Essay: The Merits of Affirmative Action.

For my final paper I looked at the merits of affirmative action. I argued that affirmative action is still a relevant and effective means through which to address persisting racial stereotypes and economic discrepancies if implemented correctly. In my essay I rebutted the most common and strongest criticisms of affirmative action and sought to demonstrate its continuing usefulness as a potential policy.

Research Paper

In my research paper, I examined the idea of affirmative action in higher education, how it's been implemented, and the arguments for and against it-- especially interesting in terms of how the Supreme Court has supported it or refuted it at the University of Michigan in 2003.

I concluded that an examination of the ideas behind the implementation of affirmative action in higher education and an assessment of how it affects society leads one to the conclusion that overall, affirmative action’s effect on society has and will continue to be positive because it minimizes the disparities in equality between white society and socially constructed racial minorities.

I also thought that though the importance of considering the practical ways to fix racial inequalities in higher education should not be diminished, the support for affirmative action in higher education that holds the most gravity is the simple idea that it is morally right, because minority students in present day America on the whole generally begin their education on a lower level and receive a lower quality education than white students, which leads to fewer economic and intellectual opportunities in life. The only way to reform this problem as quickly as possible is with the direct intervention of the group in charge: privileged white society.

Immigration & Race

For my research paper, I worked to analyze how the perception of immigrants and the formation of immigration policy have racial implications. In an effort to address the issue, I began with a discussion on how the United States of America was built on immigration and transitioned to current debates about the problem of immigration.

Throughout my paper I discussed the following things:
- language used to address immigration issues --> implications of "alien" and "illegal" opposed to undocumented.
- history of immigration laws: quota systems that initially favored Northern Europeans and eventually progressed to favor Western Hemisphere migrants--> immigration preference
- current policy changes and implications:
1) "English Only" proposals, forcing assimilation
2) the "Secure Fence Act" which is the fence built between the US and Mexico-- why so scared of immigrants from the south?
3) Arizona's new immigration law-- which condones racial profiling and allows great room for interpretation and abuse by law enforcements, also making hispanics that identify as American feel less American.

After close analysis of immigration issues, I concluded that residents of the United States must work to recognize (and overcome) their fear of changing demographics. Additionally, government policies must work to understand why people migrate in an effort to better address the issue. With better education and the deconstruction of stigma and stereotypes, better relationships will develop amongst the immigrants and those born in the United States.

Research Paper

I examined how Dave Chappelle and Richard Pryor have changed comedy and society with their racially charged humor. Through careful examination of a documentary on Pryor and an episode of Inside the Actors Studio I was able to understand where each comedian stood on the topic, and why they did so. In the Richard Pryor documentary, many black comedians give their input about the topic of the use of the N word and of bringing race into comedy in such a blatant way. Both Pryor and Chappelle traveled to Africa, and both came back changed. Both decided to stop using this word, but the damage has already been done. Although Pryor said to stop using it, it was becoming engrained in the black community as a way of self identifying, and in the case of Chappelle the word had started to become too common for his liking. Both comedians employed a white voice, which Pryor was again the first to do. In the episode of Inside the Actors Studio Dave is asked about this voice and he responds saying that all black people are bi-lingual. When I heard this I thought I had hit pay dirt, the interview already had provided me with some information that could be useful but this hit so close to what we have discussed in class that I felt there was no way I could not incorporate it into the paper. In the closing bit of the interview Chappelle is asked about crossing the line, and he gives a somewhat profound response that is rooted in the fact that people don't realize some of the privelege that they have and feels that it is so institutionalized that people often forget about the problem. It has been a very interesting thing to research and examine because these two men were very much alike and act as the same vehicle to different generations.

My Conclusion

The main goal of this research paper was to expose the eugenic undertone of modern media. By valuing the whiter skin of popular figures, allowing degenerative influences in minority culture to proliferate, and representing sex as a segregated practice, the media helped to maintain racial segregation and inhibit miscegenation. These were shown to be eugenic principles through the twentieth century in the US. If the social influences of popular culture push for the reproduction of two lighter skinned, morally laudable individuals it was for the proliferation of these genes and character qualities into future generations.
The problem with eugenic movements was that in theory they would benefit a population by creating healthier citizens. However, when it built hierarchies of superior and inferior groups, labeling the minorities in the US as less intelligent and “undesirable,” it became a racist tool to maintain an assumed white supremacy. In relation to the media’s main goal of making money and believing they were representing images in specific ways and situations that would produce the most income, they showed a visual representation of society. The message was that an implicit eugenic tone symbolizes the continued racist sentiments of the white American consumer. The solution to the problem did not rest solely on the shoulders of the people in control of the media, but on the American public, as well. Until a change in attitudes towards body image, minority culture, and sex occur, racism will continue to disseminate throughout the public sphere of America.

Witness to Racism: What would you do?

I came across this very interesting news piece on how a bystander would act if they witnessed racism in America. It relates to the example Professor Moore brought up of standing in line and hearing racially charged comments. What would you do, really?

http://abcnews.go.com/WhatWouldYouDo/story?id=6551048&page=1

My Research

There is a contemporary debate over the utility and/or harm racial recognition has caused, polarized by the eliminativism on one end and conservatism on the other. Eliminativism considers racial categorization to be mistaken and oppressive and thus calls for the abandonment of it altogether. Conservatism feels that racial identities are beneficial and must be preserved, yet reformed. Both positions look for a change in the way we perceive race. The motivation behind my research paper is an intuition that Americans have a preset qualitative belief on race that lurks in one’s subconscious. If this is so, such an implicit bias poses problems for reforming modern racial categorization in either direction (eliminativism or conservatism). How do you autonomously overcome something you are not even aware of?

My intuition is empirically grounded in the implicit association test (IAT), a psych study revealing that our opinions on race elude our consciousness and are not necessarily available to introspection. In my research paper, I plan to use this empirical platform to embark on a discussion regarding the pitfalls of eliminativism and/or conservatism (I might just choose one to focus on) as well as the potential solution to reforming our ideas on race (once establishing that our current ideas are diseased and undesirable). In my pragmatic prescription to the diagnosis, I foresee the possibility of appealing to concepts developed by W.E.B De-Bois, specifically on his ideas for self-empowerment of the suppressed races.

Interesting article on Belgium considering that there be a ban put on burqas.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/04/21/belgium.burqa.ban/index.html

If passed those caught can be fined or even imprisoned for 1-7 days.

Even though it has to do with religion I believe that it is still relevant to our class because of the overlap with race, considering that the majority of Muslims are non-white while Belgium's population is predominately Causcasian. On a related note, this is not the first issue with European governments targeting Muslims. In Switzerland they passed a ban on building minarets, the tall towers next to mosques, back in November.

Skin bleaching

My topic is 'Becoming White', and am talking about the practice of skin bleaching by using chemicals. This is a practice done by 'people of color' in order to become lighter because light is perceived as more beautiful, more acceptable. I am looking into the deeper reasons as to why this pratice is being carried out, so for instance why is lighter skin, perceived as more beautiful and acceptable? is there perhaps any thing to do with the psychology of the people practicing skin bleaching that could give clues as to the reasons why? what about white priviledge? slavery? and all of this in the context of 2010.

This topic is of interest to me because, we live in 2010, you would think people by now accept the fact that beauty and notions of what is acceptable are really relative, there is no absolute, but reality shows the contrast, as individuals, we tend to not like the way we look, whatever we look like, we are constantly altering it somehow, and some people will willingly go just a bit extreme at it.

My Topic: Du Bois & HBCUs

I've always been interested in the "Philosophers in Focus" style of learning philosophy. And when we got to Du Bois in "The Idea of Race," I knew I had found my philosopher. His pragmatic yet unquestioning understanding of racial problems was so unlike the philosophers we read before. The issue of African Americans in higher education had always interested me, so I wrote a paper applying the educational philosophy of W.E.B. Du Bois to HBCUs today.

Using his writings, the writings of his critics, and research on modern HBCUs, I came to a two-sided conclusion. Du Bois' primary priority was successful education, not dictating the race of the students in the classroom. Ultimately, there are some HBCUs that provide rich educational experiences and offer the added bonus of a built-in racially supportive and diverse environment. On the other hand, there are other HBCUs that are simply academically inadequate. I argue that Du Bois would call for the closing of subpar HBCUs at more attention to the place where education begins to fail, in primary school.

