Week 2- The Four I's of Oppression

Week 2- 2/4/24 (late, oops) 

On “The Four I’s of Oppression”-- Notes and other thoughts

Luna Malbroux’s discussion on the ideological element is fascinating to me, as she makes a great point that many roots of racism/sexism/etc. are instilled in us by these systems and stereotypes that we grow up alongside. It shapes the way we navigate the world.

Microaggressions are still a concept I am trying to handle. I have heard the term many times, but the way she explained it made sense to me. It is a backhanded compliment in a way. I think most of the time, people do not mean such comments in this way, but it is the way that systems have normalized certain stereotypes and expectations onto others that seep in.

In what other ways might our expectations of other individuals/races influence the way we treat others? A microaggression might emerge from something like a compliment, but what other ways can it appear?

Institutional oppression in my opinion may be the most difficult I of oppression to tackle. At a governing level, so deeply entrenched in laws and the way neighborhoods are divided, how do we as humans try to reverse this, even as upper class citizens and those in power stand to retain these oppressions and societal norms?

Dominant narrative is a societal norm. I would personally like to learn more about this concept. In what ways is our society glorifying certain groups? How much is intentional? Malbroux’s words remind me that social issues and the subject of oppression remain difficult to navigate and comprehend for the average individual.

Internalized oppression– yet another thing shaped by surrounding ideology. It’s a subconscious shaping, but still all too prevalent. When the culture surrounding us is oppressive, it instills in us these same ideologies. I had written earlier that perhaps institutional oppression may be the most difficult to tackle, but I think internalized may take that title.

Conclusion

Malbroux argues that the four I’s of oppression– ideological, interpersonal, institutional, and internalized– are all key elements that uphold systemic and cultural oppression. No one individual element shares the entire blame, but rather each I coalesces to create dominant ideologies and rigid social structures that limit individuals who do not fall in line with American ideologies and dominant narratives.

I am writing this blog a bit late (sorry again Lesley), but our previous class really helped frame what exactly are the dominant social ideologies in the United States (SCWAAMP). So much of American culture, I came to realize, really is framed around an “us vs. them” type scenario– you are with us or one of us, or you aren’t. And this same framework helps fuel much of the four Is discussed by Malbroux– a clear defining line, created by long standing systemic oppression, between what is socially acceptable and what is not. It almost predetermines what people should think and feel, and that’s horrible.

Typing it out, “us vs. them” reminded me of the Pink Floyd song “Us and Them”. The song I think touches on some similar elements discussed– a predetermined way of thinking or acting, decided by those with higher authority over common individuals. How this same system, likewise, encourages us to enforce these norms, and not question them. In the song, soldiers fight a war which they don’t understand who they are fighting, and why. They are only told that they are “other”, they are different. And I think this same line of thinking is exactly what causes systemic oppression to continue cycling.