Post-Racial Ideology and Implicit Racial Bias

This study assesses college students from the University of New Hampshire (UNH) and their attitudes and opinions toward people of color, specifically looking at racial/ethnic identity and campus social climate. With 362 respondents from the University of New Hampshire who answered our online survey, it looked at the participants’ post-racial ideologies and the participant’s racial/ethnic identity. This study finds that there is a correlation between racial identity and post-racial beliefs. The study found that 82 percent of the student respondents did not believe that we, as a society, lived in a post-racial America. It was also discovered that the student respondents who did believe we live in a post-racial society (eighteen percent) were almost primarily White participants. The research also shows that in comparison to students of color, White students are more likely to believe that there is little to no racial prejudice or discrimination on UNH’s campus. While this data gives important insight into the racial attitudes at UNH, having a more diverse demographic and a larger sample size would improve the research

Implicit Racial Biases in Prosecutorial Summations: Proposing an Integrated Response

Racial bias has evolved from the explicit racism of the Jim Crow era to amore subtle and difficult-to-detect form: implicit racial bias. Implicit racial biases exist unconsciously and include negative racial stereotypes andassociations. Everyone, including actors in the criminal justice system who believe themselves to be fair, possess these biases. Although inaccessible through introspection, implicit biases can easily be triggered through language. When trials involve Black defendants, prosecutors’ summations increasingly include racial themes that could trigger jurors’ implicit biases, lead to the perpetuation of unfair stereotypes, and contribute to racial injustice and disparate outcomes. This Note examines and critiques the current approaches that courts and disciplinary authorities use to address implicit racial biases in prosecutorial summations. Recognizing the inadequacy in these current methods, this Note proposes an integrated response, which involves lawyers, jurors, trial courts, and appellate courts. The proposed approach seeks to increase recognition of implicit racial bias use, deter prosecutors from using language that triggers implicit racial biases, and ensure that Black defendants’ equal protection rights are upheld

Collective ethnic-racial identity and health outcomes among African American youth: Examination of promotive and protective effects

OBJECTIVES: Racial discrimination is associated with numerous negative health outcomes, including increased risk for depression and anxiety symptoms and substance use. Positive affect toward of one's ethnic or racial group (i.e., ethnic-racial identity affirmation) has been shown to buffer the negative effects of racial discrimination on health outcomes. The extent to which one believes his or her group is valued by others (i.e., positive collective ethnic-racial identity) has also been proposed to be protective. However, to date a limited body of research has examined the moderating effect of collective ethnic-racial identity on health, and among available studies, findings are mixed. METHOD: African American youth (N = 612; 58.2% female, M grade = 8) completed measures on experiences of discrimination, mood symptoms, substance use, ethnic-racial identity affirmation, and collective ethnic-racial identity (assessed using the Collective Self-Esteem Scale). RESULTS: Controlling for demographic variables and affirmation, a significant main effect was found for collective ethnic-racial identity, such that believing that others viewed your group positively was associated with better health outcomes among African American youth. However, collective ethnic-racial identity was not found to buffer the effects of discrimination on health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of examining collective ethnic-racial identity and the promotive effect it can have on health outcomes for African Americans. More research is needed to better understand if there are health outcomes in which collective ethnic-racial identity may also mitigate risk as a consequence of racial discrimination. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)

Why Yellow Fever Isn't Flattering: A Case Against Racial Fetishes

Most discussions of racial fetish center on the question of whether it is caused by negative racial stereotypes. In this paper I adopt a different strategy, one that begins with the experiences of those targeted by racial fetish rather than those who possess it; that is, I shift focus away from the origins of racial fetishes to their effects as a social phenomenon in a racially stratified world. I examine the case of preferences for Asian women, also known as ‘yellow fever’, to argue against the claim that racial fetishes are unobjectionable if they are merely based on personal or aesthetic preference rather than racial stereotypes. I contend that even if this were so, yellow fever would still be morally objectionable because of the disproportionate psychological burdens it places on Asian and Asian-American women, along with the role it plays in a pernicious system of racial social meanings