My Topic

My paper addresses racially oriented prison gangs. The current situation with overcrowding and increased gang violence in penitentiaries across the United States have many corrections officials, politicians and members of the public desperately searching for a solution. In an attempt to try and control this epidemic officials have tried several measures including: segregating prisoners, isolating them, integrating them, transferring known gang leaders out of state and counseling.

My thesis will be: Although none of these methods yield a conclusive solution, mandating the integration of all prisoners is the only plausible resolution.

Do you think its weird that on April 12 of this year, nothing was done to remember the incident that occurred last year? Has the college administration done anything to promote acceptance and tolerance amongst staff and faculty? I am creating a race relations program that will hopefully be in full effect next fall. I'm working in conjunction with CVC, CCOR, Goldfarb and hopefully CCAK. So if you have any ideas that you would like to see incorporated in the program let me know! I want to increase people's awareness of race and diversity. I would love if my fellow CCOR facilitators could lead discussions in the coffee house and amongst CAs, Coot Leaders and CCAK mentors to make sure that they have the proper vocabulary to discuss race if it ever comes up. I want those involved in the program to go into the Waterville community and work with local residents and school children in discussions about their experiences with race. There is a lot I would like to accomplish so if you guys have any thought let me know!

My research paper is on white privilege, more specifically on the the emotion of white guilt and whether this feeling effects the white population's support of programs like affirmative action. I decided to interview students and faculty of all ethnic backgrounds to help with my research.

My paper topic

I've already wrote about what my topic is but I'll give a bit more detail. Using the essay that we read "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack: White Privilege", I am using points about white privilege specifically about the education system. I am interested to see what is taught in American high school history today about black people and then talk about why it is important for black history to be taught more in schools. I've already asked about what you all thought about this topic. Another question I could ask is where you are from and what you learned about American history in high school? Was is designed to teach about the white founding fathers or did you also learn about the black people contributed to making America what it is today?

A Surge of Black Republicans

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/us/politics/05blacks.html?hp

This is an article from the New York Times about black republicans running to be house representatives. I think it is interesting that the article focuses on black republicans because African Americans more commonly vote democratic. The article states that those running feel empowered by Obama’s election and have gained confidence even though they are across party lines. It seems to me that the republicans are realizing the importance in gaining voters of various races in order to compete. One of the republicans running stated that last year he could not gain state support even though he had raised a significant amount of money. This statement makes me wonder, is it absolutely essential to have party and state support in order to win elections? Could this be a partial explanation for the prevailing white majority in government? These queries lead me to question the influence in society that those in power possess.

race as an obsession

I was just scrolling through CNN when I came across this story of a lacrosse girl found dead--thought to be murdered by a lacrosse boy. While the story is a tragedy and the report leaves out any discussion on race, the comments on the story are about race. Granted the story provides the picture of the victim and the suspect, I am fascinated by peoples inability to see the story for what is being told and the desire to start a discussion on race into it.

The debate is about whether or not justice will be served or if the suspect will be found innocent simply because he is white.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/03/virginia.student.killed/index.html?hpt=C2

Natural vs. Aquired color

In recent discussion on skin tone, I have been forced to consider a very confusing reality about the meaning of skin tone. Aside from the simply asking the question, I don't know how to address this.

Why is has it been considered less desirable to be born really dark but yet everyone works on their tan to get dark?

I have been thinking about conversations on skin whitening cream and the idea of not having kids darker than yourself-- but why does it matter?

There seems to be a fine line on when being "dark" becomes an object of qualification/classification. There is the white/"pink", there is olive-skin, light skinned dark, and dark-- and several colors in between. There is also a clear distinction between one who has acquired color and one who was born with color.

When I look through a magazine and see all the ideal models, very few are the pastey pure white that is associated with the "ideal" race. Is physically being white actually beautiful? or is just socially identifying as white that brings this idea of superiority/beauty? If this is about social classification, this would imply that the more important part is the shared history rather than the physical classification...

Another Behavioral Study: Power of Circumstance

On the topic of psychological studies regarding the influence of external environments and the malleability of character traits, I would like to share another interesting study that I once came across.

The aim of the study was to question what makes us help others, when do we express our "Good Samaritan" qualities? The study shows that we behave in a caring manner only when circumstances allow us to, questioning whether personality is influential or not on our actions. I am certainly intrigued with these types of experiments, challenging our assumptions on autonomy. I probably am most interested because it is a serious problem that we need to overcome, or shall I say, would arguably want to overcome due to its severe implications.

Read about the experiment here:

http://www.experiment-resources.com/helping-behavior.html

Free Will, Moral Luck, and Responsibility

We began to scrape the surface today on a deeper debate regarding how moral and circumstantial luck challenge the philosophy of free will and thus moral responsibility. I thought it would be useful and informative then for us to take a look at how to render consistent the two seemingly opposed concepts. Here is an excerpt form the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

"A basic compatibilist strategy is to argue that agents can have control over their actions in the sense required for freedom and/or responsibility even if they do not control the causal determinants of those actions. For example, if one acts with the ability to act in accordance with good reasons (Wolf 1990) or if one acts with “guidance control” which consists in part of acting on a reasons-responsive mechanism for which one has taken responsibility, (Fischer and Ravizza 1998), one can be responsible for one's actions. The key move here is to distinguish between different kinds of factors over which one has no control. If one's actions are caused by factors that one does not control and that prevent one from having or exercizing certain capacities, then one is not responsible. However, if one's actions are caused by factors that one does not control, but that do allow one to have and exercize the relevant capacities, then one can be “in control” of one's actions in the relevant sense, and so responsible for one's actions.

Interestingly, compatibilists are often silent on the question of resultant and circumstantial moral luck, although these forms of luck might represent an underutilized resource for them. For if it turns out that the luck — or lack of control — delivered by determinism is but one source of luck among others, then determinism does not embody a unique obstacle to free will and responsibility, at least when it comes to control. This is to expand the application of a widely used compatibilist strategy to show that when it comes to causal luck, compatibilists are not alone.

For within the free will debate, compatibilists are not alone in accepting the existence of certain types of luck. Many libertarians assume that our actions are caused by prior events (not themselves in our control) in accordance with probabilistic laws of nature (see, for example, Kane 1996, 1999, Nozick 1981). Given this view, it is natural to conclude that if determinism is false, there is at least one kind of luck in what sort of person one decides to be and so in what actions one performs. That is, there is luck in the sense that there is no explanation as to why a person chose to be one way rather than another. At the same time, Kane, for example, denies that there must be luck in the sense that one's choices are flukes or accidents if determinism is false. In Kane's view, what is important is to be free from luck of the second kind. For even if one's action is not determined, it can still be the case that the causes of one's action are one's own efforts and intention. And if one's action is caused by one's own efforts and intentions, then one's action is not lucky in the sense of being a fluke or accident. But while this shows that one's actions can be free of luck of an important kind, it still leaves unaddressed luck of a third kind, namely the kind at issue in the moral luck debate: the dependence of agents' choices on factors beyond their control. And it appears that on the libertarian view in question, our choices are indeed subject to luck of this sort. (See Pereboom (2002) for a discussion of the similar burdens shared by compatibilists and this sort of libertarian.) Only the agent-causal libertarians discussed above offer an account that aims specifically at eliminating a type of moral luck."

Enjoy.

Just wanted to post an article on humane prisons in Norway that I found very relevant with regards to our discussion last Wednesday. Some statistics in the article state that "Within two years of their release, 20% of Norway's prisoners end up back in jail. In the U.K. and the U.S., the figure hovers between 50% and 60%." Evidently one has to factor in that Norway has a much lower level of criminality compared to the UK and US, but still I think that the example of Norwegian prisons could support the position of an massive overhaul of the prison system in other countries.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1986002,00.html#ixzz0mnjMsFCY

Another Reference to "The Problem of Speaking for Others"

As I was reading an article about the newest happenings in the health care/abortion saga, I came across a quote from Representative Janet Long from Florida. She said "stand down if you don't have ovaries" (see article here).

In our class discussion, we compared the idea that only members of a certain race should be able to make decisions about what is best for that race to the issue of governing bodies (which are composed of men) making decisions about abortion (an issue that mostly concerns women). It seems that this Representative, Janet Long, feels strongly about women making decisions for women. But would she also say that whites, Latinos, Asians, etc. should "stand down" and let African Americans make legislative decisions for themselves? And then should everyone in turn "stand down" and let those who identify as Asians make decisions their own legislative decisions? It seems that this process would result in a farce of a political system. It seems that our political system is founded on the basis that members of different groups collectively make a decision based on what is best for the whole. If we allow self-interest to not only dominate but effectively legislate (not that that issue isn't already present given the enormous white majority), it seems that our budget deficit would be even scarier than it is now, but that our Congressional body would have even lower approval ratings.

