Response to Too Many 'Model Minority' Asians in the Library

From The Huffington Post:

Although she wasn't a celebrity a few days ago, a student at UCLA, Alexandra Wallace has become something of a name for a really unfortunate anti-Asian video she posted to YouTube, "Asians in the Library," in which she makes the mocking "ching-chong" phony Chinese sound and makes a comment about how Asians in the library are irritating her even if they're getting news about their relatives "back home" after the tsunami.

What is it about this horrible disaster and the tragic aftermath -- we're on the brink of a nuclear meltdown, hello -- that is bringing out such stupid reactions?

See also HERE.

I enjoyed this response to the Wallace video. One cannot help but notice, however, how gender is built into this video towards the end as a way to put down Wallace (attack discrimination with another form of discrimination). Nevertheless, I enjoyed the bulk of the video here.




academics directory

What if Jared Loughner had a Latino Last Name?

Over at "All Things Considered" on NPR, Daisy Hernandez explains the political fallout that would have likely emerged had Jared Loughner been Latino. Hernandez's viewpoints illustrate how our society operates as part of a social system, where an individual's actions are attributed to different causes based on racialized perceptions, and that result in differing, racialized policy efforts:

I wasn't the only person on Saturday who rushed to her Android when news came of the Tucson shooting. I wasn't looking however to read about what had happened. My auntie had already filled me in — "Someone tried to murder una representante. People have been killed," she'd reported. What I wanted to know was the killer's surname.

My eyes scanned the mobile papers. I held my breath. Finally, I saw it: Jared Loughner. Not a Ramirez, Gonzalez or Garcia.

It's safe to say there was a collective sigh of brown relief when the Tucson killer turned out to be a gringo. Had the shooter been Latino, media pundits wouldn't be discussing the impact of nasty politics on a young man this week — they'd be demanding an even more stringent anti-immigrant policy. The new members of the House would be stepping over each other to propose new legislation for more guns on the border, more mothers to be deported, and more employers to be penalized for hiring brown people. Obama would be attending funerals and telling the nation tonight that he was going to increase security just about everywhere.

Hernandez then goes on to state the social significance of a gay, Latino man coming to the aid of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, given Arizona's current political climate revolving around immigration:

It's painfully ironic that a gay Latino man came to the aid of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in the storm of gunfire. Daniel Hernandez, an intern with the congresswoman, ran to Rep. Giffords and helped to stop the bleeding. If a judge hadn't blocked provisions of Arizona's SB 1070 law, the intern's surname would have easily qualified him as a target for police under different circumstances on Saturday.

But because Loughner comes from the majority group in the United States (and Arizona), his actions are not attributed to his social in-group, but instead to a unique mental illness that does not typify white males to a significant degree in the popular public consciousness. This perspective that does not associate Caucasians, or more to the point, political conservatives, with Loughner in any way is present in Sarah Palin's perspective:

Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.

Really, had Loughner been Latino, would Palin be expressing similar sentiments? Or, would she be staunchly using the tragedy to heighten a culture of fear and drive American immigration policy in line with a nativist agenda? And seriously, for a former Vice-Presidential candidate to say that "Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own" and are unaffected by any variety of other social circumstances is rather naïve. Agreed, we all have individual power, choice, and autonomy.

Likewise, we are all significantly influenced by our social surroundings. Automatically discrediting political ideology from Loughner's actions is as absurd as automatically attributing his actions wholly to his political beliefs and/or political loudspeakers. Considering that an assisination attempt was made on Congresswoman Giffords (an obvious political figure), political ideology should at the very least be explored as one variable that contributed to this tragedy.

Picture via NPR (story also available for listening via podcast).


academics

Distancing Mass Killings from Systemic Patterns

Criminologists have long lamented the ways that white males suspected of committing mass shootings and being serial killers are typically profiled. As the public discourse continues to develop regarding suspected shooter of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, 6 deceased and 14 additional wounded victims, Jared Lee Loughner, we are seeing the typical pattern emerge among those on the conservative side of the political spectrum: the violence can be attributed solely to mental illness, and not to any systemic influences tied to political ideology.

Attempts to distance Loughner's alledged attack from right-wing political ideology have grown largely because Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik pointed out the possible ties between exaggerated, vitriolic political discourse and the violence that has now been thrust upon someone who was once targeted symbolically by Sarah Palin (see picture, top of post).



Now in reading through the posted explanations by those on the conservative right, we see an intensified attempt to maintain the typical explanation for mass violence committed by white males - the alleged white male suspect is an individual anomaly with mental illness who has no ties to any institutional groups and/or their influence.

In contrast, mass violence perpetrated by individual minorities is typically tied to the perpetrator's minority culture, weather that be a said culture of poverty, culture of terrorism, drug culture, etc. SocProf explained this phenomenon first:

This list is quite long and definitely establishes a pattern of political violence. But if every incident is treated as an individual act, taken in isolation, and explained by reference to individual characteristics of the perpetrator, then, the social, political and cultural background disappears, leaving the emerging social movement unexplained and unaccountable.

It is a common phenomenon, long studied and explained by social psychology that when individuals from our in-group or privileged individuals commit questionable acts, these acts are explained individually. When individuals from out-groups, or groups that are socially unpopular, commit questionable acts, these acts are explained as part of group membership, as categorical. The former are exceptions, the latter are representative. That is how racial and ethnic prejudice persist and how white privilege is preserved. One only has to imagine what media discourse would be, had the shooter been non-White, Latino or Muslim.

It is not difficult at all to now find data illustrating this phenomenon while browsing through the comments of various news stories. Liz Halloran recently penned a piece on NPR titled "'Vitriol' Cited As Possible Factor In Arizona Tragedy" that as of 5:00pm Hawaii Standard Time has 2,701 reader comments. Here are few that demonstrate how individuals are trying to distance these violent actions from right-wing ideology (obviously, this is not a representative example, as I have not conducted a full content analysis with coding and accounting for "rec's"; these are simply a few examples):

• Rhetoric is not the issue here...this was a lone nutbag, with his own mad view on things, hell bent on killing many. It's a shame that both sides are trying to reap some kinda political points for this. (Sunday, January 09, 2011 8:16:15 PM).
• I listened to this Sheriff again this morning and he is completely out of line and is using this tragety to promote a political agenda and I hope the good people of Pima Co. remember this when he is up for re-election... Freedom of speech cannot be closed down because there are unbalanced people that will twist the meaning of what is being said into a call to kill people... This event was caused by this man's mental illness period. (Sunday, January 09, 2011 2:32:35 PM).

And this from Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash, "You know, his favorite books are 'the Communist Manifesto' and 'Mein Kampf.' I think it's important that we recognize that this is an individual that had -- that has mental challenges, and we need to act appropriately in dealing with him and making sure that justice prevails here" (emphasis added), contrasted with the following from Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md (FoxNews):

Far too many broadcasts now and so many outlets have the intent of inciting, and inciting people to opposition, to anger, to thinking the other side is less than moral. And I think that is a context in which somebody who is mentally unbalanced can somehow feel justified in taking this kind of action. And I think we need to all take cognizance of that and be aware that what we say can, in fact, have consequences.

