Reactions and responses to intellectual and cultural events at Birmingham-Southern College.
Session on Slavery in the Twenty-First Century
Published on April 8, 2005 By jtatter In Politics
I will reveal my bias by saying that I expected this presentation to be informational rather than inspirational or promotional. I should have read the poster a little closer, near the bottom, where the invitation was to "come hear Beatrice and Stephen speak out against modern day slavery." But of course these two people would be speaking out against slavery. Who would speak out for slavery?

Beatrice Fernando's presentation was troubling in its subject matter and moving in its presentation. There is nothing new, of course, about opportunists taking advantage of poor people who are desperate for a way out of their poverty. But it was shocking to hear about an actual case of slavery. True stories are more effective than fiction in making a case for taking action against injustice, and I'm sure that Ms. Fernando's story was designed to encourage us to take action against slavery.

Steven Steinlight's presentation was troubling in its presentation and moving in its subject matter. As I suggest above, who would expect Steinlight not to speak out against slavery? The distractions of general attacks on the United Nations and personal attacks on its Secretary-General Kofi Annan took the focus off what I considered to be the "real" topic--where slavery is happening in the world, who is perpetrating it, and what measures are being taken--and should be taken--to stop it. That the United Nations may be ineffective or irresponsible is a worthwhile topic for another lecture.

To connect the presentations to our class, I'd like you to think about how, in the stories we have read, people with money and power have taken advantage of those without money or power. How do advertisers take advantage of poor women of color like Arlene? What do they promise her? Are their promises as empty as the ones Beatrice Fernando responded to? How did the store owner take advantage of Dave in "The Man Who Was Almost a Man"? Does our entire society promise success and wealth to the people who come to our shores from elsewhere, like Mr. Chang in "In The American Society"? Does our society conveniently forget to mention that race and culture have an effect on success?

On another note, I'd be interested in your comments on exactly how the presentations failed to live up to your expectations--not what you liked and didn't like, but on what was and was not effective and why.

Comments
on Apr 11, 2005
Just as the "agency" knew just how to advertise to Ms. Fernando, advertisers today sell their products by playing upon the ideas of success and power. In both Ms. Fernando's situation and Arlene's situation, the women were in a struggle to find something to make them happier and more successful. Ms. Fernando felt her only option for success was to work for this agency and go out of the coutry to make a better living for her family, and she was willing to take incredible risks to do so. In light of Prof. McCallum's lecture, I find the actions of both Ms. Fernando and characters such as Arlene very interesting becaue both of the women came from backgrounds of low-income families and niether of the ladies felt that they had very much hope for the future and these serve as predicators for the fact that they were willing to take some great risks. Arlene sort of lived life on the edge, hoping to make herself appear beautiful and attractive in order to be more successful and therefore risked sleeping around with different men and even physical and emotional abuse she might endure from them at times. Ms. Fernando was willing to turn herself over to the agency without much consideration of the possibilities because she saw it as her only hope. In both cases, the women were prey to advertising, whichmany others might not have found so appealing, because the women did not have much hope for their futures and therefore latched on to the claims of the advertisers.
I found the presentations rather effective. First hand accounts of tragic situations really bring the seriousness of the situation forward, and Ms. Fernando's story was certainly effective for me. We've become so accustomed to hearing the numbers and statistics and blowing problems and casualties off, but after hearing such a vivid first hand account of slaver, it made the situation much more real. For every one of the 27 million enslaved people, there is another heart-wrenching story. For me, her story was incredibly compelling because coming face to face with an actual victim was very compelling. Mr. Steinlight's presention was effective for me in that it was very interesting, thought I feel that he should have focused more on ways to aid the situation than personally attacking individuals. I found his comments about the UN and other nations enlightening, but I do feel that he focused too much on their failures and would have better served his cause by focusing on what needs to be done to help make changes. He added some suggestions about what should be done towards the end, but they were rushed and not flushed out because he had spent so much time criticizing others.
on Apr 11, 2005
I never knew just how bad slavery still is in the world until after Ms. Fernando gave her speech on her own experiences. Typically when you hear the word slavery most tend to think of the African American slave trade and the Civil War. I never took a moment to think that this was still happening in the world today but truthfully it is. I was really shocked by the trickery that was used to decieve her into slavery by making something appear good on the outside. It did not really hit me until Mr. Steinlight spoke "bluntly" on this subject matter. I was really suprised of how harsh he spoke on the matter of slavery but I would really like to know where his information came from(just so it would seem more crediable) and I would not mind looking into the source of his info for my own personal gain on what slavery is today in the year 2005
on Apr 18, 2005
I'm going to say that I enjoyed this presentation more than the one earlier in the day, but that's probably because of the entertainment factor, not the subject matter. Not that discussing slavery is entertaining in a good way, but the stories were more personal and moving, and I'm still disappointed about the lack of results in the first presentation.

Beatrice Fernando's story was horrifying, because I think slavery, happening in our world today, is not something people think about very often. We know the world is filled with racism and predjudice, but slavery seems to be a custom of the past. I think this presentation was the first time my eyes were really opened in this class, because I'm used to a lot of the other matter we discuss, but slavery is something I've definitely never encountered. I honestly had never really thought about it. The fact that she was tricked out of leaving her home and locked up and beaten in the home of a rich woman is terrifying. This is the twenty-first century! I really can't believe that so many millions of people are thrown into this sort of situation. Why haven't I heard anything about this in the past? Why are so few people doing anything to stop it? Are we just too caught up in our own worlds to care? Because it's not happening to us or Europe? The whole presentation really upset me.

Steven Steinlight's presentation was equally as horrifying, with his statistics and hatred for the UN, but I definitely think people were more lost listening to him speak. While his information was important and meaningful, it wasn't a story, and sadly, I think that made a lot of people's minds wander.

Tying all this to the stories we've read though is hard. Because while we've seen racism, and significantly unfair treatment in working conditions, there haven't exactly been stories of slavery. In "The Man Who Was Almost a Man" and "In the American Society", people are definitely taken advantage of, but not to this sort of extent. Beatrice Fernando's story was definitely the worst I've ever heard.