Racism in our culture

Going along the lines of what we talked about yesterday, how 1 and 3 black men are in prison and how prisons are just part of our culture, reminded me of a psychology study where neutral faces of white and black men were quickly presented and either a picture of a gun or a hammer was shown for a split second after and participants had to say if it was a gun or a hammer. The results supported the hypothesis that people thought the image was a gun 75% more when it was presented after a picture of a black man versus a white man. I just thought that this provides more evidence that in our culture, black men are stereotypes as aggressive and most likely to commit a crime.

Faulted System

The system that Mauer outlines in the chapter is full of inconsistencies. First, to disenfranchise a felon for life does not make sense especially when "99 percent of felons have not been convicted of electoral offenses." The worst part about this is that in some states electoral offenses are only misdemeanors. As a result, those who do get caught tampering with votes or the electoral process are not subject to disenfranchisement, yet someone convicted of a petty one time drug offense may not be able to vote for the remainder of their lives.

Often times, these felons' votes are valuable. The amount of felons who are unable to vote is so significant that Mauer claims "disenfranchisement policies have affected the outcome of seven U.S. senate races from 1970-1998." Assuming that the majority of these felons would have voted democratic, "disenfranchisement prevented Democratic control of the Senate from 1986 to 2000." I just think that this is kind of crazy to think about.

Perverse Incentives

Corporations are money making machines. If we assume rationality (which is a basic economic premise), corporations respond to incentives due to their focus on maximizing profit. Prisons are a great example of this occurrence, yet, in this case, it is a PERVERSE incentive that drives the desire to put more people in prison for longer. Moreover, this perverse incentive is linked to our ideas on race and classism. It is a good starting point to think more about what perverse incentive structures exist in regards to race? Certainly predatory pricing falls under this category. Any other thoughts?

Racially-Themed Parties and Post-racial White America

I saw this great article, and given our conversations in class about 'themed' parties, this seemed appropriate as the phenomenon appears to be a larger trend. The findings of this study (that 'color-blind' white students tend not to be offended by racially-themed parties) argue that eliminating race from people's view allows for desensitization to the offensiveness of racialized stereotypes. What do you think?

Definition of ghetto

• formerly the restricted quarter of many European cities in which Jews were required to live; "the Warsaw ghetto"
• any segregated mode of living or working that results from bias or stereotyping; "the relative security of the gay ghetto"; "no escape from the ghetto of the typing pool"
• a poor densely populated city district occupied by a minority ethnic group linked together by economic hardship and social restrictions
  wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

This is the definition of ghetto. I've always wondered why young people today use the word ghetto to describe something that is old or crappy? Saying things like "that's so ghetto" is usually in reference to an object that is broken or a person that acts like a stereotypical black person. I know that words and their meanings change over time but the way the word is used today usually implies something to do with the stereotypical black community.

Any thoughts?

Racism as a Pathological Condition

I would like to start off by saying that I disagree so fervently with this position that it made me angry to just read the Zack's words on the page. I am personally of the opinion that people frequently blame all sorts of things that are really under their control on a medical "condition" in order to escape culpability for their actions. Some common examples are: Tiger Woods and his "sex addiction", the millions of people who all of a sudden need adderal in order to do school work, etc. I would also like to say that these things certainly are real conditions, but in my opinion only exist in a fraction of those people who claim to suffer from the illness. Call me an existentialist.

Because of my VERY strong opinion on the issue of free will, I was enraged when I read the account of racism as a pathology that runs from the bottom of pages 47 to the top of page 48 in Thinking About Race. ("If racists are judged to be emotionally disturbed simply because they are racists, this lifts their moral responsibility for the harm done . . .). However, this reminded me of a cartoon a friend, who knows my nearly cathartic opinion on the topic of moral responsibility, sent to me.

Here's the link!

In Response to "What is Good Hair?"

Chishala's post "What is Good Hair?" reminded me of a song called "I Am Not My Hair" by India.Arie and Akon. I think the song also relates the documentary we watched in class about beauty in African American women. I will post both the lyrics and the youtube link--- let me know what you think. Based on what we saw in the video/your understanding, do you think it's an accurate representation or just the experience of one woman?

Link: I Am Not My Hair

[Akon]
Uh-huh
See I can kinda recall
(Little ways back)
Small tryin' to ball
(Always been black)
And my hair I tried it all
(I even went flat)
Had a Gumby curly top and all the crap, now (ohhh)
Was tryin' to be (appreciated)
Nappy headed brothers never had (no ladies) (no ladies)
Then I Hit by the barber shop (real quick )
had the mini little (twist) and it drove them crazy (drove 'em crazyyy)
And then I couldn't get (no job)
Cause corporate wasn't hiring (no dreadlocks) (oh-no)
Then I thought about my dogs (on the block)
Kinda understand why they chose to (steal and rob) (uh-huh)
Was it the hair that (got me this far?) (uh-huh)
All these girls these (cribs these cars) (uh-huh)
Hate to say it but it (seems so flaw)
Success didn't come 'til I (cut it all off) (uh-huh)

[India.Arie]
Little girl with the press and curl
Age eight I got a Jheri curl
Thirteen then I got a relaxer
I was a source of so much laughter
Fifteen when it all broke off
Eighteen when I went all natural
February 2002 I
Went on and did what I had to do (oh)
Because it was time to change my life
To become the woman that I am inside
'97 dreadlocks all gone
I looked in the mirror for the first time and saw that
HEY...

[Chorus]
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am not your ex-pec-tations no no (heyy)
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am a soul that lives within

[India.Arie]
Good hair means curls and waves (no)
Bad hair means you look like a slave (no)
At the turn of the century
It's time for us to redefine who we be
You can shave it off
Like a South African beauty
Got it on lock
Like Bob Marley
You can rock it straight
Like Oprah Winfrey
If its not what's on your head
It's what's underneath and say
HEY....

[Chorus]
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am not your ex-pec-tations no no (heyy)
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am a soul that lives within

[Akon]
Who cares if you don't like that
With nothin' to lose posted with the wave cap
When the cops tryin' to harass
Cause I got waves
Aint seen nothin' like that in all my days (noo...)
Man, you gotta change all these feelings
They be judging one another by their appearance
Yes, India I feel ya girl
Now ahead, talk to the rest of the world
Cause, cause, cause

[India.Arie][Bridge]
(oh, oh, oh)
Does the way I wear my hair make me a better person?
(Whoa, whoa, whoa)
Does the way I wear my hair make me a better friend? nooo...
(Whoa, whoa, whoa)
Does the way I wear my hair determine my integrity?
(Whoa, whoa, whoa)
I am expressing my creativity...

[India.Arie]
Breast Cancer and Chemotherapy
Took away her crowning glory
She promised God if she was to survive
She would enjoy everyday of her life ooh...
On national television
Her diamond eyes are sparkling
Bald headed like a full moon shining
Singing out to the whole wide world like
HEY...

[Chorus 2x's]
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am not your ex-pec-tations no no (heyy)
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am a soul that lives within

(source: http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/i-am-not-my-hair-lyrics-india-arie/531ba18215ef78ce4825710b002a28b2)

interacial romances

i was listening to this South African radio, and the Dj was raising and opening this question out to the listeners, and am going to pass that on to you guys

so he asked, why is it that the most influential (very successful, maybe in sports, entertainment or whatever) black person will go for any plain old white person, actually he said influential black male will go for a plain white female, while a successful white male will go for the most good looking, ideal-body endowed black female?

i thought that was interesting
what do you guys think?
i mean of course there are exceptions

white goddess cookies

Yesterday when I went to Riverside Cafe for lunch, I couldn't help but to realize the "White Goddess" cookies. Perhaps it was because of our museum tour and the whole discussion on the purity of white in art-- but I found the name to be quite interesting.