Without jumping to conclusions, it is reasonable to entertain the possibility that exaggerated political discourse was a significant component in this tragedy. Shouldn't all possible contributors to physical violence be explored in order to prevent future violence? By being immediately defensive about the possible connections between vitriolic political rhetoric and physical violence, rational attempts to uncover all the underlying causes of violence are thwarted.

Suggested reading: "Climate of Hate"


academics blog

Racism, Xenophobia, and Homophobia in Combat Sports - The Floyd Mayweather Attack on Manny Pacquiao

If you haven't heard Floyd "Money" Mayweather's recent rant directed towards boxing's current pound-for-pound king, Filipino boxer, Manny "Pacman" Pacquiao, it's worth a listen. YouTube has removed the video, though it can still be seen (and heard) in its entirety HERE. Be forewarned, the content is disturbing to say the least.

Systemic discrimination in sport is nothing new. As I've documented in my blog time and time again, sexism ("America's Favorite Athletes"; "Yankee Babes vs Phille Babes"; "Blatant Sexism Tolerated"), homophobia ("Homophobic 'Slip'"; "MMA Does Not Get a Pass on Discrimination"), and classism ("Theorizing Violence in Sport"; "Marxist MMA") are rampant in contemporary sport...as is racism.

Attempting to belittle Pacquiao, Mayweather uses blatant racialized language. Embellishing verbal jabs is common in combat sports -- a promotional tactic used to build hype in the midst of long layoffs in between fights. Whether Mayweather is attempting to build "heat" for a possible showdown with Pacquiao or not, the public utilization of racism, homophobia, and xenophobia is unacceptable and requires regulation by the boxing organizations that profit from such promotional tactics. Some of Mayweather's racist, xenophobic, and homophobic words:

• @ 0:57: "I'm gonna make that mutherfucker cook me a sushi roll and cook me some rice."
• @ 1:40: "...gonna cook that mutherfucker with some cats and dogs" (repeated @ 2:18).
• @ 2:21: "Rice with a little bit of cat, and rice with a little bit of bbq dog."
• @ 2:50: "Ah man, don't tell me about what Pacquiao did, 3 losses, 2 draws. Ah, hell nah. This America baby. We built on winning. Step your game up faggot."
• @ 3:10: "Supposed to be talking to Pacquiao, but you know that mutherfucker Pacquiao can't speak no English."

Again, it is not as if this is simply an individual act operating in a vacuum. True, Mayweather may have made these statements on his own. However, he is not the only individual who benefits from these discriminatory statements. Should a Pacquiao-Mayweather mega-fight happen, Mayweather, his opponent (yes, Pacquiao), promoters, the venue owner(s), television pay-per-view companies, etc. will all benefit financially from this type of disgusting discriminatory hype.

In short, the entire industry benefits financially from blatant discrimination. Therefore, it is up to individual athletes and the institutional organizations that run various sports to outlaw discriminatory behavior. As long as the organizations and their leadership allow for this type of glaring discrimination to continue, they are not only complicit in the problem. As direct beneficiaries, they actively contribute to the problem, while sitting covertly in the shadows.

Up next: James "Lights Out" Toney's use of homophobia in MMA.

Photo via The Examiner


academics blogs

When Whiteness Matters in Sport

This is not a major social issue, and I am not going to make it one. Rather, I think the way this story is being presented in the media effectively illustrates how race matters and is constructed in particular social contexts. Among track and field (“athletics”) aficionados, the 100 meters is frequently considered the premier event. At the elite level, the 100 meters is a power sprint, measuring fast twitch, explosive, kinetic energy manifested through meticulously honed technique.

For males, breaking the 10-second mark is still a colossal accomplishment. One might not think so since track and field doesn’t get much media attention in general (at least not in the United States), and when it does, we’re now more accustomed to watching Usain Bolt blast away his competitors, seemingly cruising to numerous sub-10-second performances (his world record currently stands at 9.58). A few weeks ago sprinter Christophe Lemaitre won France’s national competition with a time of 9.98 seconds, squeaking below that 10-second mark. A typical headline of Lemaitre’s accomplishment (from Reuters.com, July 9, 2010):

Lemaitre first white man to run 100m in under 10 seconds

And from the article:

PARIS (Reuters) - France's Christophe Lemaitre became the first white man to run the 100 meters in under 10 seconds when he clocked 9.98 on Friday, the French athletics federation said.

Lemaitre, 20, set his time during the French championships in Valence, southern France.

"He is the first white man to run the 100 meters in less than 10 seconds," Jean-Philippe Manzelle, French athletics Federation press officer, told Reuters.

There have been other white sprinters who have excelled at the world level in recent years. Lolo Jones comes to mind in the 100m hurdles; Jeremy Wariner dominated the open 400m in recent years. And if we’re talking sprinters of “outlier” ethnicities in general, Liu Xiang of China recently held the world record in the 110m hurdles. But the early discourse around Lemaitre could be a bit more pointed in the way he is being constructed through the media as a great white hope.

When should race matter in sport, and when it does, how should it be discussed? In this case, at the very least, Lemaitre’s race is framed such that his being “white” is of greater importance than his win. As the track and field season moves on and should Lemaitre continue to run sub-10-second times, I expect to see increased media coverage about his whiteness. He is not going to beat Usain Bolt or America’s top sprinters at international competitions. But on the European circuit, I expect he will make waves. Mainstream media discussion of his success or failure should be interesting to follow.

Update (7/28/10): This post was re-posted over on Sociological Images, and in the comments section of that post, commenters have noted that Lolo Jones is multi-racial and identifies as such. My bad!

Blogcatalog

Youth Substance Use and Indigenous Peoples

More from the 2009 YRBSS survey, taken among 9th-12th graders in the United States (see also previous post). The youth violence rates among "American Indians and Alaskan Natives" (AI/AN) and "Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders" (NHOPI) were so high compared to the other constructed "race" groups that I decided to check out how they compared for some of the more serious substance use items (there are also more minor forms of substance use, such as "ever used alcohol" and "ever used marijuana," for which the epidemiological literature generally shows Caucasian youth tend to have higher rates). "Top two" groups bolded again (males and females combined).


