Stereotyping

by

How Children’s Books Fuel Mascot Stereotypes – COLORLINES

 

“This brings me to the issue of how we frame diversity. I want to ask you whether you think it’s helpful to refer to Natives as people of color—or if this ultimately obscures political status. 
It absolutely works against our best interest to be placed in the framework of people of color. White children’s authors, for example, write about American Indians and civil rights. And my response is that it’s not about civil rights, it’s about treaty rights. And that’s an encapsulation of what goes wrong when you use a civil rights framework. To start with, people don’t know that we’re sovereign nations, that we have a political status in the United States, as opposed to a racial, cultural or ethnic one. So it’s easy to see why people fall into that multicultural framework. But it’s really not culture—it’s really politics. When people in education start developing these frameworks and chart out the ways that people of color have a history in the United States, they’ll slot us in there, too. But that collapses, erases and obscures our distinct political designation in the United States.”

 
See on colorlines.com

by

“Suspicion Nation” – Addressing the Critics; Re: Maddy

 

“… Maddy, I can understand you more now as a person, but I still don’t like that you changed your vote. There, I said it.  Does that mean that I hate you?  No.  Does it mean I have no respect for you as a person?  No. If I were to meet you, I would want to sit and hear about everything you experienced in Seminole County.  I think we might have something in common moving away from our hometown within our hometown, to find that people in other parts of this great nation are not welcoming to “outsiders.”

 

I would tell you that our brains process what our guts tell us.  Example?  When you were mocked and demeaned, did you first feel it in your gut, or your brain?  It took your brain time to discern that the women were not laughing with you, but at you. If your gut hadn’t processed their motivation, your brain would not have discerned it.

So, what is the problem that the anti-Trayvon Martin camp has with Maddy and Lisa Bloom’s interview of her?  They allege that Maddy told Reverend Sharpton on his Politics Nation program, that she had not been bullied.

 

Thankfully, that interview is on Youtube.  Reverend Sharpton said that there are those who question what happened in the jury room.  Did people pressure people?  Were people bullying Maddy?  He asked her directly, “Were you bullied, Maddy?” Maddy hesitated.  She started her answer with “we.” She stopped again, and when she continued stated, “I can’t say I was bullied.”

 

As she continues, she goes back and repeats what she has always contended; i.e., that the way the law was read to her, she could not say that Zimmerman was guilty.

 

What I see in Maddy’s interview on Politics Nation, and her interview with Lisa Bloom, is that Maddy speaks of two distinct times.  She tells Lisa Bloom what happened BEFORE the jury deliberated and it was at that time when she was bullied.   By the time that the jury deliberated, two of the jurors had already re-defined Maddy in her person to believe that she was not educated and intelligent enough to understand anything presented to the jury at trial, neither the jury instructions, nor the law to in which to apply the facts.  By the time of jury deliberations, there was no further need to bully Maddy.  She was already intimidated…”

 
See on blackbutterfly7.wordpress.com

by

RACIAL EQUITY CANNOT BE MEASURED WITHOUT DISAGGREGATING DATA

 

“Breaking out the data this way provides an opportunity to explore the structural reasons for this gap, like employment and education opportunities or barriers and immigration history. ”

 

 

Community Village‘s insight:

 

Asian data is missing before 1987 or so. That’s due to the U.S. Asian population not being large enough before then to be ‘statistically significant’. The reason for the low Asian population is due to the Asian Exclusion Act of 1924 and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.

 

Immigration policies are no longer based on race. They now prefer the highly educated, which explains the higher income.

 

If the U.S. would implement low cost public higher education it would level out this income gap over time.

 

The U.S. benefits from the educational infrastructure of other countries. The U.S. uses (im)migrant brains without making the investment in education for it’s own citizens.

See on racemattersinstitute.org

by

Why crime statistics cannot be trusted – in two charts

AKA: Racism is not dead – in two charts: Black Americans use marijuana a bit more than Whites: Yet are way more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession: Also notice that the rise in arrest r…

See on abagond.wordpress.com

by

Chick-fil-A CEO now regrets dragging the company into anti-equality morass

 

“So does that mean he’s had a change of heart, and in his new maturity has grown to accept that marriage equality is not, in fact, the doom of America? No. He just regrets saying it out loud, because money.”

 

…
See on www.dailykos.com

by

What They’re Saying When They Talk About Us

 

“From January 1 through June 30 of 2013 (26 weeks) ChangeLab, an Asian American-led racial justice laboratory and the publisher of this blog, conducted a study of what are known as the Sunday political shows in order to learn what they’re saying about Asian Americans. The study focused on what are known as the Big Five Sunday shows: Face the Nation (CBS), Fox News Sunday (Fox), Meet the Press (NBC), State of the Union (CNN), and This Week With George Stephanopoulos (ABC).

 

In addition, we also studied two MSNBC political talk programs, Melissa Harris Perry and Up with Chris Hayes/Steve Kornacki. Both follow the general format of the Big Five, but run two-hours each on Saturday and Sunday mornings, and serve a somewhat different market, both in terms of size and demographics. For these reasons, we’ll report on them separately.

 

Those MSNBC shows do a lot more talking about Asians and race in general than the Big Five. But what they have to say is often neither very flattering nor credible”

 
See on www.racefiles.com

by

MSNBC is Doing Asian Americans No Favors

 

“When it comes to racial diversity among the Sunday political talk shows, MSNBC is the undisputed leader. In two studies conducted by ChangeLab(January-June 2012, and January-June 2013), MSNBC’s anchor weekend talk programs, Up with Chris Hayes/Steve Kornacki and Melissa Harris Perryincluded more guests of color and hosted more discussion of issues of race than all of the other networks offering similar programming combined. The difference is not just in quantity but in the depth and quality of the discourse. Now, mind you, the standard established by the major networks is set pretty low, but they do at least exceed it.”

 

…

 

 

Community Village‘s insight:

 

Ignoring groups and spreading misinformation about them is a form of oppression.

 

And the continually message that some groups are better than others is also a form of oppression.

See on www.racefiles.com

by

LGBT victims of domestic abuse are rarely catered for – or acknowledged

Ally Fogg: While activists for heterosexual victims of domestic violence have ensured measures such as Clare’s law, LGBT people have fallen through the cracks

 

Community Village‘s insight:

 

This article is from the UK, but makes a good point about overlooked communities.

See on www.theguardian.com