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.
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...
Comments
Post a Comment