1. Tried Marijuana For The First Time Before Age 13 Years

• Total (7.5%; N=16,134); females (5.0%; N=8,183); males (9.7%; N=7,888)
• AI/AN total (18.1%; N=137); females (N/A; N=55); males (N/A; N=80)
• Asian total (2.5%; N=741); females (1.1%; N=399); males (3.9%; N=342)
• Black total (10.2%; N=2,741); females (4.1%; N=1,1413); males (16.1%; N=1,322)
• Hispanic (10.3%; N=4,676); females (7.8%; N=2,412); males (12.9%; N=2,251)
• NHOPI (15.0%; N=173); females (N/A; N=83); males (N/A; N=89)
• White (5.7%; N=6,828); females (4.0%; N=3,403); males (7.1%; N=3,418)
• Multiple race (9.1%; N=547); females (9.2%; N=307); males (8.9%; N=240)

2. Drank Alcohol For The First Time Before Age 13 Years (more than just a few sips)

• Total (21.1%; N=16,207); females (18.1%; N=8,194); males (23.7%; N=7,949)
• AI/AN total (36.0%; N=136); females (N/A; N=54); males (N/A; N=80)
• Asian total (14.8%; N=734); females (12.4%; N=392); males (17.2%; N=342)
• Black total (24.9%; N=2,773); females (21.9%; N=1,429); males (27.6%; N=1,338)
• Hispanic (27.1%; N=4,692); females (23.2%; N=2,408); males (31.0%; N=2,271)
• NHOPI (23.9%; N=176); females (N/A; N=83); males (N/A; N=92)
• White (18.1%; N=6,854); females (15.5%; N=3,411); males (20.3%; N=3,436)
• Multiple race (22.7%; N=552); females (20.0%; N=308); males (26.0%; N=244)

3. Ever Used Any Form Of Cocaine One Or More Times (for example, powder, crack, or freebase, during their life)

• Total (6.4%; N=16,204); females (5.3%; N=8,214); males (7.3%; N=7,927)
• AI/AN total (10.9%; N=135); females (N/A; N=53); males (N/A; N=80)
• Asian total (3.9%; N=744); females (2.7%; N=402); males (5.2%; N=342)
• Black total (2.9%; N=2,769); females (1.5%; N=1,431); males (4.3%; N=1,332)
• Hispanic (9.4%; N=4,692); females (8.7%; N=2,415); males (10.1%; N=2,265)
• NHOPI (8.5%; N=174); females (N/A; N=82); males (N/A; N=91)
• White (6.3%; N=6,846); females (5.4%; N=3,410); males (7.1%; N=3,429)
• Multiple race (3.8%; N=492); females (2.3%; N=274); males (5.5%; N=218)

4. Ever Used Heroin One Or More Times (also called "smack", "junk", or "China white", during their life)

• Total (2.5%; N=15,731); females (1.7%; N=7,923); males (3.2%; N=7,750)
• AI/AN total (3.1%; N=134); females (N/A; N=53); males (N/A; N=79)
• Asian total (2.4%; N=662); females (1.3%; N=348); males (3.5%; N=314)
• Black total (2.2%; N=2,757); females (0.7%; N=1,418); males (3.6%; N=1,333)
• Hispanic (3.3%; N=4,450); females (2.9%; N=2,270); males (3.6%; N=2,171)
• NHOPI (6.1%; N=144); females (N/A; N=67); males (N/A; N=76)
• White (2.2%; N=6,798); females (1.6%; N=3,381); males (2.7%; N=3,411)
• Multiple race (3.3%; N=501); females (1.9%; N=278); males (4.9%; N=223)

5. Ever Used Methamphetamines One Or More Times (also called "speed", "crystal", "crank", or "ice", during their life)

• Total (4.1%; N=16,289); females (3.3%; N=8,244); males (4.7%; N=7,982)
• AI/AN total (11.0%; N=137); females (N/A; N=54); males (N/A; N=81)
• Asian total (3.1%; N=745); females (3.0%; N=401); males (3.2%; N=344)
• Black total (2.7%; N=2,790); females (1.0%; N=1,437); males (4.5%; N=1,347)
• Hispanic (5.7%; N=4,728); females (5.2%; N=2,430); males (6.1%; N=2,286)
• NHOPI (7.7%; N=175); females (N/A; N=83); males (N/A; N=91)
• White (3.7%; N=6,868); females (3.2%; N=3,419); males (4.2%; N=3,442)
• Multiple race (4.6%; N=550); females (4.0%; N=307); males (5.3%; N=243)

6. Ever Used Ecstasy One Or More Times (also called "MDMA", during their life)

• Total (6.7%; N=15,887); females (5.5%; N=8,016); males (7.6%; N=7,811)
• AI/AN total (13.3%; N=134); females (N/A; N=53); males (N/A; N=79)
• Asian total (4.3%; N=713); females (3.2%; N=383); males (5.3%; N=330)
• Black total (5.1%; N=2,758); females (3.8%; N=1,420); males (6.5%; N=1,332)
• Hispanic (8.2%; N=4,485); females (7.5%; N=2,287); males (8.9%; N=2,187)
• NHOPI (12.0%; N=161); females (N/A; N=78); males (N/A; N=82)
• White (6.4%; N=6,814); females (5.3%; N=3,388); males (7.4%; N=3,420)
• Multiple race (8.0%; N=536); females (6.6%; N=298); males (9.8%; N=238)

7. Ever Took Steroid Pills Or Shots Without A Doctor's Prescription One Or More Times (during their life)

• Total (3.3%; N=16,320); females (2.2%; N=8,256); males (4.3%; N=8,001)
• AI/AN total (7.6%; N=139); females (N/A; N=55); males (N/A; N=82)
• Asian total (3.1%; N=747); females (2.4%; N=403); males (3.8%; N=344)
• Black total (2.8%; N=2,803); females (0.9%; N=1,441); males (4.6%; N=1,356)
• Hispanic (3.9%; N=4,734); females (3.2%; N=2,433); males (4.6%; N=2,289)
• NHOPI (5.3%; N=175); females (N/A; N=83); males (N/A; N=91)
• White (3.1%; N=6,873); females (2.1%; N=3,419); males (3.9%; N=3,447)
• Multiple race (3.4%; N=552); females (1.9%; N=309); males (5.2%; N=243)

8. Offered, Sold, Or Given An Illegal Drug By Someone On School Property (during the 12 months before the survey)

• Total (22.7%; N=16,261); females (19.3%; N=8,238); males (25.9%; N=7,962)
• AI/AN total (34.0%; N=139); females (N/A; N=55); males (N/A; N=82)
• Asian total (18.3%; N=748); females (15.1%; N=402); males (21.5%; N=346)
• Black total (22.2%; N=2,782); females (18.8%; N=1,435); males (25.7%; N=1,341)
• Hispanic (31.2%; N=4,721); females (27.1%; N=2,429); males (35.1%; N=2,280)
• NHOPI (27.6%; N=174); females (N/A; N=83); males (N/A; N=90)
• White (19.8%; N=6,855); females (16.5%; N=3,412); males (22.7%; N=3,436)
• Multiple race (26.9%; N=550); females (23.0%; N=308); males (31.6%; N=242)

Although I didn't show the results for every survey item listed under the substance use construct, it's still worth noting that AI/AN's had the highest prevalence rates for 7/8 survey items listed above. NHOPI's were in the "top two" for 5/7 survey items. Again, the small sample sizes for the two indigenous groups (counting "NHOPI" here since Hawaiians are included) are unfortunate. However, the high prevalence rates for these two indigenous "umbrella" ethnic groups cannot be ignored. More research and resources are, no doubt, needed in these communities.


Blog Directory

Youth Violence and Indigenous Peoples

The Centers for Disease Control has their Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) that provides rates of different types of risk for 9th-12th graders across the United States. The 2009 data are out, and there's some extremely interesting findings.

To begin with, those going to the site can break down the data by grade, state, "race," and sex, and even test for statistical significance when making comparative requests. It's quite impressive, so that's what I did.

