In Miller’s article, she talks about the difference between temporary and permanent inequality. Temporary inequality exists in relationships where one person has qualities that they are expected to teach the other, and this gives them authority over the other person. One example of a relationship with temporary inequality is the relationship between a parent and a child. Miller seems to think that temporary inequality is somewhat acceptable because even though one person is in a position of authority over the other, they are also supposed to be serving the subordinate, and I agree. For example, parents make decisions that children are not mature enough to make for themselves. When children become adults, they continue to have a relationship with their parents, but it is no longer a dominant\/subordinate dynamic.Permanent inequality is inequality that exists on a much larger scale and is based on characteristics that we cannot control such as race, class, or gender.<\/p>\n
The second article about dissent reminded our class discussion on Thursday about groupthink. Cheney and Lair argue that there is “a great deal of fear about entertaining views outside whatever functions as, or is defined as, the mainstream set of positions at the time.” This is happening not only on a societal level about significant political issues, but also on a smaller scale in workplaces and communities. This also made me think about the expectations created by dominant groups that Miller discusses in her article. Subordinates are discouraged from expressing any dissenting opinions about the structure of society. I liked how Cheney and Lair laid out concrete strategies for encouraging dissent at the end of the article, both on a large scale and in our daily lives.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In Miller’s article, she talks about the difference between temporary and permanent inequality. Temporary inequality exists in relationships where one person has qualities that they…<\/p>\n