[Split]When are you white?

[hgc]

This whole topic brings to mind a Sinclair Lewis novel, Kingsblood Royal. It takes place in a midwestern city in the post-war 40's. The protagonist, Neil Kingsblood, is a returning war hero who resumes life with his family, his extended community and his comfortable job at a bank. He is described as fair skinned, red haired, freckled. His father repeats a family legend that they are descended from Henry VIII by way of Mary Boleyn, and urges Neil to research the family history. What Neil finds out instead is that his great great grandfather on his mother's side was black. He starts a journey of discovery, in secret, hanging out in the black side of town, making friends there. Since the mescegination laws of most states at the time, dating from antebellum times, stated that anyone with 1/64th blackness was deemed black, he thought of himself as such. He eventually announces to everyone concerned that he is black, and he and his family quickly become outcasts. He is fired from his bank job. His parents and in-laws won't have anything to do with him. People he doesn't even know start calling him "******" to his face, and worse so do people he does know.

Interesting how people can be so accepting of arbitrarily defined categorizations.

 

[drkitten]

But how would anyone find out?

By reading Dr. Rosch's thirty-year old studies in which she addressed the problems of prototype identification.

For someone who claims to be professionally qualified in the field of classification, you seem strangely unfamiliar with the literature. I had this stuff in secondary school, before I ever set foot in a university classroom.

 

[roger]

I remember I was talking to a friend a few years ago when he brought up a topic that momentarily flabergasted me. We were talking about race, and he said (I paraphase) "Ya, like what about me? Am I white? Am I black? I don't know." It surprised me because I had never really put him in a category in my mind. Yes, he has dark skin, but not overly so. I had never really thought about it. If pressed to guess based on facial feature I would have probably guessed he was Arab with a deep tan or something. (this was a fairly new friend, so I didn't know much about his past).

We talked a bit about his heritage, family, etc (he was born in Africa, the rest I forget except it was complicated), and we came to the conclusion that there was no reasonable way to call him either black or white. It was indeterminate.

What was not, and never will be indeterminate for him, is how people tend to treat him based on which category they place him.

 

[Tricky]

When are you white?

Evenings after 7 PM and on alternate Saturdays. Also by appointment.

 

[CFLarsen]

Well, one reason is because there's strong social pressure within the group to conform to the in-group social expectations; John McWhorter, for example, has spent quite some time documenting anti-intellectualism among American blacks, and -- interestingly -- black children who act intellectual are criticized specifically for "acting white." To attempt to self-identify as "white" will expose you to as much or more discrimination among blacks than self-identifying as "black" among whites. And if most of your social contacts are black, that's a much bigger disincentive.....

So, what you are saying is that blacks are stupid? How else would you describe such behavior?

For many, self-identification as "black" is actually beneficial if they're in a strongly "black" community, to the point that they will attempt to become more prototypically black -- essentially, trying to make themselves more black instead of make themselves more white. Again, this can produce strongly counterintuitive results, such as Lichelle Laws' rather infamous "Trying to get to Watts, but I'm stuck in Baldwin Hills" lyrics.

But we are not talking about self-identification within the black community. We are talking about self-identification in society as a whole.

Do you have some data on this? How many, out of how many? What the heck is a "prototypically black"?

Beyond that, of course, self-identification only works as long as other people tend to agree with the results of the self-identification. As you point out, correctly, a white could self-identify as a black to try to get money out of a college-tuition-for-blacks fund. As a single isolated incident, this isn't necessarily a problem; in order to get the money, the white not only has to self-identify, but the fund officer has to agree, otherwise, he doesn't get the money. The funds officer, of course, has his own prototype (again, there's no "bright line" involved). The system is robust enough to stand up to a few mistakes. If the funds officer's decisions vary too radically from society's as a whole, he will either be removed from his job as incompetent, or else donations to the fund will drop to the point that the fund is no longer viable.

But what is this "society's yardstick" that he has to measure up against? That's what I'm trying to find out.

So the system is robust to a few errors, but widespread attempting to work the system as you describe would produce too many errors, and people would stop relying on self-identification. For example, some schools/foundations used to require applicants to submit photographs with the application. This substitutes the prototype-based judgement of the foundation's officer with the self-identification of the applicant.

You still haven't argued why you need a single bright line to define people's race when every other categorization decision that people make can demonstrably be handled well by prototype-based decision mechanisms. If your point is simply that racial classification is not objective -- so what? If you argue that people can disagree about a given person's race -- again, so what? The fact that two people can disagree about a borderline case in a prototype-based classification system does not invalidate either the system or the classifications.

Or if you feel it does, then take it up with Dr. Rosch.