What could make a cookie warrant such a name?

what is good hair?

after the clip we watched in class i couldnt help but get stuck watching some Tyra Banks, and her show is entitled what is good hair?
one of the striking things that were said is that the reason why African Americans want straight flowy hair (which is the good hair) is because during slavery it was your means for survival, it meant that you had more chance of being appointed to work in the house so you would have access to food, water, shelter and all those necessesities as opposed to one with the darker skin and nappier hair ( by the way nappy hair is kinky, matted hair, kind of like what i have :)).
so then the older generation see straight hair as your means to a better life even though they will not admit to this because it is so ingraved in their subconscious, but the new generatiion are now examining this trend and seeing the harm that chemically straightening your hair can do.
one of the women here said that her mother kicked her out and will not introduce her to people because she is ashamed of her daughter coz of her hair.
i thought that was something
check out the videos if you have the time see the whole 5 videos

The taboo of race: When racial preference is rational

I would like to begin this post by stating that I withhold my personal moral judgement on the following comment/question that I am about to raise.

Today in the video, several curious opinions were expressed. A girl said that all else fixed, she would choose to marry a man with the lighter skin, for she would rather not have dark skin in her gene pool. If we take this statement at face value, in our post-modern economy, it is difficult to assign any blame or fault to the individual preferring light to dark skin, rather we should acknowledge the rationality of such a preference. We see this in many other forms. All else fixed, would you choose the short or tall man, fit or overweight, ugly or stunning? All your choices, while they may be aesthetically based, also play into the economics of individual characteristics that are used as assets in the work force. Unfortunate as it may be, it is nevertheless a reality that employers tend to gravitate and offer greater opportunity to those bearing certain characteristics. The majority of CEO's are tall white men and there is a reason for it, be it merely an extension of the white man's privilege. Nevertheless, certain features open up a greater potential for success than others. This is a saddening yet undeniable fact of the capitalist society we partake in.

Thus, following this line of reasoning, and assuming that individuals are self-interested, it is fully rational, in an economic, game-theory competitive respect, for a women to want to marry a man with lighter skin. She is simple acknowledging the unfortunate fact that he might have a greater chance for success. THIS ARGUMENT IS NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS SOCIAL TRUTH, BUT IT SIMPLY IS SPEAKING IN TERMS OF MECHANISTIC RATIONALITY.

If we want to address racism, we should be less concerned with the women who wants to marry a lighter skin male, and more focused on addressing the heart of the issue, which is why a lighter skin male has a better chance for success. This is the root of the problem, and most likely involves an effort similar to the self-empowerment movement described by du Bois.

Travel

I have been thinking about how traveling is correlated to whiteness. In my art history class my professor explained where the term tourist originated. The word comes from the idea of the grand tour, which was a popular activity for educated individuals in the 17^th century. In order to complete ones education, one would travel through Europe and study antiquity. The grand tour was reserved for people who were white, wealthy, and well educated. Before Dr. Moore mentioned that traveling was a white idea, I did not comprehend that fact. I understand why the grand tour was correlated to wealth and whiteness, but why is the idea of traveling still correlated to whiteness, why is wanting to understand and experience other cultures a white idea? Maybe my impression of traveling is skewed since I grew up immersed in the concept, but traveling has led me to want to live outside of the United States, study other cultures, and learn more about the world. I do not think that these things are necessarily bad, and the way we discussed traveling in class seemed to have a tone of negativity. Is traveling bad, or is it only something reserved for higher socioeconomic classes; therefore, a luxury correlated with whiteness?

I have been meaning to post this link in regards to what we discussed last class involving the subject of "whiteness." In her book, Zack talked about the fact that the idea of "white" is divided into different stereotypes- for example, the stereotype of "white trash," or whites who have not conformed to the "moral standards and tastes" of middle and upper class whites. However, it is clear that there also exist some stereotypes for those middle and upper class whites- many involving money and the materialistic lifestyle. This blog, called "Stuff White People Like," seems particularly relevant- it makes fun of stereotypes about middle and upper class white people while perhaps acknowledging some of the truths behind them, but with a dose of humor. Some of the most interesting articles on the site involve the idea of race and white guilt such as #71 and #73.
Check out the blog here: http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/

American Beauty

I have been meaning to post this for sometime mostly in response to Darcy Bullock's essay regarding the cover page of Vanity Fair. The fact that white is a common attribute of beauty and sexual appeal for women in our culture is a persisting problem. Based on the doll tests performed in Harlem by Kenneth and Mamie Clark in the 1940s, a high school student recently conducted doll tests intended to detect whether or not attitudes toward race and beauty were still persistent. She filmed her study as a documentary. Although I was unable to retrieve a copy of the documentary unedited, here is a link to the news story:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqSFqnUFOns

Also, just wondering what you guys thought about this commercial.
Its for vitamin water.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYVboYqxuDc

Since being in this class, becoming knowledgeable and learning to articulate the different vocabulary that relates to race, I wonder, if put in an uncomfortable situation where someone has said a racial slur/something derogatory, would you actually stand up and say something? In my CCOR facilitating group we are talking about personal/group goals that we would like to accomplish. Many people in my group have said that they will no longer ignore when a friend/acquaintance/stranger/family member says something wrong.

Go Meat!

I saw this Hillshire Farm commercial the other day and naturally our class came to mind. All I can say is have a look and see if you too see anything wrong with it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_CmXCU_LKw

Just a couple of things that stuck out to me were the clothes that the white people wore and how the white girl has this awkwardly off beat clap. Personally I have never seen someone tie a sweater around their shoulders at a cookout. Also I noticed that the black guy has got this little dance to the song and that he throws a "say what" in there. Any thoughts?

Should African-American history be taught in schools?

When doing research for my critical essay, I have noticed that most primary high school institutions primarily focus on how white people founded and made America what it is today. I have found many reasons for why African-American history should be taught in high schools, but I want to know what you think. Do you think it is important to educate our youth not only on how white people colonized America but also how black people played a role in creating America today? Do you think it would help eliminate racism if everyone had this knowledge?

Speaking for Others

A few words in response to our class discussion on speaking for others. It is important to analyze the act of speaking for an external group both quantitatively and qualitatively. Regarding the former, emphasis should be placed on the degree to which this type of event occurs. Every day in every form possible, be it politics or a friendly conversations regarding sports. We use it on a daily basis and it serves the pragmatic role of progressing academia, intellect, and the spread of information. Qualitatively, what does it really consist of?

Well in simplest terms, it essentially is trying to describe a certain event/idea from an "outsiders" perspective. It might be trying to make an argument through citing other peoples experiences. In this sense, it is exactly what we do when we write any research paper. So why then not evaluate it on these terms, as a teacher would grade a paper for accuracy, representation, and breadth of content. Why can't we look at speaking for others through such a lens, and assess its "legitimacy" or "authenticity" based on the degree and depth of its references. It is a very practical approach and generally in line with how we commonly assess speeches or arguments made. Does this person know what he is talking about? Hm, well he did spend x amount of time with the group he is talking about and has talked to x amount of people in depth about the issue. So yes he does have a degree of reliability. Instead of attacking the "morality" or even the epistemic ability for speaking for others, why can't we instead look at it as we would view a paper or a website. Whatever sparks our intuition of why a source is reliable, should be a good ground to base our judgement on authenticity in terms of those speaking for others.

Is "Learnid" even a word?

My senior year in high school I had an English/Social Studies teacher that always said she was "learnid." She would say so only when we were questioning something and she knew she was right. Because she had been through college and graduate school, she could speak with more authority than anyone of us on most subjects. At the end of class today, the point was made that no one should speak at or for, but simply speak to a group so that a conversation could ensue. I don't agree with this statement in its entirety. I think that there is a time and place for dialogue, and most often its necessary and productive. However, why do we and those before us bother to go through college and grad school if we don't have the right to speak about what we've learned? By graduation, after hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent, are we not considered learned individuals in our field of expertise? Can we not speak at a group of economically destitute individuals about economics or how about to a racially segregated intercity high school about racism? Sure, these peoples location provides them with more experience-oriented authority, but shouldn't the economist or philosopher's opinion be more valued?
I know there are exceptions to this argument, and as I've said there are certain situations that call for dialogue. I think most of those situations are extremes that cannot be simply written about, but must be lived. The one experience that sticks out in my mind is going to war. Unless you've seen combat first hand then there's no way you can really speak about it. Obviously, I've never been to war, but seeing my Uncle, a US Marine, struggle after coming home from his combat duty makes me certain its not something that I can learn about in a book. But I'm digressing from my original point, I believe the intellectual has the right to speak for, at, and to a group about their subject area. And can someone tell me if "learnid" is a word? I'm not an English major.

What does it mean to be white?

In watching the amazing race tonight, one man says something like "I can't dance and I have no rhythm; I am as white as can be."

This reminded me of a conversation we once had in class and really got me to wonder what it means to be "white." Is white generic? flareless?