First, with regard to "race," there are the typical concerns. The sample size is just over 16,000, so its representativeness is suspect, especially when considering certain groups. The "Asian" group for instance, has just under 750 subjects, and the rates of risk tend to be low when compared to other groups. Of course, "Asians" are comprised of Japanese, Chinese, Laotians, Filipinos, Cambodians, etc. Southeast Asians typically have much higher risk rates than East Asians, so it's a problematic and small "umbrella" category, but one that would become even smaller if broken down by all the ethnic groups that comprise the "Asian" rubric. Same concern for "Hispanics" -- how do specific Latino groups differ?

Okay, now that that's out of the way, let's look at the rates of different types of violence, compared by "race" and sex. I've bolded the two groups (males and females combined) with the highest prevalence rates for each type of violence, also providing percentages ("yes" respondents) and sample sizes for each group.

SCHOOL VIOLENCE

1. Carried a weapon on school property on at least 1 day (for example, a gun, knife, or club during the 30 days before survey)

• Total 5.6% (N=16,256) females 2.9% (N=8,239) males 8.0% (N=7,958)
• American Indian or Alaskan Native (AI/AN) total 4.2% (N=138) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=81)
• Asian total 3.6% (N=746) females 0.9% (N=402) males 6.3% (N=344)
• Black total 5.3% (N=2,795) females 4.0% (N=1,437) males 6.6% (N=1,351)
• Hispanic total 5.8% (N=4,712) females 3.7% (N=2,424) males 7.9% (N=2,277)
• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (NHOPI) total 9.8% (N=177) females N/A (N=85) males N/A (N=91)
• White total 5.6% (N=6,848) females 2.4% (N=3,415) males 8.3% (N=3,426)
• Multiple race total 5.8% (N=552) females 4.7% (N=309) males 7.3% (N=243)

2. Did not go to school because they felt unsafe at school or on their way to or from school on at least 1 day (during the 30 days before survey)

• Total 5.0% (N=16,371) females 5.3% (N=8,268) males 4.6% (N=8,040)
• AI/AN total 8.7% (N=139) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=82)
• Asian total 2.9% (N=749) females 3.4% (N=403) males 2.3% (N=346)
• Black total 6.3% (N=2,817) females 6.6% (N=1,445) males 5.9% (N=1,365)
• Hispanic total 8.1% (N=4,750) females 8.3% (N=2,432) males 7.9% (N=2,305)
• NHOPI total 10.6% (N=179) females N/A (N=85) males N/A (N=94)
• White total 3.5% (N=6,886) females 3.8% (N=3,424) males 3.3% (N=3,455)
• Multiple race total 5.5% (N=558) females 5.4% (N=311) males 5.6% (N=247)

3. Threatened or injured with a weapon on school property one or more times (for example, a gun, knife, or club during the 12 months before survey)

• Total 7.7% (N=16,367) females 5.5% (N=8,264) males 9.6% (N=8,041)
• AI/AN total 16.5% (N=139) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=82)
• Asian total 5.5% (N=750) females 1.6% (N=403) males 9.4% (N=347)
• Black total 9.4% (N=2,828) females 7.4% (N=1,448) males 11.2% (N=1,373)
• Hispanic total 9.1% (N=4,742) females 6.3% (N=2,429) males 12.0% (N=2,301)
• NHOPI total 12.5% (N=179) females N/A (N=84) males N/A (N=94)
• White total 6.4% (N=6,883) females 4.9% (N=3,423) males 7.8% (N=3,453)
• Multiple race total 9.2% (N=557) females 5.2% (N=311) males 14.0% (N=246)

4. In a physical fight on school property one or more times (during 12 months before survey)

• Total 11.1% (N=16,089) females 6.7% (N=8,150) males 15.1% (N=7,879)
• AI/AN total 20.7% (N=135) females N/A (N=53) males N/A (N=80)
• Asian total 7.7% (N=732) females 4.1% (N=397) males 11.4% (N=335)
• Black total 17.4% (N=2,769) females 12.5% (N=1,430) males 22.2% (N=1,332)
• Hispanic total 13.5% (N=4,676) females 9.3% (N=2,400) males 17.7% (N=2,263)
• NHOPI total 14.8% (N=175) females N/A (N=83) males N/A (N=91)
• White total 8.6% (N=6,771) females 4.3% (N=3,371) males 12.4% (N=3,394)
• Multiple race total 12.4% (N=541) females 7.5% (N=302) males 18.3% (N=239)

5. Bullied on school property (during 12 months before survey)

• Total 19.9% (N=15,633) females 21.2% (N=7,838) males 18.7% (N=7,734)
• AI/AN total 33.8% (N=133) females N/A (N=52) males N/A (N=79)
• Asian total 17.5% (N=650) females 13.9% (N=344) males 21.0% (N=306)
• Black total 13.7% (N=2,728) females 15.5% (N=1,399) males 11.9% (N=1,322)
• Hispanic total 18.5% (N=4,440) females 18.9% (N=2,254) males 18.0% (N=2,175)
• NHOPI total 20.4% (N=146) females N/A (N=68) males N/A (N=77
• White total 21.6% (N=6,756) females 23.5% (N=3,341) males 19.9% (N=3,409)
• Multiple race total 23.9% (N=497) females 22.8% (N=273) males 25.1% (N=224)

COMMUNITY VIOLENCE

6. Carried a weapon on at least 1 day (for example, a gun, knife, or a club during the 30 days before survey)

• Total 17.5% (N=16,110) females 7.1% (N=8,203) males 27.1% (N=7,848)
• AI/AN total 20.7% (N=137) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=80)
• Asian total 8.4% (N=745) females 3.8% (N=401) males 13.0% (N=344)
• Black total 14.4% (N=2,746) females 7.8% (N=1,427) males 21.0% (N=1,312)
• Hispanic total 17.2% (N=4,667) females 7.9% (N=2,412) males 26.5% (N=2,244)
• NHOPI total 20.3% (N=175) females N/A (N=84) males N/A (N=90)
• White total 18.6% (N=6,807) females 6.5% (N=3,405) males 29.3% (N=3,395)
• Multiple race total 17.9% (N=550) females 10.9% (N=308) males 26.2% (N=242)

7. Carried a gun on at least 1 day (during the 30 days before survey)

• Total 5.9% (N=15,664) females 1.7% (N=7,916) males 9.8% (N=7,690)
• AI/AN total 7.6% (N=135) females N/A (N=54) males N/A (N=79)
• Asian total 3.4% (N=662) females 0.8% (N=347) males 5.7% (N=315)
• Black total 7.6% (N=2,736) females 1.8% (N=1,417) males 13.2% (N=1,312)
• Hispanic total 5.1% (N=4,430) females 1.9% (N=2,266) males 8.2% (N=2,154)
• NHOPI total 10.4% (N=145) females N/A (N=69) males N/A (N=75)
• White total 5.8% (N=6,778) females 1.5% (N=3,377) males 9.5% (N=3,395)
• Multiple race total 7.2% (N=502) females 3.3% (N=279) males 11.7% (N=223)

