a very straightforward way of placing the blame for any issues onto people who were, in reality, not responsible. Change in the eyes of the historically white majority probably meant giving up of power to said "other", which was seemingly unthinkable, so they had to create some sort of reasoning to manufacture backlash and stereotypes tying different groups of people to being some sort of problem. I can think of certain instances where queer people are seen as being dirty, but these examples feel different to me because you can't make the same concrete connections unless you know someone's sexuality, and not everyone displays that aspect of their lives openly, whereas things such as race, age, and gender are usually shown by visual markers of some sort.
ReplyDeleteWhen we as humans analyze any change in our environments, we intuitively look to our past experiences (consciously or not) to evaluate how severe this change may be, and what impacts it may have on us. When an immigrant or minority group suddenly begins to migrate to a different community, the members of that community may look to their past experiences with change to decide how they feel about this one. Since it is historically true that certain migrations have resulted in public health emergencies to the affected community, it kind of makes sense that some people might be hesitant to embrace the change. Fortunately, advancements in medicine and public health have allowed us to witness entire waves of migration with minimal rates of disease transmission, so this excuse of "migration used to cause disease" has lost much of its validity. Nonetheless, the ignorant will continue to search for any evidence that can seem to back up their claim. I would say socioeconomic status plays a much, much more significant role in deciding who gets access to adequate health care than does race. We know that racial identity can limit peoples opportunities in this world, but the largest discrepancy still lies with the issue of wealth inequality. I have personally (and in a professional capacity) been exposed to the inner-workings, philosophies, and politics that govern LA County hospitals. I have been the third EMT on a 911 emergency ambulance crew for about 20 different patients and have transported to hospitals in South LA including Centinela in Inglewood, Gardena Memorial, Torrance Memorial, and Harbor-UCLA. What I saw at many of these facilities literally brings tears to my eyes whenever I think about it. I can handle the sick and the injured and the suffering people, I've been trained for that. But what I have been unable to cope with is the unbelievable disconnect between the philosophies of these public community hospitals and places like Huntington Memorial. At HMH, at least in my experience, patients are treated compassionately and with diligence. Extreme attention is payed to any needs the patient expresses, and staff are very receptive to those needs. On the other hand, one of the patients I dropped off at Harbor had only one person to talk to during the entire emergency, transport, and hospital admission process. That person was me. Unfortunately, the other providers with me felt that they did not want to listen to much of what she had to say. Sure, she had a thick accent, but I believe the real reason is because we picked her up in a dilapidated apartment building without an insurance card. This led me to think, if I was not present, would she have less of a voice? Another man, picked up from a dialysis clinic (very common), had a similar experience. Since he was incoherent for the most part, the providers just went through the motions of assessing him, getting him in the rig, admitting him, and placing him in a bed in a hospital gown. Uncomfortable with this, I asked him occasionally if there might be anything else we could do for him, such as simply providing an extra blanket, which I did. Not only were so many patents handled with borderline negligence, the hospital infrastructure in most of these facilities is something the county ought to be ashamed of. Makeshift waiting rooms, unclean hallways, low quality bedding, and outdated diagnostic equipment are just some of the major issues I have with these facilities. If you could have seen what I saw, you too would ask "how can anybody ever get healed in a shithole like this?" I am absolutely convinced that the single biggest contributing factor to people not accessing adequate healthcare if the fact that they are poor. From the streets and apartments of South LA, they are shuttled, by the people who I now call my colleagues, to their lonely demise in LA County public hospitals.