Why is being white associated with lacking unique characteristics?

What are the positive and negative stereotypes of being white?

In thinking about what I know about white stereotypes the things that come to mind are:
white men can't jump
no rhythm
can't dance
preppy or "white trash"
not as athletic

What do you think it means to be white?

the authority to speak on racism

We've talked a lot in our class about what gives someone the authority to comment credibly on a certain racial group. There was an article in the New York times today, which is about the recent comparisons between Pope Benedict XVI and World War II Pope Pius XII. The relevant part of the article is the following quote,

"On Good Friday, the preacher of the papal household, the Rev. Raniero Cantalamessa, delivered a sermon in St. Peter’s Square, citing a letter that he said was from a Jewish friend who had compared what he called 'the violent and concentric attacks against the church' to anti-Semitism, angering both victims and Jewish groups."

My participation in this class made me notice something that I don't think I would have noticed before. In order to make this letter credible, it had to be from a Jewish friend. Not a historian, theologian, philosopher, or International Studies researcher. In my opinion, a thorough knowledge of the subject matter (history, Catholocism, etc) would make someone much more qualified to make that statement than someone who is simply, and solely identified as, a member of a specific religious group. Just an timely example of one of the recurrent themes in our class.

Fair or Unfair Generalizations

At moments in our class, we have bumped into the discussion on the practicality of racial generalizations. Grouping individuals for say economic, organizational, or simply dialectical purposes. Similar generalizations occur frequently on a variety of topics. "I like all fruits," "The Northeast is cold." "White men can't jump." Generalizations help us navigate the world and function more efficiently. Yet some generalizations are deemed offensive or simply unjustified, while others seem reasonable. My question to the class is if you think there are qualitative terms to judge the morality and acceptability of making certain generalizations?

Socioeconomic status and race

In my senior psychology seminar, a study was presented where white doctors that were treating black, latino, white, and asian children asked fewer standard questions to the black and latino children because they believed they had lower socioeconomic status', therefore were less educated and wouldn't understand all the questions. A stereotype is that asians are the "good race" meaning that they are the one's trying to get a better education, study long hours, etc...We have talked about race and socioeconomic status together before, but I am wondering what you think of this study. Do you think that the stereotype that black and latino's do not have as high of an academic background as their white and asian counterparts will ever go away? It seemed to me like the doctors were taking stereotypes to the extreme.

"Some theorists have suggested that when such a rigidity around racial identity manifests itself among oppressed, it is the result of the internalization of oppression and acceptance of racist, self-denigrating cultural values." (The Idea of Race p. 143)

To me, this quote (which is not Alcoff's opinion-- but drawn from another source), leaves out an important dynamic that we mentioned in class about minorities choosing to identify with the title forced upon them. Of course, no rational would choose to be a member of a marginalized group purely for the sake of being marginalized. However, this quote seems to me to attribute the racial rigidity among minorities as totally involuntary and as a result of negative forces. I, however, disagree that the acceptance of racist, denigrating self values must be at the root of this phenomenon. Some minorities, such as the mulattoes who chose to be identified solely as "Negro" even if they could pass for white, embrace a form of racial purity and rigidity for other reasons, such as: genuine affection for that minority group and distaste for white, to make a point about race, etc.

embarrassment

this is after reading the speech by Zadie Smith
towards the end she says; "It's amazing how many of our cross-cultural and cross-class encounters are limited not by hate or pride or shame, but by another equally insidious, less discussed, emotion: embarrassment."

i thought that is very interesting, for me her whole speech was very relevant because i think i can relate to it somewhat, when i went home over jan plan, i was told that my accent has changed and i sound American, this was said with various tones, some people seemed envious, others disgusted and others mockingly, all of these reactions made me feel embarrassed, so that i tried as much as i could to go back to my Swazi accent, which by the way i have never had because i went to an international school which had its own melange of accents which resulted in an undeterminable accent

and then here at Colby, i have been told that if i do not speak like the American person i will not be taken seriously and no one will understand me, i have found that most of the time am understood and taken seriously, but there are times when am not, and i have to say something with an American accent which by the way my American friends will say is not an American accent
on the same note, when i talk with other international students especially Africans, i automatically, well most times, have some 'African' manner of speech when i talk

so i think i will have to agree with Smith, that embarrassment is definitely an emotion that can characterize (for lack of a word) our cross-cultural encounters, one feels the need to fit in so much so that it is at times even involuntary

am wondering if anyone else in the class has a similar experience or just what people think

reality of racism

Maybe it is my peaked awareness, maybe its something else, but lately I have felt that stories about racism in America have been everywhere.

I recently came across an article in the Boston Globe about the desires for a colorless society and thought the article was quite dreamy, but unrealistic. Soon after, there was a comment published from a reader about how great the idea was but arguing that deciding not to identify race doesn't do the trick. The United States has a racist history and this cannot be ignored. People may believe they are not racist, but it almost seems unnatural that someone could actually be oblivious to race and the stereotypes associated with them. In order for the United States to truly overcome racism, it must look it straight in the face and admit to it, accept it, dialog about it, and work to reconcile it.

This story caught my eye over spring break:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/03/18/sotvo.walmart.customers.react.wpvi?iref=allsearch

--while maybe on not such a large scale, incidents like this happen all the time. What should our responsibility be in reconciling this? It doesn't seem like enough to say that I'm not racist, so I am doing my part.

The Bad Translator

After completing an exam, I found myself sitting on my computer avoiding work; therefore, I began to stumble. The popular website stumbleupon.com took me to site with a BAD translator! I was typing in anything I could to see what would come out and on my desk was the book The Idea of Race. I typed in the title to see what would come out and the result after 25 translations of various languages was “the idea that competition.” Even though the point of the site was silly and to mess up the phrase, the translation acknowledges an important concept. Between different groups there is conflict and competition, and this is evident in the history of races. Also, I think that this site points out how complicated the communication process is and the problematic barriers in understanding that can ensue due to the inadequacies of human's capability to comprehend differences in cultures.

Racist vs. Racial

Yesterday morning I was watching the show 1st in 10 on ESPN when they brought up a topic that is relevant to our class. They were discussing whether or not a certain college basketball player named Gordon Heyward should enter the NBA draft after only his sophomore year at Butler University. Initially they weighed the pros and cons, but then someone brought up the potential benefits for the league if a white player were to become a superstar. The entire issue was hypothetical, but it was interesting to see the different attitudes surrounding it. The reporters (both black and white) agreed that it would be good if there was another white NBA superstar, but instead of using the term "white" and including several white Europeans in the NBA, they used the term "North American Caucasian" throughout the debate. Many people argue that since Larry Bird's retirement the league has seen no such star (although some might say Steve Nash). One of the reporters (a middle-aged white male) stated that he (and friends that were around his age) would love to see a white superstar in a league that is predominately represented by African-Americans. He said that it is easier for him to relate to a player like Gordon with things like dribbling and passing, but that he could not relate to players like LeBron James (one of the most talented, strong and athletic players that the game has ever seen). When things really began to heat up, one of the reporters attempted to point out that the topic as a whole was racial and not racist. I just thought that it was weird to wake up and see this racially charged debate on TV right before we had class. Anyways I am skeptical that the whole topic was only racial. Is it racist if the one reporter and other people like him prefer a white NBA superstar? I don't know I am just trying to see if any of you have thoughts on the issue.

Student Election Sign

I know that the elections have been over for a while, but I wanted to ask for opinions concerning one of the signs displayed in Dana. The poster said something along the lines of vote for us we’re ethnic. The students who made the poster were a white girl and a black male, while the opposition was two white students. I talked to some students on campus and some said that they were very offended but a few thought it was funny. After seeing this poster I realized that most of the pairs running for office were very diverse. Does this diversity give the candidates an advantage? Do you think these students were exploiting their diversity in order to gain votes? Were their methods appropriate?

Anyone ever Heard of Avenue Q?

We watched this in our first CCOR meeting.
Like I said today, EVERYONE is a little bit racist...
Have a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbQiSVeQwVQ

The DeWolf's

First of all I applaud Katrina Browne for having it in her to do all of this, it took a lot and clearly she invested a lot of her time and money in it.
Moving on...
She said something to the effect of the DeWolf slave trade money ran out, but the family maintained its elite status because of other sources of income like cotton, sugar, railroads, etc. To me it seemed like she was trying to say after the original DeWolf's noone really benefited monetarily from the slave trade. It sounded like she was trying to say that they kept their status by branching out, but really all of those industries were fueled by the slave trade and slavery. I do not know if this statement was meant how I am interpreting it, but that is what it sounded like to me. I want to know if anyone is on board with me on this one?

