The Utility of Race Labeling in Understanding Cultural Identity: A Conceptual Tool for the Social Science Practitioner

Abstract

A s things go, it has taken several decades to loosen our social science frameworks from race biases and cultural myopia so that we can study differences between groups as opposed to deficiencies of disadvantaged groups (Sue, 1988). And presuming, for the moment, that we now have nailed down a more responsible position of social accountability, we are left with a number of problems related to theory construction and development. Bringing clarity to questions of race seems uniquely hampered by the fact that we assume an objectivity that says that social processes are amenable to the same physical laws and principals as are characteristic of the biological or physical sciences. Yet, some of our major social theories are little more than metaphors borrowed from the physical sciences (Kaye, 1985). Said differently, our methods of inquiry in social science are still developing, and many of our theories yield poor or limited results because we use inappropriate theory building techniques.Hendi (1976) contended that the social sciences have underutilized taxonomic (observational) approaches for conceptualizing relational patterns and paradigms. This discussion uses his assertion to examine utility and precision among terms (lexicon) used in race relations and cultural studies. In this article it is shown that much of our basic terminology needs to be modified in contextual meaning or preferably not used at all.

Addressing the Complexities of Culture and Gender in Counseling

“…Because race is still a powerful sociopolitical construct and an important aspect of identity for many people (Helms, 1990;Spickard, 1992), it continues to require consideration in the social sciences, particularly with regard to understanding social attitudes, prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination (Fairchild, Yee, Wyatt, & Weizmann, 1995). However, its use as an explanatory factor in behavior is quite problematic (Dobbins & Skillings, 1991). For example, as Jones (1987) noted, knowing that a client is Black (or for that matter, White) does not adequately inform the therapist about the client's views of psychotherapy, personality, psychological conflict, aspirations, or goals in therapy, "let alone about educational level, social background, or environmental context" (p. 175).…”

Racism as a Disease: Etiology and Treatment Implications

“…The utility of the race concept in the social sciences has long been held in question (Dobbins & Skillings, 1991;Johnson, 1990;Zuckerman, 1990). We agree, however, with Johnson (1990) that a social definition still has some utility when one is examining issues such as racism.…”

“…We use this term to refer to people who are or were socialized to see themselves as white (the "w" in white is intentionally lowercased in this article; the authors are referring to a power group, such as "women," "elected officials," or "adults"). We avoid the use of the term white because (a) it is inaccurate; Caucasians are more beige or tan than white and (b) it feeds into a color symbolism of supremacy that we would rather not perpetuate (Dobbins & Skillings, 1991). The term includes people who are not of Euro-pean American ancestry but who identify with these values so completely that they function as agents of a system even though it mitigates against them.…”

Internalized Culture, Culturocentrism, and Transcendence

“…I deplore its continued use and prefer the term Euro-American. (For a discussion of the problems of race labeling, see Dobbins & Skillings, 1991;Yee et al, 1993. )…”