Mapping others

Gender and the Neighborhood Location of Mixed-Race Couples

“…Most studies drawing on these approaches focus on individuals or households. When households become the object of analysis, such research time and again conceives of them as monoracial; differences within the household have not been the immediate concern of researchers trying to unpack the mechanics of residential sorting or other social processes (exceptions include Ellis et al 2007; Holloway et al 2005; Iceland and Nelson 2010; Smith et al 2011; Wright and Ellis 2006; White and Sassler 2000; Wright et al 2003). When considering the neighborhood locations of households headed by racially mixed couples, however, the issue of gender asymmetry in such units places the question of how gender interacts with race in residential processes squarely in the spotlight.…”

The Map, the Other and the public visual image

“…and the spatial visualisation of residential segregation, however, has been criticised as a dangerous practice because it tends to reproduce the idea of social separation from Others, as well as 'fixity' in migrant life. Alternatives are found, for instance, by replacing the focus on individuals with a household approach (Wright & Ellis, 2006), by mapping fluctuating migrant territories grasped by walking their everyday spaces together with them (Awan & Langley, 2013), or by investigating segregation in cities through a combination of mental maps and tracking technologies (GPS) (Greenberg Raanan & Shoval, 2014).…”

“…The association of realms such as cartography, on the one hand, and racial/ethnic Otherness, on the other hand, could lead a geographer to think about past and present cartographic products such as cartographic representations of ethnic groups, maps of racial segregation, migration maps, decorative emblems of difference within historical maps, colonial/imperial mapping and non-Western/indigenous cartography (Awan & Langley, 2013;Edney, 1997;Paulani Louis, Johnson, & Hadi Pramono, 2012;Pearce, 2009;Pratt, 1996;Winlow, 2009;Wright & Ellis, 2006). The present article, however, deals with a different way of confronting Otherness with cartography.…”

Geography, Race, and Quantification

“…Paralleling the development of critical race geographies over the past fifteen years, but at a slower pace, is what can be termed critical quantitative geography (Lawson 1995;Mattingly and Falconer Al-Hindi 1995;McLafferty 1995;Moss 1995;Rocheleau 1995;Sheppard 2001;Kwan 2002Kwan , 2004Poon 2003Poon , 2005Houston et al 2005;Wright, Ellis, and Parks 2005;Wright and Ellis 2006). Critical quantitative geography is coupled to critical race geographies at two points: the quantitative race work of Wright, Ellis, Holloway, Parks, and others; and the work of feminist empirical geographers (McLafferty andPreston 1991, 1997;JohnstonAnumonwo 1997;Houston et al 2005;Wright, Ellis, and Parks 2005;Wright and Ellis 2006).…”

“…Critical quantitative geography is coupled to critical race geographies at two points: the quantitative race work of Wright, Ellis, Holloway, Parks, and others; and the work of feminist empirical geographers (McLafferty andPreston 1991, 1997;JohnstonAnumonwo 1997;Houston et al 2005;Wright, Ellis, and Parks 2005;Wright and Ellis 2006). This brand of quantitative race research differs from its predecessors in that it does not take racial categories as natural.…”