The
first time I learned about immigration was freshman year. As an RC student, I
was placed in an Intensive Spanish class. An hour a day, I went to my
discussion section. The purpose of the class was to help students learn to have
scholarly discussions about topics in Spanish, to improve our speaking and
reading skills.
Although
I found the discussion section helpful in teaching me Spanish, what I found
most exciting about it was its topic: immigration. I can remember the exact
moment when I began to care about immigration. It was in the middle of class
one day; we were learning about Mexican immigrants coming to the United States.
A boy in my class called the immigrants “ilegales,” which means “illegals.” My
professor stopped the class.
She
spoke slowly and deliberately in Spanish, so that even the students who most struggled
with Spanish could understand. “We need to be careful about what words we
choose to use,” she said, looking at each of us. “There is a big difference
between using the word ‘illegal’ and the word ‘undocumented’ when describing
immigrants. There is a whole debate surrounding it. In this classroom, we will only
use the word “undocumented” when we talk about immigrants. Calling someone
“illegal” takes away their human dignity. No human being is illegal. If you
have any more questions, you may come to my office hours.”
Her
speech gave me chills. I had never heard of this controversy before, and had
not expected my professor to get so serious about it. I went to her office
hours later that week to learn more. I sat with her and listened as she
explained to me that calling someone “illegal” or “alien” sets him or her apart
from the norm of society.
“We are all human,” my professor told me. “No matter our
immigration status. Just because someone doesn’t have the right papers, doesn’t
mean that they’re any less human than the rest of us.”
What she had taught me, essentially, was that calling
someone an “illegal alien” was making them into the other in society.
Now, after taking American Culture 311, I finally have the vocabulary to
express what this “otherization” is.
The
“Other” is marked by absences – they lack something. Those absences make this
person different, apart from the norm.
By
calling someone “illegal,” we are establishing a normative and standard
identity. All other identities are compared to this norm. In our case, the norm
is being a US citizen. In lecture, we also discussed how the common norm in the
US is being a white, heterosexual, English-speaking, upper-middle class,
Christian, able-bodied male citizen.
Some
immigrants, and often Latin American immigrants, don’t fit this normative
identity. They often have darker skin, speak Spanish, and may be lower on the
socio-economic spectrum. Added to these identities is the fact that some
immigrants don’t have the right papers, and are undocumented. In many ways, these
immigrants are far from the norm. They are the
other.
In
class, we learned that the other is:
• Establishing a normative/standard identity through
which other identities are measured or compared. In our case, the normative and
standard identity is having papers, visas or passports.
• Refers to that which is understood as the symbolic
opposite/binary opposite to the normative category. The opposite of the norm of
having papers is not having paper, or
being undocumented.
In
all cases of being the “other” in society, there is always terminology to
accompany and point out the differences – to “otherize” the group of people.
I’m sure readers of this post will easily be able to think of derogatory terms
that accompany each “other” identity – terms for being racially different than
the white norm, terms for being religiously different from the Christian norm,
terms for being sexually oriented differently than the heterosexual norm.
For
being the “other” in terms of immigration, the derogatory terminology to
“otherize” the group are words like “illegal” and “alien.” These terms point
out that undocumented immigrants are different from “what is right” in US
society.
Calling someone an "illegal immigrant"
is 1) legally inaccurate and misleading 2) politically loaded and popularized
by anti-immigrant strategists and 3) experienced as racially biased and
dehumanizing by the people it is used to describe. The current debate presents an
opportunity for journalists to be responsible to their readers by dropping this
coded language. (For more information on this campaign, click here).
Other campaigns are even closer to
home. Social Work Allies for Immigrant’s Rights (SWAIR), a group from the
University of Michigan, held a campaign this fall labeled “Drop the I-Word
Week.” They wrote,
Our goal is simple. SWAIR believes that
language matters. Let’s take a stand to eradicate the dehumanizing
slur "illegals" from everyday use and public discourse so that we may
have a respectful debate on immigration.
The University of Michigan’s student
group, Migrant and Immigrant Rights Advocacy, held a similar campaign last
year. Both groups sold t-shirts for students to wear:
Click here to sign the
pledge to stop using the i-word.


No comments:
Post a Comment