Situating Oneself in a Racialized World: Understanding Student Reactions to<i>Crash</i>through Standpoint Theory and Context-Positionality Frames

Kinefuchi, Etsuko; Orbe, Mark P.

doi:10.1080/17513050701742909

Cited by 21 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Differences in perception are particularly pronounced when individuals' identities confer unequal levels of power. For example, among students who were shown the same film about race relations, white students were more likely to respond by describing the film as an exaggeration, or "over the top," while students of color were more likely to respond with reflections on how much the film mirrored their own experiences [23]. In this example, students' own racial identifications (their positions within social structures) produced very different perceptions about the same film (the phenomenon).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparing demographics of signatories to public letters on diversity in the mathematical sciences

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In its December 2019 edition, the Notices of the American Mathematical Society published an essay critical of the use of diversity statements in academic hiring. The publication of this essay prompted many responses, including three public letters circulated within the mathematical sciences community. Each letter was signed by hundreds of people and was published online, also by the American Mathematical Society. We report on a study of the signatories' demographics, which we infer using a crowdsourcing approach. Letter A highlights diversity and social justice. The pool of signatories contains relatively more individuals inferred to be women and/or members of underrepresented ethnic groups. Moreover, this pool is diverse with respect to the levels of professional security and types of academic institutions represented. Letter B does not comment on diversity, but rather, asks for discussion and debate. This letter was signed by a strong majority of individuals inferred to be white men in professionally secure positions at highly research intensive universities. Letter C speaks out specifically against diversity statements, calling them "a mistake," and claiming that their usage during early stages of faculty hiring "diminishes mathematical achievement." Individuals who signed both Letters B and C, that is, signatories who both privilege debate and oppose diversity statements, are overwhelmingly inferred to be tenured white men at highly research intensive universities. Our empirical results are consistent with theories of power drawn from the social sciences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparing demographics of signatories to public letters on diversity in the mathematical sciences

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, Whites have been known to invalidate, reframe, and recommend how Blacks should feel during interracial conversations (Narayan, 1988). And, because some Whites believe that racism has largely disappeared in contemporary society (Kinefuchi & Orbe, 2008), they are less likely to be sympathetic to the pain and suffering expressed by Blacks.…”

Section: Sensitivity To Race-based Rejection and Ethnocultural Allodyniamentioning

confidence: 99%

Why we can’t talk openly about race: The impact of race and partisanship on respondents’ perceptions of intergroup conversations

Appiah

Eveland

Bullock

et al. 2021

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conversations about race-specific issues with interracial conversation partners can be important to combat prejudice and foster mutual understanding. Using a national U.S. sample of 201 Black Democrats, 199 Black Republicans, 200 White Democrats, and 200 White Republicans, this study examined the role that race and partisanship play in individuals’ desire to have political discussions about race-specific topics with racial outgroups. Findings indicate that Blacks in general expected more negative outcomes of race talk with racial outgroups, and Republicans were more likely to attempt to avoid interracial conversations about race. However, these findings were qualified by an interaction between race and partisanship such that White Democrats anticipated fewer negative outcomes from cross-race conversations about race than all other subgroups, and Black Democrats expected more negative outcomes than all other subgroups. Black and White Republicans did not differ from one another and fell roughly between the two Democratic subgroups. Nonetheless, it was White Republicans who were most likely to want to avoid race-specific conversations with cross-race discussion partners, rating significantly more avoidant than Black Republicans and White Democrats, but not Black Democrats.

show abstract

“…10 The fact that sociologists failed to see what was there to be seen is a case study where the absence of evidence, or negative evidence, constitutes the evidence of absence. A meditation on what was not there in sociological analyses is thus part of a meaningful measurement of sociologists' monoracial subjectivity and standpoint with respect to multiracial identities and mixed-race experiences in the late 1980s and early 1990s (Kinefuchi & Orbe, 2008;Thompson & Scurich, 2018).…”

Section: The Multiracial Movement and Positive Marginalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociology of Multiracial Identity in the Late 1980s and Early 1990s: The Failure of a Perspective

Daniel

2021

J Ethn Cult Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sociologists largely failed to comprehend the emergence of multiracial identities in the United States during the late 1980s and early 1990s. This was due, in part, to hypodescent and the monoracial imperative. These social devices, respectively, categorize offspring of interracial unions between Whites and people of color based exclusively on the background of color, and necessitate single-racial identification. This has prohibited the articulation and recognition of multiracial identities. Hypodescent and the monoracial imperative are so normative that they have been taken for granted by sociologists across the monoracial spectrum, much as the larger society. Sociology’s espoused objectivity blinded sociologists to the standpoint of their own monoracial subjectivity. They provided little critical examination of hypodescent and the monoracial imperative in terms of their impact on multiracial identity formations. Some sociologists challenged theories of marginality, which stressed the psychological dysfunction of multiracials. Yet multiracial identities were considered symptomatic of mainly isolated psychological concerns with personal identity. Sociologists were absent from analyses of collective identity and agency speaking to mixed-race concerns. Consequently, they remained on the periphery of social scientific theorizing of multiracial identities in terms of their wider-ranging implications.

show abstract

Situating Oneself in a Racialized World: Understanding Student Reactions toCrashthrough Standpoint Theory and Context-Positionality Frames

Cited by 21 publications

References 24 publications

Comparing demographics of signatories to public letters on diversity in the mathematical sciences

Comparing demographics of signatories to public letters on diversity in the mathematical sciences

Why we can’t talk openly about race: The impact of race and partisanship on respondents’ perceptions of intergroup conversations

Sociology of Multiracial Identity in the Late 1980s and Early 1990s: The Failure of a Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About