White Counselor Trainees\u27 Racial Identity and Working Alliance Perceptions

Racial identity has been theorized to significantly affect cross-racial counseling relationships (Helms, 1984, 1995). This study examined the direct impact of White racial identity of 124 counselor trainees on working alliance formation in a same-racial and cross-racial vicarious counseling analogue. Regardless of the race of the client, disintegration and reintegration attitudes negatively affected working alliance ratings, and pseudoindependent and autonomy attitudes positively affected working alliance ratings. Implications for counseling, supervision, training, and research are discussed

Free Your Mind: Contemporary Racial Attitudes and Post Racial Theory

The inauguration of the United States first Black President has prompted mass discussions of race relations in America. It is often articulated that America is now in a post-racial society. However, the question still remains: does the election of a Black president demonstrate that America is now a color-blind society? To answer this question, we rely on data collected by PEW (2007). Our results suggest that white and African Americans differ significantly in the extent to which they express post-racial attitudes. Specifically, we find that whites more commonly express post-racial attitudes, claiming that racism and discrimination are rare, in opposition to African American views. On the other hand, blacks are more likely to believe that discrimination still occurs. We further find that whites\u27 post-racial beliefs are significant determinants of their attitudes towards race-related policies, such as affirmative action. Keywords: Race, Obama, Post-racial, Public Opinion, Racial Attitudes, Racial Politics, African American

Neutralizing Grutter

Part I of this article argues that the Supreme Court lacks the institutional competence to formulate racial policy for the nation, and highlights the tension that exists between the Court\u27s abstract preference for race neutrality and the concrete reality of contemporary race relations, in which dedicated efforts to promote racial balance offer the only meaningful hope of eliminating systemic discrimination. Part II discusses moderate strategies that can be used to deflect the impact of Grutter’s prohibition on racial balance, suggesting that racial balancing can be restructured in ways that the Supreme Court may view as constitutional. Part III discusses more radical strategies that can be used to promote racial balance, and advocates a direct confrontation with the institution of judicial review in the context of affirmative action. The article concludes that the political branches of government possess the power to overcome Supreme Court impediments to racial justice, and hopes that they also possess the will to exercise that power

Disparate Impact

There has been a lot of talk about post-racialism since the 2008 election of Barack Obama as the first black President of the United States. Some have argued that the Obama election illustrates the evolution of the United States from its unfortunate racist past to a more admirable post-racial present in which the problem of invidious racial discrimination has largely been overcome. Others have argued that the Obama election illustrates only that an extraordinarily gifted, mixed-race, multiple Ivy League graduate, Harvard Law Review President was able to overcome the persistent discriminatory racial practices that continue to disadvantage the bulk of less fortunate racial minority group members in the United States. Part I of this essay discusses the claim that we have now become a post-racial society, arguing that this claim itself constitutes a form of systemic discrimination against racial minorities. Section I.A describes the history of Supreme Court involvement in the sacrifice of minority interests for the benefit of the white majority in order to establish a context in which the racial jurisprudence of the contemporary Supreme Court can be assessed. Section I.B describes how the contemporary Court has used post-racial assumptions to perpetuate discrimination against racial minorities in the name of protecting the equality interests of whites. Part II discusses the Supreme Court’s hostility to disparate impact claims. Section II.A describes how the Court rejected disparate impact claims under its constitutional equality jurisprudence. Section II.B describes how the Roberts Court is extending this hostility to the statutory disparate impact claims created by Congress in Title VII. Part III argues that the recognition of disparate impact claims is a sensible precommitment strategy for the resolution of the nation’s persistent racial discrimination problem. Section III.A argues that racial discrimination is so deeply embedded in United States culture that it cannot be eradicated through mere voluntary efforts to behave in nondiscriminatory ways. Section III.B argues that viewing racially disparate impact as sufficiently suspect to warrant a presumptive remedy would enable the culture to approximate the genuine racial equality that its ingrained racial attitudes have thus far precluded it from attaining. The Conclusion expresses the fear that Supreme Court jurisprudence will continue to reject disparate impact claims in the name of post-racialism precisely because the Court is one of the institutions on which the culture relies to perpetuate its systemic discrimination against racial minorities

Post-Racial

This image was created by Sam Fleming for Tapestries: Interwoven voices of local and global identities, volume 6 (2017), published by Macalester College.For more information, please visit the Tapestries journal home page. Copyright 2017, Samuel Fleming