Social Identity Mapping
Through lecture and discussion students will learn about social identity in relationship to oppression as a dynamic system of power, privilege and discrimination.
Sally Eck, Instructor
Women’s Studies
Portland State University
Portland, OR 97207-0751
Background
As a student and as an instructor, I have searched for strategies to build classrooms in which students and instructors are thoughtful and sensitive about the experiences and lives of all people, including themselves. Where are we coming from? Why do we believe what we believe? How much of what we believe is based on our own social location/positionality? If we recognize where ideas come from and who they may or may not include, how might we be able to shift or adapt in order to be more inclusive, clear, critical and respectful? Thus, the challenge is to create a learning environment where students speak from their own experience and place of power/privilege/difference in order to engage in potentially difficult discourse when the personal is political.
Some of pedagogical principles that inform this notion are outlined in the very useful text, Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice edited by Maurianne Adams et al. (1997). They are to “acknowledge and support the personal while illuminating the systemic,” “attend to social relations within the classroom,” and “value awareness, personal growth and change as outcomes of the learning process” (42-3). The authors suggest having students do a “Social Group Membership Profile” as part of a curricular design for “Single Issue Courses” (69-74).
Similarly, in all of my courses (e.g. Introductions to Women’s Studies, Gender and Education, Social Justice Education, and service-learning courses where students are working directly with adolescents), I have found it useful to have the students map out their own social identities. It offers a framework for understanding our lives in terms of oppression (How are affected by experiences that are so obviously connected to our social identities/status? What does that mean in terms of privilege or discrimination?). We can develop a common language, as well.
Although we live in a diverse society, some people believe their position, social location is just “normal.” Mapping ourselves, helps each of us to understand our lives are not just normal. They are a complicated web of power and difference in which the vast majority of us are simultaneously privileged and discriminated against by systems of oppression (Adams et al., 1997). When students have an opportunity to see themselves in this context, they often talk about the responsibility they have in their privilege to be an ally to targeted groups. This new found responsibility can act as an impetus for altering the way students engage in dialogue involving identity politics. The purpose is for each student to understand they come from a specific web or map of identities and each of their colleagues comes from their own place, as well. When engaging in difficult dialogue students can situate themselves and speak from their own experience/positionality. While it may seem obvious to some, it is easier to be thoughtful and sensitive to others when we can be thoughtful and sensitive to ourselves.
Implementation
Please note that it is useful to set group norms or guidelines of operating as a collective before conducting this exercise. The exercise itself could take 45 to 60 minutes depending on depth of discussion
To begin, I divide the chalkboard in two vertically. On one side I write “Agents” and on the other I write “Targets.”
First, I ask the students to name the social identities that are privileged by oppression (agents). The prompt that has worked well in naming those categories regarding agent status is, “Name some of the characteristics of most presidents of the United States.” For example, the president so far has usually been known by the public as heterosexual, white, male, and otherwise privileged. There are often students who name some of the exceptions to the norm for this category (e.g. President Franklin Roosevelt had a disability.). When this occurs, this idea can be explained by the concept of “the exception proves the rule.” We often want so badly to live in a fair and just system that we try to disprove injustice by finding exceptions—that is, those extraordinary few who have managed to escape a rigid system of inequity. Yet, the very fact that there are only a few (i.e. exceptions) proves the rule; inequity and systems of oppression do in fact exist in tangible and systemic ways.
Next, I ask the students to name the social identities which are the targets of oppression. The prompt for this portion of the activity might be, “Name the characteristics of those who have not traditionally occupied the US presidency.” I place these identities on the board opposite the correlating agent status (e.g. “person of color” is directly across from “white person”). As we place the various identities on the board, I use the activity to discuss some of the complexities of placing the identities on the board as though it is a perfect binary. I talk about the notion of ideal types and using this as a way of illustrating systems in a simple way for the purpose of study, though we may be experiencing them in more complex ways. For instance, being a person of size or class identity are identities that may have been fluid in a person’s life and technically any one of these identities may have some fluidity and are not always so clearly one or the other. There is still value in simplifying and naming, though. I also use this opportunity to discuss the notion of “othering.” Anytime the dominant group names an oppressed group in terms of its own by simply putting the prefix “non” onto its own identity, the oppressed group is denied the ability to be known in a stand alone context without its relationship as the oppressed to the dominant group. For instance, when we look at the religion of the president, we would say Christian (more specifically, Protestant) and we look at that which is placed across from Christian, we might tend to say “non-Christian.” In the interest of time, I do use the term and describe the act as othering. I often share with the students that in an ideal world we would be able to spend the next several days writing down and giving name to all other forms of religious identity, however, in this case we will use the term “non-Christian” knowing this is a form of othering.
Then, I ask the students to name the forms of oppression experienced by the targets. I write these on the board in between the already listed agents and targets (white people, racism, people of color). Upon naming all of the oppressions (including the notion, there are probably more), the worksheet with the same information is given to the students. I then use the work we did on the board to map myself by drawing a line to all of the different identities I have occupied/currently occupy. I draw dotted lines that run horizontally between the identities that are most fluid for me and I talk about knowing what it is like to be in a family that is really struggling financially for years at a time and what it feels like to be financially stable for years at a time. I talk about understanding what is like to both a thin person and a person of size as well. Then I ask the students to do the same at their seats for themselves. I do not require anyone to share their own map with the class. Doing so could be dangerous. Then we discuss the exercise in general terms. In class discussion following the exercise, it should be noted that no one is required to share their exact social location, but for the vast majority, people are simultaneously oppressed and privileged. Thus, it behooves each of us to work to dismantle the system.
Possible discussion questions include the following.
- When you look at your map what comes up for you?
- Are you surprised at all?
- What did you notice about places you are an agent/target?
- Any new awareness?
Follow-up
It may be useful to think about social change activities or other forms of social action that can be taken upon learning about these systems. Students sometimes will express a sense of hopelessness in a system that is so unjust. I often discuss the concept of education as liberation. When we know what is happening, we are more capable of doing something about it. When we were ignorant to oppression, it was still happening. We just did not have the language for it.
Materials/Resources
See the attached worksheet.
Adaptability
To date, I have only done this activity in a social science context. In all of my courses (e.g. Introductions to Women’s Studies, Gender and Education, Social Justice Education, and service-learning courses where students are working directly with adolescents), I have found it useful to have the students map out their own social identities. It offers a framework for understanding our lives in terms of oppression (How are affected by experiences that are so obviously connected to our social identities/status? What does that mean in terms of privilege or discrimination?). We can develop a common language, as well.
This exercise can be done in a large lecture-style classroom. However, I prefer to facilitate this exercise in a U-shape around the board so we can all see one another and connect.
It is important for the instructor to have some knowledge of oppression theory and be comfortable being known to the students in the variety of identities discussed.
Author’s Reflections
I have used this exercise for more than six years in a variety of college and high school classrooms. I feel that this activity has helped to lay a foundation of respect. As I become more conscious of my own social location and allow myself to be proud and responsible for all of the identities I occupy, it has gotten easier and more exciting. I would not find this activity to be as joyful if I was still enmeshed in white guilt or had not done years of work thinking through my own internalized sexism. Each of us is in our own place and we need to be gentle with ourselves and open to learning about our identities. If we can model openness as instructors, the students will be more apt to open up as well.
Citations/Bibliography
Background reading for the instructor:
Adams, M. et al. Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice. New York: Routledge, 1997