No, I am asking you. You are the one debating here.

By reading Dr. Rosch's thirty-year old studies in which she addressed the problems of prototype identification.

Do they do that? Is this the yardstick they measure up against? If they don't, then your point is invalid.

 

[drkitten]

So, what you are saying is that blacks are stupid? How else would you describe such behavior?

No. I'd describe it as "humans are social animals."

On the other hand, McWhorter describes it (broadly) as "blacks are stupid," so perhaps there's something to your theory as well.

But we are not talking about self-identification within the black community. We are talking about self-identification in society as a whole.

You know, that's the hard thing about self-identification.... it's the sort of thing that you really have to do consistently to be any good at. Trying to be "all things to all people" has a tendency to bite you in the ass.....

Do you have some data on this? How many, out of how many? What the heck is a "prototypically black"?

Yes, lots. Start with John McWhorter.

But what is this "society's yardstick" that he has to measure up against? That's what I'm trying to find out.

You're doing a very poor job of it, then. To start with, where did the word "yardstick" enter the discussion?

Society's judgement is a collection of individual judgements. If you want to learn how individuals form prototypes, read Rosch.

Do they do that? Is this the yardstick they measure up against?

There is no yardstick; there are only prototypes. You are using a metaphor that has been known to be incorrect for about thirty years.

 

[CFLarsen]

No. I'd describe it as "humans are social animals."

Do other groups act the same way? Whites trying to be as white as possible? What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?

On the other hand, McWhorter describes it (broadly) as "blacks are stupid," so perhaps there's something to your theory as well.

It's not my theory. I'm not the one claiming that blacks are self-destructive because they prefer to be as black as possible.

You know, that's the hard thing about self-identification.... it's the sort of thing that you really have to do consistently to be any good at. Trying to be "all things to all people" has a tendency to bite you in the ass.....

Maybe so. That still doesn't address the issue of blacks not applying as whites, to avoid racial discrimination.

Is there any chance you'll address it in the near future?

Yes, lots. Start with John McWhorter.

Let's see the data. Explain what a "prototypically black" is.

You're doing a very poor job of it, then. To start with, where did the word "yardstick" enter the discussion?

"Measuring tool". Call it what you like.

Society's judgement is a collection of individual judgements. If you want to learn how individuals form prototypes, read Rosch.

I am much more interested in you explaining what this measuring tool is.

There is no yardstick; there are only prototypes. You are using a metaphor that has been known to be incorrect for about thirty years.

Please stop this rubbish, and address the issues.

 

[drkitten]

Do other groups act the same way?

Depends on the group. I'd be happy to provide citations if they were relevant and if you gave any indication of having read the ones I've already provided.

Maybe so. That still doesn't address the issue of blacks not applying as whites, to avoid racial discrimination.

Is there any chance you'll address it in the near future?

Not until you're familiarized yourself with Rosch and McWhorter's work, no.

I don't want to overload you with reading.

I am much more interested in you explaining what this measuring tool is.

I'll be delighted to. Read up on Rosch and McWhorter and then I'll happily explain how Nosofsky classifiers work, as one way of implementing the measuring tool.

 

[CFLarsen]

Depends on the group. I'd be happy to provide citations if they were relevant and if you gave any indication of having read the ones I've already provided.

The onus is not on me, but on you.

Do other groups than blacks act the same way? Whites trying to be as white as possible?

Not until you're familiarized yourself with Rosch and McWhorter's work, no.

I don't want to overload you with reading.

The onus is not on me, but on you.

What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?

How many blacks self-identify as blacks because they find it beneficial if they are in a strongly black community?

Out of how many blacks in all?

Can you explain what a "prototypically black" is?

I'll be delighted to. Read up on Rosch and McWhorter and then I'll happily explain how Nosofsky classifiers work, as one way of implementing the measuring tool.

If you can explain, please do so: What is this measuring tool that a funds officer/administrator has to measure up against?

Cut the manure and answer the questions.

 

[drkitten]

The onus is not on me, but on you.

I can cite the evidence, but I can't make you read it. And I'm not going to summarize the primary source documents to you.

So, no, the onus is now on you.

What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?

Read McWhorter.

How many blacks self-identify as blacks because they find it beneficial if they are in a strongly black community?

Out of how many blacks in all?

Read McWhorter.

Can you explain what a "prototypically black" is?

Read McWhorter and Rosch.

If you can explain, please do so: What is this measuring tool that a funds officer/administrator has to measure up against?

Read Rosch.

Cut the manure and answer the questions.

Cut the manure and read the evidence I've cited already. You asked for evidence. I provided it, including citations to the primary research. If you don't like the evidence, read the sources yourself and refute them on their merits.

