Historical Societal Myths: The Land of Equal Opportunity - Research Paper Example

?Historical Societal Myths: The Land of Equal Opportunity Introduction All cultures have popular cultural myths, and America is no different. There are many American myths circulated by those within and outside of the United States, none more so than the thought that America is the land of equal opportunities for all. There are different arguments for and against this being true, but the fact still stands that America still has a culture of discrimination and social grouping structures that are changing rapidly (Aldrich et al, 1989). There are still different socioeconomic groups that have different spheres of influence, although these are being moulded and changed by the influence of social media, such as Facebook and Twitter (Chou et al, 2009). The purpose of this paper is to explore the myth of American equal opportunities by examining the evolution of this myth through time, discussing the use and purpose of cultural iconography and artefacts in perpetuating the myth, and how stereotypes have arisen from the myth itself. By doing this, it will become clear how the representation of America as a land of equal opportunity and socioeconomic equality can be classified as a myth and how modern influences on the myth are furthering the evolution of the myth. The Origins of the Myth It has been said that “Equality is as American as baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie” (Crandall & Martinez, 1996), but this does not hold true. African Americans are 77% of the NBA, but only 4% of the healthcare profession (Kaplan et al, 1996). Women are still widely unrepresented in the workforce (Aldrich et al, 1989). However, this myth is still perpetuated throughout America and those who wish to live in the United States. The origin of the thought comes from Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence (Bonilla-Silva, 2006), when all men were deemed to be created equal. Since then, there have been many amendments to the American constitution, including the abolition of slavery (Kaplan et al, 1996) that have assisted this concept, but still equality does not pervade American culture. Over the 20th century, there were many mass immigrations into the United States (Bonilla-Silva, 2006) and many of the immigrants came seeking equality that was not found in their own culture. It may be true that equality in the United States is still superior to those found in many cultures, but there is still not an overwhelming sense of socioeconomic equality between genders, races and ages (Crandall & Martinez, 1996). It is unclear as to why this myth was propagated. Most scholars seem to believe that it has arisen from the very founding of the United States, when the American War of Independence was fought to provide the citizens with equality not found in the countries from which they were originally from (Crandall & Martinez, 1996). Christianity in the United States, for example, has many different representations in different churches, many of which were founded at this early stage in American history. Some of these were founded because of the religious persecution in Europe (Brass et al, 1998), and there was a widespread tolerance of other Churches even at this early stage, usually out of necessity. For outsiders, America seemed to be a land of hope, where they could escape the persecution found at home, which is why America is such a melting-pot of racial diversity and culture, but many of these people still experience discrimination. A motivation for this myth that has been suggested is that the Founding Fathers of the United States desired for an expansion in population to help the economy (Kaplan et al, 1996), and one way to achieve this quickly was to spread the word of a tolerant and equal nation in which all would be welcome. From the 1920s Onwards The starting point that this paper is going to take with regards to American inequality starts in the early parts of the 20th century. In 1920, American women were finally given the right to vote (Aldrich et al, 1989), with African Americans and poor white males being given the vote just 50 years previously. At this point, almost all Americans were eligible to vote. This is a great symbol of equality, and one that is sought by many in countries where this is not the case. Whilst this change in voting status was not directly created for the purpose of perpetuating the myth of American socioeconomic equality, ensuring that voting rights were not hampered by gender or race helped to cement the idea of equality in the minds of many (Brass et al, 1998). The reason that this moment in history has been chosen to illustrate the evolution of the myth of equality is that it covers up many of the other facts. In 1930, for example, 77% of all American cities did not hire married women to be teachers because of the risk they may become pregnant (Aldrich et al, 1989). This same discrimination simply was not applied to men. Although black people had the right to vote, it was not until 1964 that discrimination against black people was made illegal (Bonilla-Silva, 2006). This highlights the fact that the use of voting equality as a symbol for equality is false and has perpetuated the myth to Americans and outsiders alike. Another symbol often used to represent equality is the 'new woman' of the 1920s (Aldrich et al, 1989). These women swore, drank, smoked and gambled in public and were a feature of American life from the 1920s onwards, perhaps celebrating their new found voting rights. These women dictated their own fashions and started getting careers and education, suggesting that equality between the genders was on the rise. However, as previously mentioned, there were still inequalities in the American workforce in the 1930s, and these inequalities still exist (to a lesser degree) today (Freeman & Katz, 1994). 'New women' therefore again represent a false icon of the American dream of equality. Women were gaining more and more rights, but the fact that women still do not have equal opportunities in the workplace suggests that the myth is still a myth in the 21st century. Modern Icons of Equality that Perpetuate the Myth Something else that is also used as an example of equality in American society is the class system (Crandall & Martinez, 1996). Whilst the class system in America is less intense than in countries such as the United Kingdom which still possess a nobility and a royal family (Freeman & Katz, 1994), there are still massive class divides which can be explored along the lines of education level. For example, the lower classes are generally classified as those earning less than $10,000 per annum and possessing either no high school diploma or high school being the highest level of education achieved (Bonilla-Silva, 2006). Many may feel that this is fair, as not everyone can possess a graduate degree and a high-paid job, but the interesting thing about equality is that people within this class are predominantly African American or Latino (Kaplan et al, 1996). The fact that class lines are also loosely drawn along racial lines is probably one of the biggest hints that American