Psychological well-being

Previous research has found that African-Americans have more psychological distress from being subject to racism. Recent investigations have found that when black's have positive ingroup attitudes, their psychological health is improved. In social psychology, I learned that almost everyone wants to feel like they are a part of something bigger than themselves; we want to feel like we fit in somewhere. The issue of how people from the same race always hang out together has been brought up before. But if you explain that with this psychological health research, then it makes sense. What do you think about this issue of psychological health? Do you think because racism is becoming less of a problem that people will start socailizing in more diverse groups or has this already happened?

civil discourse & parties

To continue on a previous topic of interest to me and to the class:

As the year is nearing its end, my roommate and I have been tossing ideas around about the final party we want to throw in our room. Naturally, the party must be themed (because if it's not themed, it's not Colby). Last night, (what I thought was) a brilliant idea hit me. A WHITE TRASH BASH. How great does that sound? But then I remembered this class. And it made me think-- is a white trash themed party offensive?

First of all, it is obviously targeting a certain racial group. But not only that, it is focusing in on a specific part of that group, and mocking its members for their cringe-worthy habits. However, as a friend of mine pointed out, most of those habits could probably be attributed to their poverty or lack of education. And most people are not entirely responsible for their economic status or level of education-- it's somewhat inherited as a facet of the class to which they belong. And the class to which a person belongs is, generally speaking, hereditary.

What do you all think, is a white trash bash offensive? Is it any more acceptable to make fun of someone for their class than for their race?

post-spring break observations

Pick any dry spot on campus. Stand there and count to fifty, looking closely at the students who pass. It's hard to miss the newly tanned physiques of the many members of the Colby student body. Indeed, many kids have just returned from vacations in Florida, the Caribbean, and various other sunny locales. While you're standing there, listen closely. I'm sure you'll hear at least one excited declaration to the effect of "ohh my gosh you're sooo tan! how was your break?" It certainly seems that students are intentionally skimping on the sunscreen in order to obtain the coveted sun-kissed look. However, it seems that this contrasts with the desire for extreme whiteness we had previously ascribed to peoples both white and non-white.

In several classes, we have talked about the desire to appear as white as possible that pervaded society in previous centuries. However, in traversing across campus on this rainy day, it is apparent that this desire for pallor has not manifested itself in the student body.

My question for this class is, what changed? Why is it all of a sudden desirable to appear as dark-skinned, not as light-skinned, as possible? Is it because some of the things that whiteness indicated in past centuries are no longer relevant (ie. whiteness was considered desirable because it meant that the person didn't have to go outside and do manual labor and thus were wealthy)? Or is it a product of the change in cultural status of non-whites?

Gay Men of Color

An interesting topic came up in my gender class that has bearing on our discussions. The situation of gay men of color is described as a "matrix of domination." Depending on the individual, some of them relate as a person of color, while others as a homosexual, and still others as both. The article, entitled "They Don't Want to Cruise Your Type: Gay Men of Color and the Racial Politics of Exclusion," discusses how in their communities these men are subject to racism, sexual discrimination, and homophobia. They experience racism in both hetero and homosexual society. They experience a unique form of discrimination as many people don't believe that a man of color would be homosexual, and are treated awkwardly even at gay bars. On top of all of this, they experience the same type of homophobia that all gay men experience when they are accepted as being homosexual. I thought this was interesting because it truly illustrates a complete "matrix of domination," or the idea that you cannot merely look at one single act or picture, but must view the complete experience of a person to see just how much they are oppressed. Think about that the next time we talk about individual racist actions and oppressions, there's always more to it.

Racial Profiling

After seeing racial profiling as one of the possible topics for the research project I began to wonder how frequently the police do it today. I’ve heard the commonly joked about saying that “Driving While Black” is sometimes enough to get someone of color pulled over, but to what extent is this statement true in modern society?

Anyways I found this article:

http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/maryland-court-orders-state-police-turn-over-racial-profiling-records

that shows how a Maryland court just ordered the Maryland State Police (MSP) to release their records on interior investigations into racial profiling. Apparently, there have been 100 official complaints alleging racial profiling by the MSP since 2003. Data proves that non-whites are pulled over in traffic stops much more often and are frequently asked to exit the vehicle so that the officers can conduct an unwarranted search. Out of these 100 complaints that have been investigated, there have been no disciplinary actions taken against any of the department’s officers.

It is a very interesting article that proves racial profiling still exists and how there is not much being done to put an end to it. Does anyone have someone that they know (friend, family member, etc.) that has been a victim of racial profiling?

White Privilege Checklist

The following are examples of ways white individuals have privilege because they are white. Please read the list and place a check next to the privileges that apply to you or that you have encounterd

1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time

2. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race

3. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin colour not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility

4. I can worry about racism without being seen as self interested or self seeking

5.I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group

6. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the "person in charge" I will be facing a person of my race

7. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singles out because of my race

8. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" colour and have them more or less match my skin

9. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race

10. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be my race

11. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race

12. I can easily buy posters, picture books, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race

13. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race (sort of what I was trying to get at in class today)

How many of these did you check?

Are all of these examples based on race alone?

How does class (socio-economic status) play into this checklist?

What about appearance? Or the way you talk?

Should the white population feel guilty for white privilege?

do we have racial souls?

in the introduction(sorry this takes us back) of Hackett in the discussion of Du Bois' proposed definition of race it says that he maintained that a study of history will show that although based on the physical the identity of a racial group infinitely transcends biological difference. that race in this sense referes to a subtle cultural bond that is more spiritual, psychic, than physical.(page xiv)

so this got me wondering, do we have racial souls? was he turning to the spiritual because there are biological/scientific trustworthy explanations for the differences we see? is this approach significant today, or of benefit today? if we say we have racial souls, doesnt that go along with the description of race as characterized by moral qualities, (i think spiritual and moral go together), and isnt that problematic?
what do people think?

Ivy League nude posture photos: Phantoms of American Eugenics

Although it is more of a historical note, it is often forgotten how far the eugenics dogma had penetrated American academia. Up until the 1970's several studies were conducted at participating Ivy league schools which sought to explain social structure in racial terms. Most famous of these studies, was a project run by William Herbert Sheldon in which freshmen students were photographed naked and measured. This study lasted up into the mid 1970's when it was subsequently terminated. The following schools participated in the project: Harvard Universit, Mount Holyoke College, Princeton University, Radcliffe College, Smith College, Swarthmore College, Vassar College, Wellesley College, and Yale University. Below is a link to The New York Time's article on the exposure of the study, but please feel free to post any other articles or links to the actual study.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/15/magazine/the-great-ivy-league-nude-posture-photo-scandal.html?pagewanted=1

The Gerber Generation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3MYNBF0tBw&feature=related
When a Gerber commercial appeared while I was watching hulu, I was very excited to see the wide variety of races. The commercial says to meet the Gerber generation, and displays many different images of children strung together in order to create a unified moving image like a flipbook. I was impressed by the commercial and was glad to see that Gerber was making a conscious effort to use all different types of races. I thought it was cool that the children got older as the video progressed; however, I was a little startled when the commercial broke the pattern at the end. The pleasant tune and swapping images come to an abrupt halt when a white baby giggles. The baby’s face resembles the famous baby that is imposed on all Gerber products, the classic Gerber baby. Even though the commercial portrays diversity, the message remains befuddled by the overarching stereotype that is embedded into Gerber’s marketing. Consistency for marketing is good for companies, but is it beneficial for society if these marketing symbols depict one race over another? Is the new Gerber generation overshadowed by Gerber's old ways?

implict/explicit messages

I thought this starbucks commercial was really interesting. There is a really something interesting about what races/ethnicities should and shouldn't mix. I am not sure why they would chose to make an ad like this-- maybe because its the kind of ridiculous that makes you laugh but shouldnt because its not PC at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3kpyJI2JBo


I'm interested in hearing what other people think about this.

I am...

not racist at all. But apparently, I am! I just took the IAT online which is basically an unconscious measure of your preference for european or african americans. My result was that I strongly preferred european americans. It takes about 8 minutes and is well worth it. Post your results and talk about how valid you think they are!

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/takeatest.html

Go to "Take a Demo Test" and choose RACE IAT.

the hipocrisy of dogead (?)