8. In a physical fight 1 or more times (during the 12 months before survey)

• Total 31.5% (N=16,130) females 22.9% (N=8,183) males 39.3% (N=7,890)
• AI/AN total 42.4% (N=135) females N/A (N=53) males N/A (N=80)
• Asian total 18.9% (N=737) females 13.2% (N=399) males 24.9% (N=338)
• Black total 41.1% (N=2,759) females 33.9% (N=1,426) males 48.3% (N=1,326)
• Hispanic total 36.2% (N=4,672) females 28.5% (N=2,404) males 43.8% (N=2,255)
• NHOPI total 32.6% (N=174) females N/A (N=83) males N/A (N=90)
• White total 27.8% (N=6,825) females 18.2% (N=3,402) males 36.0% (N=3,417)
• Multiple race total 34.2% (N=549) females 26.7% (N=306) males 42.9% (N=243)

9. Injured in a physical fight one or more times (injuries had to be treated by a doctor or nurse, during 12 months before survey)

• Total 3.8% (N=15,749) females 2.2% (N=7,938) males 5.1% (N=7,752)
• AI/AN total 7.9% (N=134) females N/A (N=53) males N/A (N=79)
• Asian total 2.9% (N=702) females 1.7% (N=378) males 4.1% (N=324)
• Black total 5.7% (N=2,748) females 4.4% (N=1,414) males 7.0% (N=1,327)
• Hispanic total 4.7% (N=4,462) females 3.3% (N=2,270) males 6.0% (N=2,181)
• NHOPI total 7.3% (N=164) females N/A (N=79) males N/A (N=84)
• White total 2.9% (N=6,732) females 1.3% (N=3,343) males 4.2% (N=3,383)
• Multiple race total 3.9% (N=528) females 1.9% (N=294) males 6.2% (N=234)

10. Hit, slapped, or physically hurt on purpose by their boyfriend or girlfriend (during the 12 months before the survey)

• Total 9.8% (N=16,217) females 9.3% (N=8,196) males 10.3% (N=7,957)
• AI/AN total 13.4% (N=139) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=82)
• Asian total 5.5% (N=740) females 5.3% (N=399) males 5.8% (N=341)
• Black total 14.3% (N=2,803) females 14.8% (N=1,443) males 13.8% (N=1,353)
• Hispanic total 11.5% (N=4,713) females 11.4% (N=2,414) males 11.7% (N=2,286)
• NHOPI total 13.1% (N=177) females N/A (N=84) males N/A (N=92)
• White total 8.0% (N=6,803) females 7.2% (N=3,380) males 8.8% (N=3,416)
• Multiple race total 12.2% (N=548) females 11.2% (N=307) males 13.4% (N=241)

11. Every physically forced to have sexual intercourse (when they did not want to)

• Total 7.4% (N=15,735) females 10.5% (N=7,926) males 4.5% (N=7,748)
• AI/AN total 13.1% (N=135) females N/A (N=52) males N/A (N=81)
• Asian total 5.7% (N=733) females 6.4% (N=396) males 4.9% (N=337)
• Black total 10.0% (N=2,492) females 12.0% (N=1,286) males 7.9% (N=1,201)
• Hispanic total 8.4% (N=4,680) females 11.2% (N=2,391) males 5.7% (N=2,276)
• NHOPI total 11.9% (N=175) females N/A (N=83) males N/A (N=91)
• White total 6.3% (N=6,696) females 10.0% (N=3,309) males 3.2% (N=3,380)
• Multiple race total 9.3% (N=540) females 11.2% (N=301) males 6.9% (N=239)

SUICIDE

12. Felt sad or hopeless (almost every day for 2 or more weeks in a row so that they stopped doing some usual activities during the 12 months before survey)

• Total 26.1% (N=16,232) females 33.9% (N=8,199) males 19.1% (N=7,969)
• AI/AN total 30.8% (N=139) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=82)
• Asian total 23.5% (N=741) females 26.4% (N=399) males 20.5% (N=342)
• Black total 27.7% (N=2,811) females 37.5% (N=1,444) males 17.9% (N=1,360)
• Hispanic total 31.6% (N=4,723) females 39.7% (N=2,420) males 23.6% (N=2,290)
• NHOPI total 33.4% (N=177) females N/A (N=83) males N/A (N=93)
• White total 23.7% (N=6,801) females 31.1% (N=3,381) males 17.2% (N=3,413)
• Multiple race total 31.1% (N=544) females 35.8% (N=304) males 25.4% (N=240)

13. Seriously considered attempting suicide (during 12 months before the survey)

• Total 13.8% (N=16,200) females 17.4% (N=8,189) males 10.5% (N=7,966)
• AI/AN total 19.0% (N=139) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=82)
• Asian total 14.9% (N=740) females 16.9% (N=399) males 12.9% (N=341)
• Black total 13.0% (N=2,805) females 18.1% (N=1,438) males 7.8% (N=1,360)
• Hispanic total 15.4% (N=4,722) females 20.2% (N=2,417) males 10.7% (N=2,292)
• NHOPI total 19.2% (N=179) females N/A (N=84) males N/A (N=94)
• White total 13.1% (N=6,792) females 16.1% (N=3,377) males 10.5% (N=3,408)
• Multiple race total 18.0% (N=545) females 21.2% (N=306) males 14.3% (N=239)

14. Made a plan about how they would attempt suicide (during the 12 months before survey)

• Total 10.9% (N=16,213) females 13.2% (N=8,183) males 8.6% (N=7,965)
• AI/AN total 17.0% (N=139) females N/A (N=55) males N/A (N=82)
• Asian total 12.6% (N=740) females 14.7% (N=398) males 10.4% (N=342)
• Black total 9.8% (N=2,798) females 13.3% (N=1,433) males 6.2% (N=1,358)
• Hispanic total 12.2% (N=4,720) females 15.4% (N=2,418) males 9.0% (N=2,289)
• NHOPI total 13.2% (N=177) females N/A (N=84) males N/A (N=92)
• White total 10.3% (N=6,796) females 12.3% (N=3,376) males 8.5% (N=3,413)
• Multiple race total 13.2% (N=545) females 14.4% (N=306) males 11.8% (N=239)

15. Attempted suicide 1 or more times (during the 12 months before survey)

• Total 6.3% (N=14,609) females 8.1% (N=7,475) males 4.6% (N=7,082)
• AI/AN total 10.0% (N=122) females N/A (N=51) males N/A (N=69)
• Asian total 4.0% (N=681) females 3.7% (N=367) males 4.3% (N=314)
• Black total 7.9% (N=2,308) females 10.4% (N=1,206) males 5.4% (N=1,096)
• Hispanic total 8.1% (N=4,132) females 11.1% (N=2,151) males 5.1% (N=1,972)
• NHOPI total 11.9% (N=155) females N/A (N=73) males N/A (N=81)
• White total 5.0% (N=6,459) females 6.5% (N=3,237) males 3.8% (N=3,215)
• Multiple race total 12.4% (N=509) females 13.7% (N=289) males 10.8% (N=220)

Okay, that's a lot to unpack. To begin with, there are some prevalence rates that merit discussions in their totality. The last survey item on suicide attempt(s) surprised me a bit. Over 1 in every 20 youths reports a suicide attempt within the last year. Survey item #11 on sexual assault also surprised me, with about 1 in 10 girls reporting forced sexual intercourse. These are American high school students. I knew these rates were high for young adults, but not this high for high schoolers.