inequality is a myth, but it still is perpetuated. A good modern icon that perpetuates the myth is Barack Obama, the President of the United States. Obama identifies as an African American and holds the highest political position available, which suggests to many within the country that African Americans can achieve any of the positions that white Americans can. Whilst this is theoretically true, Obama is the first African American President and African Americans are still under represented in Congress (Crandall & Martinez, 1996). Oprah is another example of an icon of equality. Oprah Winfrey is a female African American celebrity and was the first black billionaire in the United States. She is also the richest African American woman in the United States and relies fully on a self-made fortune. Oprah is frequently celebrated as an example of the equality that can be found in the United States, for she is this icon that comes from two of the most under represented social groupings but has battled through the prejudice to become a self-made billionaire. However, the fact that she is so celebrated is a clue to the fact that she is unique in her position. In 2009, female full-time year-round workers earned 77% of what their male counterparts did (Chou et al, 2009). African American full-time year-round workers earned only 64.5% of what their white counterparts did (Crandall & Martinez, 1996). This again cements the fact that equality in the United States is a myth and socioeconomic status differences still apply. Social Media and their Influence on the Myth Modern social groups are different to the past. In the 21st century, different social groups have been influenced by the social media in different ways, especially young people who spend many hours a day on social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter (Hargittai, 2008). Use of social media sites is roughly equal for men and women, African Americans, Latinos and white Americans, and different socioeconomic groups (Chou et al, 2009). Disparities in the age groups does still exist, as American teens and those in their 20s are over represented on the websites (Chou et al, 2009), and these social groupings have had an overwhelming effect on the way that equality is perceived in America. One example of this is the amount of pages and sites dedicated to icons of American equality. Both Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey have their own Twitter pages, and these are subscribed to by a mix of the socioeconomic groups, different races and different genders, suggesting that equality is more prevalent or well-defined on these websites. This may also help perpetuate the myth that America is an equal society, because these prominent figures have even more exposure than they would have done without social media websites. Additionally, the wide range of followers that these icons have suggests that people that use these websites may have different opinions of these icons than others, again helping to perpetuate the myth of American equality across the globe. Another interesting influence that social media has had on American equality concerns Facebook. Facebook was originally started as a Harvard-only website, before spreading to other Ivy League Universities and finally going global. Despite the fact that a member of Facebook can now be a member of any socioeconomic group, race, University-affiliated or not, Facebook still primarily attracts those pursuing this higher level of education. The resulting effect of this is that those on Facebook tend to have higher ambitions than those on Myspace or comparible social networking sites (Chou et al, 2009), suggesting that there is still a hierarchy of socioeconomic groups between these social networking sites. Facebook itself could be considered a false icon of this American equality, by opening up membership to anyone but actually still appealing to one particular social group. Conclusion In conclusion, the evidence above shows that there the myth of American equality is still alive today and has followed a long history within the United States. From the very first American Constitution through the changes to suffrage to the use of social media, the myth has developed and spread through the United States and worldwide. There are many examples which are held up as icons of equality, such as the 1920s flapper girls, Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama, but these are false idols. Whilst the gaps are closing, African Americans and Latinos still earn less than white Americans, women still earn less than men and many socioeconomic groups are still victim of discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere. The people held up as shining examples are cultural artefacts that perpetuate the myth of equality in the United States. It is possible that some of the conflicts that have arisen on social media have developed because of the myth of American equality, and perhaps even helped to perpetuate the myth further. Despite all this, it is important to note that equality in the United States is much higher in many countries and perhaps the interactions on social media will help spread equality further. It will be interesting to see how this myth develops throughout the next century. Works Cited Aldrich, H., P.R. Reese, and P. Dubini. “Women on the verge of a breakthrough: Networking among entrepreneurs in the United States and Italy.” Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 1.4 (1989): 339–356. Print. Bonilla-Silva, E. Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc, 2006. Print. Brass, D.J., K.D. Butterfield, and B.C. Skaggs. “Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective.” Academy of Management Review (1998): 14–31. Print. Chou, W.Y.S. et al. “Social media use in the United States: implications for health communication.” Journal of medical Internet research 11.4 (2009): n. pag. Print. Crandall, C.S., and R. Martinez. “Culture, ideology, and antifat attitudes.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22.11 (1996): 1165. Print. Freeman, R.B., and L.F. Katz. “Rising wage inequality: the United States vs. other advanced countries.” Working under different rules (1994): 29–36. Print. Hargittai, E. “Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13.1 (2008): 276–297. Print. Kaplan, G.A. et al. “Inequality in income and mortality in the United States: analysis of mortality and potential pathways.” Bmj 312.7037 (1996): 999. Print. Kuo, W.H., and Y.M. Tsai. “Social networking, hardiness and immigrant’s mental health.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior (1986): 133–149. Print. Lynch, J.W. et al. “Income inequality and mortality in metropolitan areas of the United States.” American Journal of Public Health 88.7 (1998): 1074. Print. Piketty, T., and E. Saez. Income Inequality in the United States, 1913-1998 (series updated to 2000 available). National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA, 2001. Print. Stanton-Salazar, R.D., and S.M. Dornbusch. “Social capital and the reproduction of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school students.” Sociology of Education (1995): 116–135. Print. Read More