During a recent class discussion, someone brought up ethnic holidays at Colby. There have been several incidents in the past few years during which students have felt that their respective culture was not appropriately celebrated or revered during an ethnically themed celebration.

Although I believe that those claims are quite legitimate and deserve attention, I thought our class might turn its attention to the most recent "holiday": Colby's celebration of "Doghead".

For those of you who have been living under a rock, Doghead is Colby's celebration of St. Patrick's day. Students stay up all night Friday night, drinking and partying until they run (or stumble) to the steps of Miller to watch the sunrise on Saturday morning. Traditionally, students all go to breakfast at Dana intoxicated Saturday morning, go off campus Saturday afternoon, and continue their festivities through Saturday night.

Obviously, this agenda is generalized. Not every Colby student even participates in Doghead, and there are certainly a significant number of students who participate but do not consume alcohol. However, no one who wandered the halls of Dana/the Apartments last night or was present for the sunrise could deny that alcohol played an enormous role in the festivities. And although alcohol consumption is a normal part of a weekend at Colby, I dare say that alcohol consumption is higher than normal this weekend.

My question is the following: why is it okay to take this particular holiday (St. Patrick's day-- which is obviously linked to the Irish country and culture) and turn it into a themed drinking marathon with very limited accurate ties to Irish culture, if the whole school seems to freak out when the same thing is done to a minority culture? And, why isn't the administration all over this festitivity, when they claim to be making every effort to reduce the racial/ethnic stereotypes and prejudice? Granted, the administration does not officially sponsor Doghead, but it did not officially sponsor the majority of the parties that caused outrage in previous years.

Is it the in group/out group issue? Is it because St. Patrick's Day is a "white" holiday, and the majority of Colby students are white, it's okay to disgrace a national and religious holiday with drunken debauchery?

And although many of us might not think about it this way, when you consider it, Doghead really somwhat enforces stereotypes about the Irish. Colby students arguably drink more on Doghead than any other day of the year. And what is the stereotype about the Irish? That they're drunks.

I'm interested to hear the opinion of the class on this issue. What do you all think? Do you think likening Doghead to the previous parties is a fair comparison? And if so, why do you think this particular facet of this issue is so largely ignored when others are so incendiary?

Black Barbie Sold Cheaper Than White Barbie

After having written our papers on racism in contemporary media, I thought this news article would be of interest. Is Walmart being racist or rational?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/black-barbie-sold-white-barbie-walmart-store/story?id=10045008

Phylogenic diversity map

Today, in my evolution and diversity class, my professor had a power point slide of this map, which represents the phylogenic diversity of mitochondrial DNA in humans. When this map came onto the screen I was astonished immediately.

Even though Africa is the origin of the tree and it has the most diversity, the pie chart on the image suggests that Africa has the least amount of diversity. The populations measured with more acuity represent the compelling interest of the person who is creating this map. Also, the color scheme chosen for the earlier categories, which are combined into three large groups, are represented by a gray scale while the rest of the phylogenic groups have colors of the rainbow. Even though this map is based on scientific measurements, the map seems to be depict certain races over others in a type of phylogenic hierarchy.

Heredity and Culture Reading

As I have not yet had the benefit of discussing this reading in class, my perception may not be as clear as it could be. However, I think that the main idea of the "Heredity and Culture" reading is as follows: one cannot attribute behaviors or tendencies of a group of people to their race or ethnicity without a historical and anthropological understanding of that group's circumstances. Avoiding these presumptions will help to prevent sweeping, unfounded generalizations based on race. Also, Alain Locke is calling for an academic implementation of the understanding of the difference between correlation and causality.

"Heredity and Culture" was published in 1924. My question is, HOW DID IT TAKE THIS LONG for these points to come to the forefront of academic thought? Calculus was discovered in the 1600s. Advancements in physics leading to the discovery of quantam mechanics were made in 1897. How could it have possibly taken us until 1924 to come to the conclusion that we cannot just attribute cultural characteristics to racial determination without any understanding of that group's history?

This past weekend I was at a birthday party for one of my good friends when a gangster rap song came on and the 'n' word blared from the speakers. Most of my friends are like me and don't like the use of the 'n' word in any context so I was sort of surprised. I decided to change the song. But then some slightly intoxicated guy, who I know but am not close friends with, got annoyed that I kept changing the songs he wanted to listen to and we ended up having an argument about the use of the 'n' word. I'm a pretty stubborn person and so I didn't just give up and let him play the song. Afterwards one of my friends came up to me and said that the whole discussion was awkward and unnecessary. What would you do in a situation like that? Do you just think that you should say something? Or do you actually act upon what you believe is right?

Bigotry in the Online Gaming Community.

I have a confession to make. I am a gamer. At around the ripe age of three I was indoctrinated into the mind numbing subculture of video gaming and I have remained there ever since.

Historically speaking video gaming (I will refer to it as "gaming" from now on) was a communal, corporeal, and all around a social practice that has since degenerated. Originally console gaming was only enjoyable in a face to face setting which often took place in public (arcades), and, as a result, tended to be highly social in nature. Although competitive, these environments were all around friendly social settings which often understood their occupants by the quality of each others abilities and not by outside social constructions.

With the advent of massive multiplayer online gaming (MMO for short), however, this community of corporeal gamers has since degenerated into solitary adolescents crouched in the dark before the buzz of a glowing screen shouting anonymously over a foam mic at strangers. Please don't get me wrong, I am one of them so to speak (I mean that I play video games not practice bigotry), but I must admit that most of the interactions that now take place amidst this subculture tend to the crude and racists.
It must be said that this phenomenon has arisen in large part due to a feeling of anonymity. Similar to the social psychology of group think, individuals in these online settings lack a feeling of responsibility or connection to their behavior. Much like the invisible man or Plato's "ring of gyges" story, the anonymity in the gaming community gives us a dark glimpse at our nature unopposed by our social inhibitions.

Below is an article which talks briefly on the subject, and although I do not want to go into great detail about the actual bigotry that can be found over the speakers of the modern mmo, I do want to point out that it is unclear how much of the racism is actually intended to target and/or subjugate members of a race. The brutishness of mmo dialog, after all, isn't limited to racism and this makes me suspect that racism is incorporated because of its stigma as being hyper antisocial in modern society. Please let me know what you think.

The following is a link to an article which deals with this topic:

implicit and unintentional racism.

Hi guys,
I thought I'd share this with all of you. I first heard/took this test back in high school close to when it first came out. The whole premise is that even those of us who say we don't discriminate against any minority group, whether it be a racial, sexual, or what have you group, that we have subconscious tendencies to be discriminatory. I'm not sure of the validity of it, but it would already be harder for each of us to take it with the what we've learned in class. Our bias towards explicitly not trying to be racist would skew the results, I think. But you might find it interesting and even fun to take one of the other tests. Enjoy.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

interacial romance

So my essay was based on the use of color in this movie entitled "something new". this is a movie about an upper class African American woman who has sacrificed love for career success and her own made up "Ideal Black Man" -who must meet such criteria as being college educated, holding a decent job, having good teeth, not crazy and no kinky sex. she also has this thing about color; 'bright colors are for children and whores" (this is actually her mother's saying) therefore her house is hotel-like, with different shades of bland colors mostly beige. she meets a white landscaper, and having recently bought her house she hires this guy to landscape, in the process she falls in love with him.

I focused on how, they have her very bland and made up, before dating this white guy and then in the process of dating, she paints her house different colors and adds some variety in her decor and also starts wearing colorful clothing and more relaxed clothing, and starts going out more.

interpreted this as directed to an African American audience and a play on the sociohistoric use of white as the good color and other colors especially black as nothing but negative. in the movie this is reversed; beige, which i interpreted as standing for white, is considered dull and uninteresting, and then the more variety of colors as more balanced and happy. it was interesting how the black person was living by this sociohistoric idea and the white person was the one being the more tolerant and flexible.

i also touched on the fact that this African American woman has several female friends who are also in her situation; upper class African American women who are single. I took this as an indication that the stratification theory is very much a reality; there are not "enough" college educated black men in America today.

this movie goes into race, class and gender into such detail that i think it is worth watching, and thinking about, because it is a fairly recent production, it is amazing to think that there can still be such social devide between races even at the same class level. it makes me think, will we ever be socially united?

Racism on College Campuses article

I just came across this on my yahoo news feed-- definitely food for thought/for our class.