ReplyDeleteThe fear in change aids in the stereotyping of immigrant minorities as unclear and hazardous due to immigrants possibly bringing about change. The fear of change exists because people hate the unknown. The unknown includes unpredictability, and that unpredictability causes people to be uncomfortable because one feels as if they can’t do anything about it where as the known is understood and more controllable. I think this idea of the marginalized being “dirty” does extend beyond race. I think it can apply to religion, sex, sexuality, gender identity, and socioeconomic status. An example I can think of would be the Aids crisis. During the Aids crisis, the syndrome was associated with the LGBTQ+ community, and therefore the whole community was blamed and shunned. In regards to a contemporary example of the “fear of immigrants”, specifically in Los Angeles, the clear example in my mind is the coronavirus. People associate the coronavirus with the Chinese, and therefore it extends to all people of Asian descent. There’s also just the assumption that if you look asian, you are an immigrant, and you aren’t from the United States. Therefore, in this case, if you are asian, people assume you could be a carrier of the virus and are scared of catching it from you.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably a super inaccurate comparison, but the idea of something foreign being dirty reminded me of that scene in Monsters Inc. when one of the monsters has a human sock on his back and has to have his entire body shaved because humans are thought to be foreign and disease-causing. I think it is an inherit quality to associate dirtiness and disease with unknowns. Change is all about adjustment with an unknown outcome so through association the unknown change is "dirty" and therefore unwanted or avoided. Also I think labeling something different as "dirty" is a twisted way of justifying ignorance toward unknowns. For example, in the case of Los Angeles, public policies were able to skirt around the well being of minorities because they were considered dirty and unknown and therefore unworthy of positive attention. Yes policies were put in to place that related to minorities, but for the most part, nothing specific to support or protect, mostly to avoid, separate, or quarantine.
ReplyDeleteI think dirtiness as a negative label extends beyond race and can especially apply in the case of socioeconomic status. A lot of the time, lower income or homeless populations are seen as dirty and disease ridden, and for some reason this association causes more encouragement for avoidance rather than support.
I know we already talked about it today in class, but with the recent coronavirus outbreak I have seen an increase in Asian stereotyping across the media (not specifically in Los Angeles) but a general stereotype blaming Asian (specifically Chinese) culture and practices for the health outbreak.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe perception of an immigrant or refugee as country-less and therefore not belonging in any country is an idea that has historically spurred or justified genocide. I'm thinking specifically of Armenian, Jewish and Romani populations. This idea of wandering vagrancy, and picking up dirt as you go, particularly for the latter group, defines an entire population as temporary, easy to push around, easy to get rid of, and an infestation. America facilitates the most ironic of this rhetoric as it is used both by and against (once) immigrants. Because Western concepts of cleanliness are so synonymous with American-ness, the infiltration of anything not bleached and white (immigrants of color, their traditional clothing, their food, their children) is soiled and in need of that all-American product, Clorox. It was Anglo-Saxons and other Aryans that conveniently equated whiteness to cleanliness and so made purity synonymous with the color of their skin and their victim's the color of evil.The metaphor of people as dirty is more easily applied to communities of color because of their visibly darker skin tones but does extend to other groups.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Julian's argument that the poor are disproportionately denied adequate health care. Even health insurance, particularly in places with a lot of immigrants, like Los Angeles, is a mode of exploitation and breeds corruption as people are locked into policies they don't understand and scammed by hospitals and providers alike.
That's a whole other conversation. But I know a lot of people whose lives fell apart because they were required to have insurance, bought the one they could afford, were denied coverage after an accident or hospitalization, couldn't pay their rent, got a court date, couldn't make it because they couldn't skip work/didn't have a ride, etc.
I sort of feel like I'm repeating myself constantly (sorry), but I think that stereotyping immigrant minorities as unclean/hazardous/dirty has been the easy way out for people who don't want to acknowledge/embrace the inevitable change. I always find it so interesting how white Americans treat immigrants when literally none of them were from here either. Side tangent, but Europeans were actually the dirty ones in the first place. They were the ones who brought disease (smallpox!) to the native people. Anyway, like I've said before, I think these stereotypes are often just the easiest way to think about a change when there is uncertainty (cognitive dissonance???) surrounding something new. People don't like to not be able to predict what might come next, but if they make sure that the new, "dangerous" people are contained in one area, they don't have to deal with them at all. They can control what happens next. The idea of the marginalized/minority being dirty definitely extends beyond race. The AIDS crisis is a perfect example. The cycle is never-ending: different people are categorized as "dirty", people fear them because they don't want to "catch" whatever they have, and then they're further marginalized. Unfortunately, Coronavirus is a perfect example of how fear of immigrants still can exist today and in Los Angeles. This is a bit unrelated to your question, but I have a lot of Asian friends in the OC area which is where I believe one of the first cases of Coronavirus in California was reported. I sometimes see them post jokes on social media about wearing masks and saying things like "Coronavirus got nothin on us." It made me think about the role that social media plays in contemporary racism and discrimination and the role that the discriminated against play when they joke about the racism themselves. Like it suddenly makes it ok? I don't think so…
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t say everyone doesn’t like change, but I would say most people don’t like it. Thus, anything associated with change is seen as bad in people's minds, especially when it looks very different from what they are used to. I do believe the fear of change extends upon race. It is easy to see or hear people describing those apart of the LGBTQ+ community as “dirty,” and in the 20th century jews were seen as “dirty” before the holocaust. All of these examples of hate stem from the fear of difference and the unknown. That being said, I do believe that it is easier for governments to systematically discriminate against racial groups because it is a lot easier to identify a community that is made of a specific racial group rather than a religion or sexual orientation. A contemporary example of fearing immigrants and labeling them as “dirty” is the reactions to the coronavirus outbreak.
