Sample Student Response Paper
Below is another example of a strong response paper.
The Mark of the Unmarked Race
People rarely think of whiteness as belonging to the same category as other races. Society treats
whiteness as the norm or the average, and thus is not considered to be “racial” such as blackness might
be. Whiteness as the neutral or normative experience, as well as the ideal,proves to be a problematic
perspective if we are to have an honest discussion about the pervasiveness of racism in society. Labeling
something as the norm automatically denotes an air of superiority, claiming that other races are inferior or
abnormal, diverging from the norm. When whiteness is equated with the normal human condition, being
white is equated with just being human, which gives them a certain power over those who are
consequently defined by their race. As Richard Dyer writes in his text The Matter of Whiteness, “Whites
are not of a certain race, they’re just the human race” (Dyer, 11). Implicit in this statement of claiming
‘just’ humanness is that non-whites are non-humans or lesser than humans. Whereas whites are able to be
people, non-whites are required to be defined by their race alone.
Similar to the ways in which the language surrounding disability has changed to person-first language, so
too does the language of race need to make this shift. Instead of saying someone is an autistic person, you
would say a person with autism. In the same manner, non-whites should not be automatically defined by
the ways in which they deviate from the normative race (whiteness) by drawing attention to their race.
The white race becomes invisible, shadowed by their individual sense of being human. It is essential that
white people start to see themselves as white and belonging to a race, and not just human.
Non-whites should enjoy the same privileges and pleasures of individuality and autonomy that
whites do. Individuality is key to white ideology. Non-whites are pluralized, placed into different racial
groups. However, they are then homogenized and stereotyped, expected to be representative of their
entire race. As Peggy McIntosh discusses in her text White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,
one of the criteria of white privilege is the privilege of never being asked to speak for the entirety of the
people of my racial group. Whites appear and are presented as individual agents, not a homogenized
production. Whites have the ability to be unique and different, whereas non-whites are either grouped
together based off of arbitrary standards, or are stereotyped. As Ross Chambers writes in his text The
Unexamined, “Whiteness itself is thus atomized into invisibility through the individualization of white
subjects” (Chambers, 14). This individuality afforded to whites means that they are first people, and
second whites, whereas non-whites are not afforded the luxury to have people look beyond their race.
Another facet of white privilege is the ability to go unexamined or unmarked. Privacy is one of
the benefits afforded to unmarked people. When going unmarked, a racial group is then free to mark and
examine other racial groups. All racial groups other than white become lumped together and labeled as
non-white, which pluralizes them. Whites enjoy a singularity of their race as the “norm”, and the other
races become the subjects of examination. This indivisibility of whiteness creates a sense of unity or
uniformity, whereas other races produce just more ways of not being white. By examining other groups,
whites thus establish themselves as members of the elite group that go unexamined. A fascinating aspect
to this idea of plurality or individuality is the self-perpetuating cycle that it feeds into it. By labeling nonwhites as pluralistic and diverse, it sets up whiteness as singular and uniform, producing the idea that
whiteness is commonplace, ordinary, and thus unworthy of closer examination or monitoring, rendering
whiteness as an unmarked group. Whiteness is able to remain invisible as a race while non-whites racial
groups are heightened and highlighted. Describing non-whites as exotic and whites as familiar produces
the need for surveillance.
The use of hegemony and heterogeneity to discuss race issues produces conflict within non-white
communities where they would not have been. This pluralization, and further homogenization, of nonwhites causes social disunity and inequality, as well as competition. So, historically disadvantaged groups
that would have shared similar political and social beliefs are then competing against each other for the
1
few social services and benefits that are made available. This could account for some of the hostility or
racism between minority groups such as blacks and Hispanics who are competing for social resources in
an environment of white privilege. This hinders the possibility of change. In the text Understanding White
Privilege, Frances Kendall discusses how understanding or learning about whiteness and racism is an
“intellectual exercise”, something that we move on from quickly. I believe that this too will hinder the
possibility of change in America in regards to race. By ignoring white privilege or claiming
colorblindness, people are able to excuse themselves from the discussion of race, and that is too readily
tolerated in schools and universities. While it may be uncomfortable, it is essential that whites start to see
themselves as a race and not just an unmarked human. That is why classes such as this are essential in
prodding a discussion of racism. Activities such as Peggy McIntosh’s checklist, which I did for a racial
sensitivity training back in high school, are good tools to start the discussion on race and open one’s eyes
to the daily activities that are inherently racialized, such as picking out a Band-Aid.
2