Skip to main content

Commentary critique

In the commentary "U.S. consuls already have the tools to discriminate in Visa decisions" the writer discusses how discrimination against immigrants trying to receive a Visa or overstay their Visa is very biased. I believe the intended audience the writer is trying to convey these opinions to is someone who is affected by these Visa decisions or family of immigrants who are also affected as well as just informing the general public on the process and how these decisions are made. Also to explain the faults in this place of business. By using personal experience and scenarios the writer paints a clear picture of how a Visa interview might go or how they have gone and explains the turnout and aftermath of that individual who was denied a visa or was given a visa. The writer talks about the type of people who get turned down or people who would automatically receive their Visa. The discrimination towards these individuals is biased because interviewers mostly go off of first impressions. Which the writer states her herself have told immigrants going in for interviews that they should just be themselves but the outcomes were different for ones who listened and for the ones who didn't listen. She gave two examples of this in her commentary about meeting two transgender women one who decided to be open about it to the ones interviewing her and the other who thought it was best to present herself as male as it shows in her identification. Which for her ended in receiving her visa automatically, and the other who wanted a visa in order to continue her education did not receive a visa but was denied one three times. The writer's concern is that this discrimination should not continue and that these certain factors that make up an individual shouldn't be overlooked.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

lack of diversity

All throughout history, there has been a lack of diversity in the U.S. government. For example, from the very beginning, only white land owning males had the ability to vote. And the laws and people they were voting for were created by white males as well as the fact the candidates were also white males themselves. This ideology has certainly stayed in play even with all the change we have seen throughout the decades in the government. Like when women finally had the right to vote in the 1920's. But that didn't mean that all women had the right to vote. So women of low socioeconomic class and minorities were not given the right to vote. In fact, Native American women were not given the right to vote until four years later in 1924. As for African American women, in some states, they weren't given the right to vote until the 1960's. So anyone who wasn't white or rich were unable to vote for a period of time. We can still see these characte...
1 comment
Read more
The editorial "Will America Choose Its Children Over Guns?"  from The New York Times states how the mass shooting at Parkland, Florida should be the last straw when it comes to gun violence and the reason why there should be better gun laws and more light shed on the issue. Rather than just having politicians sending their condolences to the victims and their families and stating how these incidents shouldn't happen, they should be more concern with passing stricter gun laws. The audience I believe that this author is trying to convey this information to are parents or anyone who is concerned about the future of our children. Gun violence is becoming a normal issue in America with the number of mass shootings that take place within a year. Shouldn't there have been much stricter gun laws in place before the next tragedy, why is it until we have high school students who survived a mass shooting asking lawmakers themselves face to face to change gun laws. The aut...
Post a Comment
Read more