McPherson Response
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 2 When I read the title for this essay, I was thinking there was no way to compare computing with race. How would you even start to comprehend how to compare the two. Race does not determine how smart a person is or how capable they are. Race, the color of a person’s skin, has nothing to do with computing at all. It makes no sense.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 2 Of course, the real objective to McPherson’s essay became clearer to me when she brought up the 1960’s and the segregation between blacks and whites. It was then that I started to understand what she meant about race being related to computing. It wasn’t there skin color that had them at a disadvantage, sort of; it was because of their skin color that they were subjected to a lower standard and were not privileged to learn about computing.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 2 Everyone has a role to play in society. In the 1960’s, black people didn’t have a role. They were almost invisible by the rest of the public. And while black people were outcast, white people got all the opportunities, including having a shot at developing a computer system, which they did with flying colors. It was white people that created the system, not black people. Maybe the system and computing in general is so white because it was created by white people and they are the minds that are integrated throughout the system. Black people are now included in all aspects of life and opportunity, including computing, but they still did not form the foundations from which the system works. They are using a white mans tools.
I agree, Montana. I was confused as well when it was brought up but the 1960’s definitely helped with describing everything.
Why? Why do McPherson’s descriptions of 60s “white flight” and race riots help you to see the logic of her argument? What is especially clear / useful about these examples?