Now onto the prevalence rates by "race." For 12/15 survey items displayed here, "American Indian or Alaskan Native" youth had either the highest or second highest prevalence rates. They had the highest rates for 8/15 survey items. "Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander" youth were in the "top two" for 11/15 survey items. None of the other construted "race" groups ranked among the "top two" slots nearly as much.

One could easily aruge the sample sizes for these groups are too small to make generalizations, and thus, they are not representative. That's a valid concern. At the same time, one cannot help but notice that these groups are also the colonized groups in the United States (well, for the NHOPI group, Hawaiians are). True, their proportion of the total U.S. teen population is small, but that is largely because of their colonial history.

These consistently high rates across numerous youth violence constructs demand further research with those communities and further illustrate colonialism's deleterious impacts on indigenous peoples. Without strong data, these communities have a more difficult time advocating for services and policy change. The feds need to get the concentrated research with indigenous communities conducted, and start providing these communities with more robust youth, family, and occupational resources, now!

Top Sites

White Privilege/Hegemonic Masculinity in China

Anyone who thinks white male privilege does not exist in the global economy, read on.

All you need to be is a white male, presumably well groomed, and business-looking, and you can pose as a quality assurance figurehead in China. Seriously? Talk about symbols of white male privilege operating in real life! From NPR, "Job Ad In China: White Man. No Experience Needed" (original story in The Atlantic):

There's opportunity in China even if you're a Westerner with no skills. If you're a white male and have a nice suit, you can get a job that pays well — and requires no work.

[...]

Mitch Moxley, a freelance writer who lives in Beijing, discovered that with just those assets, he could make a living as a fake American businessman.

[...]

Moxley says his guess is that companies hire white people in suits to gain "a bit of credibility." He says that connections in China are important, especially in business.

"It was pretty funny. The whole thing was a little bit surreal," he says. "We were down there and were being paraded around a half-built factory and we had to sit in temporary offices the rest of the day, not really doing anything. ... We were sleeping at our desks or reading magazines."

But Moxley says he and the fake businessmen got the "red-carpet treatment" at the opening ceremony for the factory.

Not good enough to be a woman, from any background, or a male of color. But if you're a western, white man, irrespective of your experience or skill set, you're good to go. People will just assume your authority and expertise, and you can literally get paid simply to parade your demographic around, cruizing back in a fake office in between "inspections."

This is a perfect example of hegemonic masculinity. No, there's no reference to physical strength, sexuality, or violence, but what we do see is the ongoing dominance of Caucasian males in the global economy. Perception outweighs merit, in this case perpetuating minorities' already degraded image in the business world. White males are good enough to evaluate Chinese factories, to oversee the lowly Asian workers and middle management; minorities supposedly don't have those evaluation skills. But even the white males who truly don't have those skills get the evaluator jobs, to do virtually nothing.

Sometimes I wonder how these types of stories make it on NPR without more critical analysis.

Why Rocky Inspires

NPR has a story up titled, "The Rocky Balboa Metal Montage Workout," noting how inspirational the film's theme song is for those who want to hit the gym. The piece isn't intended to be terribly deep, but one might question why the Rocky theme song and filmatic series is so inspirational, and for what demographic?



The entire Rocky series was about making working-class white men minorities who could overcome all obstacles (i.e., black men with more resources) with hard work and a supportive wife. Thus, no matter how talented were the black fighters, no matter how many steroids Russian fighters took, Rocky could take 'em out.

From a macro point of view, governmental programs (e.g., affirmative action) are not needed, and the white race is ultimately superior due to their better work ethic; governmental policies that make up for past discrimination are unnecessary -- if Rocky can rise from poverty strictly through hard work, so can those lazy minorities (sarcasm). And then there's more pointed aspects of race and masculinity.

While Eddie Murphy's standup comedy had its own forms of discrimination, for instance homophobia, his analysis of Rocky with regard to white men's insecure feelings is right on. Though minorities gained power since the Civil Rights Movement, Rocky, reinvigorates their sense of power and entitlement (warning: strong language):

"This is Alabama. We speak English."

Anti-immigration sentiment continues to sweep across sectors of the United States. In this ad gone viral, Tim James, who hopes to be Alabama's next Governor, proposes public policy denouncing aspects of inclusive multiculturalism -- English-only drivers license exams. James appears to be riding the political wave that crashed on Arizona last month.



Of course such policies are justified by arguing that coerced institutionalized assimilation helps non-English speakers blend into American workplaces and other social settings. If this policy were implemented, however, finding work and/or getting to work would be all the more difficult for English Language Learners who needed to drive in order to pursue their occupational goals.

Also of significance, James ties English Language Learners (i.e., immigrants) to increased state costs. No surprise here -- scapegoat "alien" people of color by connecting them to the recession.

Using restrictive means to push for assimilation does nothing to help coalesce society. Knowing most immigrats want to learn English, provide for effective bilingual education.

Excusing Violence

A few weeks ago, I blogged about Indian students in Melbourne, Australia being the targeted victims of hate crimes. Not surprisingly at the time, Melbourne police were denying that racism was a contributing factor to the attacks, instead blaming the victims who were essentially at fault for their own victimization because they were said to walk alone at night with pricey computer equipment.

Listen in on the following YouTube video. Pay particular attention to the Melbourne police commissioner who begins speaking at 1:10. Note how he dismisses the Indian students' violent victimization by saying they are safer in Australia than India.



This tactic of pointing out that violence is more severe in a different context is commonly used among those who excuse and/or justify varying forms of violence. By using this tactic, the police commissioner indirectly suggests that Indian students should be thankful to be in Melbourne despite being violent crime victims. Moreover, he deflects attention away from the possibility of violent racism existing among the majority Melbourne population.

Thankfully a a little over a week later, a former Australian defense chief, Peter Cosgrove, stated the obvious:

"If you didn't suspect a racial strand you'd be mad .... Attacks recently by groups of people on individuals looks like a profiling approach to people from the sub-continent. Rather than say 'nothing to worry about', I'd rather look more closely."

More from the Al Jazeera piece:

Cosgrove, who was voted Australian of the year in 2001, said hidden racism should not be allowed to fester or lead to a reduction in immigration, expected to boost Australia's population from 21 million to around 36 million by 2050.

Hmmm, xenophobia among the majority Australian population? In the mean time, let's hope Melbourne police are investigating these horrific crimes, inspecting all possible angles, not just those that follow the safe public relations line.

Denying Racism and Blaming the Victims

It is not just bothersome, but extremely adverse for society when prominent figureheads and state officials deny that racism is a motivating factor in patterned hate crimes. In Melbourne, Australia, there has been a number of violent hate crimes in which Indian students are the targets.

This hasn't been covered much, if at all, in the American media, but Al Jazeera has posted a number of stories on the violent crimes. Back in the middle of 2009, Indians in Melbourne protested a spate of attacks on Indian college students. From a June 2009 story:

The mainly Indian protesters say a spate of attacks in recent days – one of which left an Indian student with serious injuries after being stabbed with a screwdriver – are racially motivated.

