Rosenblum and Travis

I think Rosenblum and Travis make two distinct statements or main points in this section of the reading. The overall ideas in this reading rely on the difference of things and how people perceive them. The first point they make is the difference between a constructionist and an essentialist by giving the example of how 3 different umpires make their “calls” on whether the pitch was a strike or a ball. By looking at the pitch as umpire one calls the ball what it is, he is seen as an essentialist. Umpire one is simply observing the pitch as it was thrown. On the other hand, umpire two who states the pitches as “nothing until I call them” is seen as a constructionist. He looks at the pitch as it has no meaning until it is given by the observer.

The second point in this section of the reading is the process of naming. There comes some difference when you name certain categories. Constructionists pay attention to the names people use to refer to themselves while essentialists tend to give the names. Asserting a name can create social conflict such as the term Hispanic vs. Latino or African American vs. Black.

The authors make an argument and a distinction between differences of race, sex, sexual orientation and social class. In the reading they state that “Essentialists are likely to view categories of people as “essentially” different in some important way; constructionists are likely to see these differences as socially created and arbitrary”. There is argument of what these differences in color, sexuality and social class actually mean.

In one section of the reading Rosenblum and Travis mentioned the controversial difference between “sexual orientation” and “sexual preference”. I feel when using either of these words, someone is automatically being placed as either an essentialist or a constructionist. Everyone comes from a different background and some might not be as familiar to the terms as others. An example of this is in the reading when they mention that ironically, colored people used to be a derogatory reference to African American, but people of color is now a commonly reference to all nonwhites. This clearly shows that the change of names and terms is a never ending. How is one person to keep track of the frequent name changes of different cultures and races? Name changes simply flow with time and history.