Racists incident, protests spread at UC Campuses

There is evidence in this article of the implied ability to relate among different minority/oppressed groups because of a shared experience of oppression. In referencing the anonymous letter of apology written by the maker of the noose to the community, the writer apparently identified herself as a minority, but not African-American. The fact that this piece of information is included not only in the letter itself but in the news report provides further evidence for the idea of a shared experience of oppression.

Media for my Essay

Here is the video I wrote my essay about. I apologize for the lateness, I forgot. My bad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpCqa0Rx0Yk&feature=player_embedded

I chose to analyze the Doritos commercial from the 2010 Super Bowl, which depicts a young African American child slapping an adult.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rsEnwKrsvc

I analyzed the Doritos commercial depicting the young African American child slapping an adult visiting male. There are many stereotypes of African American culture, and the three characters each represent various characteristics that are primarily correlated to African American culture.

First, I described the commercial in detail. The male knocks on the door and his holding a bouquet of pink flowers; the woman invites him inside. She introduces the visiting male to her son, yet he does not look at the child during their introduction. When the woman exits the room the male leans back in order to get a better look at the departing woman. The camera angle is focusing on the woman’s rear. Then the child becomes offended and slaps the man as he brings a Dorito to his mouth. He tells him to stay away from his momma and from his Doritos.

Then, I analyzed the way the commercial portrays each character individually and how each character influences the interpretation of the other characters. The male visitor is portrayed as a sexual deviant who is unconcerned with commitment. He is disrespectful to the woman and child. The woman is displayed with negative sexual connotations. Out of all of the commercials designated for the Super Bowl of 2010 this was the only commercial, which negatively portrayed women, and it was the only commercial depicting a race other than white. The woman is also a young single attractive mother, which is another stereotype of African American culture. This aspect plays off of the male’s character because it reiterates the point of African American male’s failure to commit to a stable monogamous relationship. Ultimately, the child is portrayed as being quick to aggression. This is an overarching stereotype of African American youth, which is reinforced by his family situation and race.

Since the characters are shown to be in a middle class the commercial does not suggest that these traits are dependent on being in a lower socioeconomic class. Instead, the commercial suggests that these stereotypical traits are racially dependent.

Finally, I asked why is it beneficial to Doritos to portray this type of commercial. The commercial is appalling and funny because of the type of parlance used by the characters. The Super Bowl is notorious for its commercials; therefore, millions of viewers discuss the commercials after the event. The more the commercial stands out the more attention the audience will dedicate to discussing a particular commercial. It is advantageous for Doritos to depict certain stereotypes because they receive more attention from the audience without degrading the integrity of the Doritos product.

Crash (2004)

Below is a link to the movie Crash which I used as the basis for my essay. The specific scene that I reviewed can be found at 15:41 and follows for several minutes. This being said, if you have never seen Crash I highly recommend watching the full movie. Not only is it a spectacularly well directed film, but it deals highly with contemporary racial perspectives.

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=0MTW06UY

Matthew Willett-Jeffries
Dr. Holly Moore
Philosophy PL213
2/26/10
The Stigma of Interracial Intimacy
A compilation of intersecting lives in a racially apprehensive urban setting, Crash examines race in a contemporary light seeking to clarify modern racial anxieties through a fictional narrative. Among its examinations, Crash touches on the persisting attitudes toward interracial sex. While largely an artifact of historical attitudes and belief systems, attitudes toward interracial couples, especially white and black couples, remain highly primitive and restrictive. In this light, Crash and one of its scenes bring to mind an anxiety which continues to haunt and affect race relations in contemporary America, and in order to address this attitude it is necessary to look at both the interpersonal and historical motives that drive it.

The scene begins in a diner where an aggravated Officer, John Ryan, discusses his father's health with a female African American representative on a pay phone. After an awkward argument with the representative the officer demands her name, Shaniqua Johnson, to which he responds “Shaniqua, what a big fucking surprise that is” (Crash). The officer returns to his patrol car where he subsequently pursues a passing SUV. Upon shinning a light through the rear view mirror of the SUV he spots what appears to be, under the light, a white woman raising her head from the crotch of an African American driver. At first his partner protests arguing that there is no reason to pull the SUV over, to which John rebuts “they were doing something,” and turns on the siren (Crash). After approaching the driver side window, the officer encounters a well dressed African American male driver, and a tan lady reapplying lipstick, both presumably well off. After questioning and subsequently demanding that the driver step out of the vehicle for a sobriety test, it soon becomes evident that the female passenger is slightly inebriated, as she jokingly objects to the officers demands. As the scene progresses, the officer becomes more blunt, and the female passenger becomes more openly agitated. During the sobriety test the female passenger opens her door and begins to argue with the officer who proceeds to demand that both the driver and the passenger place their hands on the vehicle. While being shoved up against the passenger side door, the female passenger yells abrasively, “this is what this is all about isn't it. You thought you saw a white woman blowing a black man and that just drove your little cracker ass crazy” (Crash). In response, the officer begins to pat down the lady while lecturing the driver. While patting his hands up under the woman's dress presumably checking for weapons, the officer explains “Now we could charge your wife here with lewd conduct by performing a sexual act in public or... we could use our discretion and let you go with a warning” (Crash). After which the husband fearfully agrees and the officer leaves the scared and abused couple with only the words “you two drive safe now” (Crash).

While this scene demonstrates the strong persisting stigma attached to interracial relationships, it does not capture the historical basis which gave rise to this persisting attitude. And although the taboo nature of interracial intercourse remains as much a product of modern motives, it is equally important to understand the historical racial projects which have helped to found this ill-seated attitude. Taking on a perspective of racial attitudes similar to Michael Omi and Howard Winant's idea of race formation as a “process of historically situated projects in which human bodies and social structures are represented and organized,” attitudes toward interracial relationships can be dated back to early pseudo-scientific attempts to validate existing social hierarchies (Omi and Winant 184). Following the 18th century, slavery in particular was becoming harder and harder to justify within the context of modern thought which emphasized, “the 'natural rights' of 'man'” (193). In this light, Omi and Winant suggest that “the invocation of scientific criteria to demonstrate the 'natural' basis of racial hierarchy was both a logical consequence... and an attempt to provide a more subtle and nuanced account of human complexity in the new, 'enlightened' age” (194). Subsequently, with the rise of a presumed scientific justification of race came the stigma of interracial marriage and intercourse. Following the logic of a natural racial hierarchy, it becomes ever apparent that mixing would be seen as undesirable. If for example one race is naturally superior to another than mixing would intuitively demean the quality of offspring (this can certainly be seen with early attitudes toward and the racial classification of mulattoes). This misconceived attitude toward interracial sex, however, is probably best rooted in later attempts at racial classification such as eugenics which sought not only to explain race but also intended to “deal with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race” (Galton 79). In many ways, eugenics played a similar social role (in the United States it validated social hierarchies still present in the south) to earlier scientific attempts to explain race; except in its case, it placed special interest on the effects of interbreeding and strongly validated the taboo nature of interracial intercourse. While most of these pseudosciences are now known to be highly inaccurate especially with the advent of improved genetic understanding, this historical racial project has had a lasting effect on the social attitudes toward interracial couples.

Today the stigma of interracial intercourse still exists in full force and it is mostly perpetuated and enforced by existing social conceptions originating in the racial projects previously described. In Crash this effect can be seen clearly. The officer's reaction to what he perceived as a white woman engaging in fellatio with an African American man sought to punish and condemn divergence from this long standing social norm. This fact is made especially clear when in a brutish symbolic act the officer proceeds to fondle the lady while lecturing her black partner. While it is clear that he is enforcing a social norm, more over it is almost as if he is staking claim to the lady, an act which sheds light on the sociohistorical background associated with this attitude. First the condemnation of the African American man at least in this case subjugates the African American man to the officer. Second the woman is also subjugated. As Naomi Zack points out in Thinking about Race, “(g)enerally, all women in romantic and sexual roles, regardless of race or ethnicity, are portrayed... from the perspective of male heterosexual viewers” (Zack 99). In this light, it is clear that strong social forces aimed at validating Caucasian male hierarchy have perpetuated a long history of radically adverse social attitudes toward interracial sex.

In conclusion, through Crash's presentation of the stigma following interracial couples a historical attitude validated by existing social interests can be seen and described. Backed by a history of pseudo-scientific explanations of race, Crash presents the persisting anxiety that surrounds interracial mingling. From this presentation, the sociohistorical motives can also well be seen and identified. In this way, Crash and its scene defines attitudes toward racial intermingling as structured upon a validation of a Caucasian male social hierarchy originating in a historic understanding of race and social structure.