Not surprisingly, Melbourne police argued that the attacks on Indians were not entirely racially motivated, but rather, were also due to Indian students' tendency to walk alone at night with expensive computer equipment:

Police officials say that while there may be a racist element to some attacks, Indian students are often assaulted because they travel alone late at night to part-time jobs and are known to carry valuable items such as laptop computers.

"I think some of the attacks are opportunistic in that they just happen to be Indian students in the wrong place at the wrong time," Simon Overland, the Victorian state police chief, told reporters on Monday.

In effect, by lessening the focus on racism as a motivating factor in the crimes, the Melbourne police are blaming the victims for their own victimization. Indian students are essentially at fault for their own victimization since they are said by police to walk alone at night with laptops.

Today, Al Jezeera has another story covering the murder of an Indian graduate student in Melbourne. This time, governmental officials are denying that racism was a contributing factor in the murder at all:

The murder of an Indian student in the Australian city of Melbourne was not racially motivated, the government has said.

Nitin Garg was stabbed to death while walking to work last week.

"What we have to do is to let the investigations take their course, but certainly on the basis of what we're being told so far, by the Victorian authorities, there's no basis for a racial motivation behind this," Simon Crean, the acting foreign minister told local radio on Tuesday.

Garg, 21, was a graduate accounting student at an Australian university.

His killing is the latest in a series of attacks on Indian students in the country.

Media in India have labelled the series of attacks against Indian students in Australia as racist, but police and the Australian government have said the attacks are criminal, not racist.

Police do need to investigate crimes with a level of objectivity. However, when police and governmental officials deny that racism could be a significant factor in the violence after a series of attacks on Indian students, there is a clear case of the state engaging in public relations -- attempting to hide the reality from themselves and the rest of the world that extreme racism exists in their society.

Thus, hate crimes are turned into "crimes of opportunity" that, again, blame the victims for their own victimization, rather than getting at the root of the problem -- racism.

An additional motivation for Australian officials to deny racism's existence is that they get money from international students. From another Al Jazeera story:

Australia's international student sector is the country's third largest export earner, behind coal and iron ore, totalling $11.7bn in 2008.

[...]

Australian universities also sought to reassure students and their families that Australia was a safe place to study.

But a recent study forecast a 20 per cent drop in Indian students in 2010 due to the attacks.

Denying racism's significance in these violent crimes will not solve the problem, improve the society, and make Melbourne a welcoming place for international students.

This story coincides with Bijan Bayne's article from TheRoot.com (August 2009), titled, "But My Best Friend is Black!: Racism is not an either/or proposition. When did the R-word become as offensive as the N-word?" Here, Bayne argues that by denying the possibility that we carry racist values of any level, society fails to address racism at all, thereby facilitating racism's power and existence.

Furthermore, when majority group members continue to deny that they and their society holds elements of racism, minority group members are forced once again to explain and prove racism's significance:

It’s left to African Americans, the offended party, to explain ad nauseum why seemingly innocuous items are offensive. We do it because we want to educate, to stop the offensive language and behavior, not because we are "playing the race card." We are always up for the teachable moment, but it does get exhausting.

For years, black Americans have tried to explain the nuances of racial discrimination in law enforcement, education, health care; racism isn’t the sole province of the Klansman.

And this is exactly what the Indian community is having to do now in Melbourne since the police and government are denying the possibility of racism in multiple attacks on Indian students.

The burden of change is placed on the victimized minorities. They must change their behaviors and avoid their attackers. The majority group attackers don't have to change their racist attitudes, since as the authorities say, racism doesn't exist in their "pristine" society.

--------

Updated (1/9/10): Really, oh really, not racially motivated? "Indian man attacked and set alight in Melbourne" one week after the homicide covered above.

Stereotypes and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies

Drs. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Columbia Provost, Claude Steele have a conversation up on TheRoot.com, theorizing how stereotypes operate in society. The conditions, according to Steele, that give stereotyping more power include:

• Integration (Steele explains this would be the earlier stages of integration and that more extensive integration can dispel stereotypes)
• When the stereotyped group is numerically small
• Having a homogenous culture despite the existence of some diversity
  

I think Steele, here, is talking about how stereotypes operate in small group situations (e.g., workplace environments). He provides the example of being the sole woman on the U.S. supreme court, and how inter-group dynamics shifted immensely after just one more woman was added.

On a macro level, however, I wouldn't say the power of stereotyping is contingent upon the stereotyped groups' numerical size or proportion in a particular realm. The classic example when explaining how minority-majority group relations depend on power (not group size) is South Africa, where black South Africans are a numerical majority, but are still minorities when it comes to power. Being minorities, they would be the group more at-risk of being stereotyped in ways that have major adverse consequences even though they comprise a bulk of the country's population. Here's the video.


The Root Interview: Claude Steele on How Racial Stereotypes Harm Performance (doh, guess you cannot watch the video here, so just click on the link to view it)

And then some research illustrating one of the points Steele was making -- that simply an awareness of being stereotyped can be distracting and have adverse consequences in everyday situations. This example is a little dated, but definitely falls in line with the subject matter offered above, with a specific focus on gender:



Both videos provide strong points on the subtleties of stereotyping and how stereotypes can operate in society.

Avatar, The Noble Savage, and Dominant Narratives

The folks over at Sociological Images have a fantastic review of the recently released movie, Avatar, up. Their commentary discusses how race, colonization, and the "noble savage" are deeply embedded in the blockbuster film. And the comments beneath their review also interrogate covert gender trends in the film.

They relate Avatar to other relatively recent films, such as Dances with Wolves and The Last Samurai, where white men "go native" and end up assuming major leadership roles within indigenous/minority populations, thereby ultimately becoming the central leaders for those "other" populations.

Consequently, the bottom line message from that genre of films is that while there are lessons to be learned from both cultures, it is the white, male culture that truly enables people of color to resist internal or external threats, even if only temporarily. Or even in movies based on true events, such as Freedom Writers and The Blind Side, with white women as the saviors, one must wonder (1) why those stories in particular were chosen as stories for motion pictures, and (2) why those stories were recieved so well by American audiences.

In the end, who, once again, is the hero, and what does this say about racial stratification in film and society? This is the same message I argued was expressed in Gran Torino (though most readers of that entry expressed their hatred of me and my analysis).

It is a fantastic read and obviously applicable for students right now. Check it out: On Avatar, The Movie (Spoiler Alert)

More on the Subtleties of Racism and Romance

Building off my previous post on the Justice of the Peace in Louisiana who refused to marry an African American man and white woman, this podcast was recently aired on NPR's "Tell Me More": "Love Might Be Blind, But Online Dating Isn't." Nothing terribly surprising here. As has been captured before in studies examining inter-racial marriage patterns, white men are the more common partners of choice for women in heterosexual relationships. Likewise on the whole, white women are considered the most desireable by men.