ReplyDeleteChange brings uncertainty, which can create a lot of fear in those who are privileged in our society. Some privileged white Americans tend to fear losing their power, influence, and status in American society. Hate and fear is used to create an “Us vs. Them” mentality that instills fear of change in many Americans. This hate and fear has been used for centuries to characterize immigrants of color as “hazardous,” “dirty,” “dangerous,” and “un-American,” in order for privileged Americans to maintain their power and the status quo.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the idea of the marginalized being “dirty” can extend beyond race. Often, homeless people or people in the LGBTQ+ community are characterized in a discriminatory manner. These communities defy the status quo, which can instill the fear of change in hateful Americans. The characterizations of homeless people or people in the LGBTQ+ community being “dirty'' are also stemmed from the hate and fear some privileged white Americans possess.
There is a racist notion that Latino immigrants come to Los Angeles to steal peoples’ jobs, hurt people, and hurt America. Other immigrant minorities are also targeted and discriminated against because fearful, hateful Americans also think they come here to incite violence. This type of fearful, racist rhetoric is very present in the current administration, and the messages they send out to their followers.
1. How might the fear of change aid in the stereotyping of immigrant minorities as unclean and hazardous? Why is change "dirty"?
ReplyDelete1. I think change is considered “dirty” because people tend to fear what is unknown. And if someone doesn’t want to engage change
2. Does this idea of the marginalized being “dirty” extend beyond race? What about religion, sex, sexuality, gender identity, and socioeconomic status?
1. I think for a long time gay people were considered dirty during the 80s because of the aids crisis in the US and the spread of misinformation.
2. Many different religious groups have been considered dirty because they lacked power in the society they occupied. For example jews in germany in the 30s-40s, the christian population in japan during the 1400s ( I think it was the 1400s someone please correct me if you know) but there are countless examples and I think they all come from a serious divide in power.
3. What are some contemporary examples of the “fear of immigrants”, specifically in Los Angeles?
1. I think that in los angeles the fear of immigrants is definitely present in areas like San Marino, San Gabriel, and Arcadia. The increase of asian immigrants to these areas has for sure brought stigma to these areas.
I think a big part of the stereotyping of immigrants as “unclean” comes from fear, like Aidan said. Although change itself isn’t “dirty,” I think the act of stereotyping immigrants as dirty is a method of damage control by those who are in power in society. I think the the actual description as dirty doesn’t necessarily have as much to do with the stereotyped as it does with the stereotypers. I think there are obviously different stereotypes for all types of people; majorities in society always find ways to stereotype any minority, whether it be religion, sex, sexuality, or socioeconomic status. These social stereotypes are not only internalized but also brought into social systems, workforces, and broader society. There are many examples of the “fear of the unknown,” and specifically of immigrants in contemporary society. Aidan named a few, but I also think the Coronavirus policies we talked about in class today are a great example of the ways our society generalizes and systemically stereotypes groups of people.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of immigrants being unclean has been prevalent in society since the creation of the United States. Created by the white community, anyone one that is not in fact white and has darker or different colored skin is “dirty”. This word is used to further dehumanize minorities and maintain the ideology of white supremacy. In Los Angeles, the “fear of immigrants” is still prevalent today. For me, the biggest example would be the Chinese massacre in 1871. This massacre was initiated by a group of around 500 white individuals. They entered Chinatown and attacked Chinese individuals, resulting in the death of many and the loss of businesses and homes. While this is the example I remember the most, there have been countless other instances in Los Angeles that has resulted in the discrimination and “fear of immigrants”.
ReplyDelete