The interesting differences emerge when examining how people rate men and women of color. Generally, men of color are seen as the least desireable marriage partners, or in this case for online dating. Some women of color, however, are portrayed as highly desireable, a likely indicator of race and gender stereotypes portraying them as exotic and/or compliant. Notably, however, African American women, were found to be less desireable. From the "Tell Me More" podcast:

MARTIN (interviewer): And what made it particularly interesting is that you asked people what they were looking for, and then you could determine whether their behavior matched what it is they said, which is one of the things that intrigued me. And I have to tell you, some of the findings will be fairly painful, depending on your values, for some people to discover.

You found that black women get the least response to their messages. They also respond the most to received messages. You found that Indian men fare very poorly overall but also with Indian women, that Indian women do well overall. White women and men do the best.

[...]

So what do you think is going on here?

Mr. YAGAN (interviewee): Well, because we're able to adjust for compatibility, and what that means is we've already normalized for how well we think each person is going to get along with the other person, the only factor left in determining response rate really is the aesthetic appearance of the person who sent you that message. Obviously, there's more to aesthetic appearance than just race, but that is going to be the first thing that someone notices when they look at a picture. So we think that there really is racial bias in determining who people want to date.

As society continues to evolve in how it functions electronically, it is important to dissect how social distance between racialized and gendered groups is widened and closed. In this case, social distance presumably closes between white men and women of color, but on what terms and based on what race/gender stereotypes? What might these stereotypes contribute to in some inter-racial relationships when it comes to power imbalances (e.g., control, isolation, violence)? Conversely, social distance between women from all ethnic groups (whites included) and men of color widens, again, based on what racialized and gendered perceptions of diverse men of color?

"I try to treat everyone equally": Except When It Comes to Miscegination

I had to re-read this article from The Guardian a few times to make sure I wasn't missing something.

A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage licence to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have.

Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa parish, said it was his experience that most interracial marriages did not last long.

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell said. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

Bardwell said he asked everyone who called about marriage if they were a mixed race couple. If they were, he did not marry them.

[...]

"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage. I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."

If he did an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.

"I try to treat everyone equally."

First, how ironic is it for Bardwell to say he "treat(s) everyone equally." How can he possibly make such a statement after he clearly rejects some couples and accepts others according to their racial composition?

But the most interesting aspects of this article are how Bardwell justifies his actions, first through his so-called evidence of non-racist attitudes and behaviors by befriending African Americans and letting them "use (his) bathroom." And then through his anecdotal "evidence" that African American and Caucasian families don't treat mixed race children well.

Bardwell is using his power to further essentialize racial differences and divisions in society. He is literally influencing peoples' behaviors without their consent by forcing them to seek marriage elsewhere and cope with the emotions of knowing those in power still generalize socially constructed groups' behaviors (e.g., African American and Caucasian families won't treat mixed-race children fairly).

Next, let's return to the issue of "prooving" one's lack of racism by having friends from the racialized group being discriminated against. The is the exact same argument Boston police officer Justin Barrett used after writing in an e-mail that Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. was a "banana eating jungle monkey" -- he's not racist because he has black friends even though he writes glaringly racist statements.

Having African American friends, even marring a minority spouse in itself, proves nothing of one's supposed lack of racism. Men from majority groups frequently marry minority women specifically so they can control them. People frequently, often times unconsciously, befriend minorities based on racial stereotypes (e.g., I play basketball all the time with my black friends).

Let's not forget the grotesque case of police brutality enacted upon Haitian immigrant, Abner Louima, by four white New York police officers back in 1997. Two of the officers had intimate relationships with African American women -- Justin Volpe (who inflicted the most severe damage on Louima) and Thomas Wiese. From a 1999 article in the World Socialist Web Site before the trial was to begin:

One of the arguments that will be made by the defense in the Louima case is that branding the cops involved as racists is contradicted by the facts of their personal lives. One of the officers, Wiese, is married to an African-American woman and is the stepfather of her son. Another, Volpe, is engaged to a black woman.

As Bijan Bayne of TheRoot.com accurately notes, racism exists along a continuum of severity, and simply because one holds espoused positive relationships with members of minority groups does not mean attitudes and acts of racism automatically dissipate. If Bardwell does not want to be labeled a racist, then he needs to do more than have African American friends over for dinner and allow them to use his bathroom. He needs to stop essentializing his attitudes about African American and Caucasian communities and stop using his position of power to steer interethnic couples away from forging their relationships.

Approaches to anti-miscegenation take new twists, turns, and justifications...

Commodifying and Controlling Love in the Global Economy

From a story linked up on AsiaOne.com -- “Get an Aussie hubby for $10K.” The story explains how high-income, professional women from Singapore can dish out a fee to have access to men from Australia looking for marriage.

When most marriage consultants are helping men to find foreign brides, one company in Singapore has come out with a blue ocean strategy, only for women.

In view of the rising number of unmarried women in the republic, the company has an ideal package to offer.

The company is matching up its clients with Australian lifetime partner and is charging a fee of S$10,000 (RM24,540) for each successful match.

The men, aged between 30 and 60, and mostly from Brisbane.

“So far, we have paired up about 30 couples,” he said, adding some of the men they introduced were professionals such as lawyers and engineers.

Most of the local clients were career women aged between 20 and 50.

“We also have Chinese women who are working here as well as single mothers who are accompanying their children studying here,” he said.

He said Singaporean women had high expectations of their prospective husbands. They wanted men with a stable income and to look decent.

A few comments. First, this represents the theoretical position of “co-option,” where a smaller number of women are able to utilize the same types of leverage as men in constructing gendered relationships. In short, some women enter the men’s world but must play by the same rules. Thus, the gendered relationships don’t exactly shift since the structure remains the same.

However, this story also has a few twists that illustrate further male privilege in the global marital building business. Even when higher-income women use men’s tactics to purchase access to potential marriages from overseas, these Singaporean and Chinese women appear to be pursuing men who will advance their collective economic advantages. Thus, the women and men are on equal footing economically and likely educationally.

This is drastically different from western men who purchase access to meeting women for potential marriage from lower-income countries. As documented in the Asian American Studies literature, western men frequently marry women from low-income countries who are disempowered once in their new “home,” lacking adequate language and educational skills, and virtually no social-networking connections that would help these women know where to turn if being abused.

Thus, when men are in essence purchasing poor, foreign women for marriage, there tends to be a more deliberate effort to perpetuate race and gender power imbalances. In these cases, the globally constructed marriage is on far less equal footing.

Then another story from Southeast Asia, covering a stepfather who chained his stepdaughter as a prisoner because he did not approve of her boyfriend. From AsiaOneNews:

KUCHING, MALAYSIA: A 20-year-old woman has lodged a police report against her stepfather for keeping her in chains in the house.

The girl claimed that her stepfather, a foreign national, and her mother took her away from the boyfriend's house at Kampung Rampangi in Santubong and forced her to return to their home in Bandar Baru Semariang on Friday night.

The couple then shackled her legs with chains to prevent her from leaving the house. He secured the chains with a padlock.

The ever-growing inter-cultural relationships that emerge with globalization are clearly ridden with power inequalities, influenced by patriarchy manifesting across stratified countries, class groups, and within families.

[Photo courtesy of AsiaOneNews.com].