 

[CFLarsen]

I can cite the evidence, but I can't make you read it. And I'm not going to summarize the primary source documents to you.

So, no, the onus is now on you.

How on Earth is the onus on me, if you refuse to cite the evidence and summarize the primary source documents? If you know the answers, let's hear them.

Read McWhorter.

Read McWhorter.

Read McWhorter and Rosch.

Read Rosch.

If you know the answers, let's hear them.

Cut the manure and read the evidence I've cited already. You asked for evidence. I provided it, including citations to the primary research. If you don't like the evidence, read the sources yourself and refute them on their merits.

This is pure bollocks.

• Do other groups than blacks act the same way? Whites trying to be as white as possible?
  
• What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?
  
• How many blacks self-identify as blacks because they find it beneficial if they are in a strongly black community?
  
• Out of how many blacks in all?
  
• Can you explain what a "prototypically black" is?
  
• What is this measuring tool that a funds officer/administrator has to measure up against?

 

[Luke T.]

When are you not "white"?

When are you not whong?

 

[drkitten]

How on Earth is the onus on me, if you refuse to cite the evidence and summarize the primary source documents? If you know the answers, let's hear them.

I haven't refused to cite the references. You've been referred -- repeatedly, I might add -- to John McWhorter and to Eleanor Rosch. In particular, I recommend Losing the Race (2000, Simon and Shuster) as a fairly clear statement on the sociology of potentially self-destructive antiintellectualism in modern black culture, although McWhorter has written extensively on the topic elsewhere.

Similarly, the two Rosch papers referenced above --" Human Categorization." In N. Warren, ed., Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology. London: Academic, and "Natural categories." Cognitive Psychology 4: 328—350" are good starting points for Rosch's theories of categorization. I believe she has a book-length treatment from the early 1980's, but I don't have the reference to hand.

• Do other groups than blacks act the same way? Whites trying to be as white as possible?
  
• What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?
  
• How many blacks self-identify as blacks because they find it beneficial if they are in a strongly black community?
  
• Out of how many blacks in all?
  
• Can you explain what a "prototypically black" is?
  
• What is this measuring tool that a funds officer/administrator has to measure up against?

The answers to these questions and more can be found in the references above.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

When are you not whong?

When you are whong, perhaps?

 

[HarryKeogh]

When you are whong, perhaps?

If woving you is whong I don't want to be white.

 

[CFLarsen]

I haven't refused to cite the references. You've been referred -- repeatedly, I might add -- to John McWhorter and to Eleanor Rosch. In particular, I recommend Losing the Race (2000, Simon and Shuster) as a fairly clear statement on the sociology of potentially self-destructive antiintellectualism in modern black culture, although McWhorter has written extensively on the topic elsewhere.

Sniff test.

I didn't say that you had refused to cite the references. I said - which is true - that you had refused to cite the evidence.

You are in deep manure, and you know it.

Similarly, the two Rosch papers referenced above --" Human Categorization." In N. Warren, ed., Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology. London: Academic, and "Natural categories." Cognitive Psychology 4: 328—350" are good starting points for Rosch's theories of categorization. I believe she has a book-length treatment from the early 1980's, but I don't have the reference to hand.

Color me unimpressed.

The answers to these questions and more can be found in the references above.

In which case, it should be easy for you to answer the questions:

• Do other groups than blacks act the same way? Whites trying to be as white as possible?
  
• What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?
  
• How many blacks self-identify as blacks because they find it beneficial if they are in a strongly black community?
  
• Out of how many blacks in all?
  
• Can you explain what a "prototypically black" is?
  
• What is this measuring tool that a funds officer/administrator has to measure up against?

If you know something, share it with the rest of us. Why do you refuse to do this?

 

[Luke T.]

What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?

Some whites still wear their ballcaps backwards. There's a certain lag time with whites when it comes to what's "in" and what isn't.

Black people talk too much in movie theaters.

Just a couple examples.

 

[CFLarsen]

Some whites still wear their ballcaps backwards. There's a certain lag time with whites when it comes to what's "in" and what isn't.

Black people talk too much in movie theaters.

Just a couple examples.

Which you have data for?

 

[Luke T.]

Which you have data for?

Sure. Just go to any black neighborhood theater and see for yourself. This is assuming you really do know what "black" is.

ETA: Or would you be completely clueless in finding a black neighborhood?

 

[drkitten]

Sniff test.

I didn't say that you had refused to cite the references. I said - which is true - that you had refused to cite the evidence.

Um, I don't think you know what the verb "to cite" means. "To cite" means "to provide references to." I didn't cite the references, I provided them.

And there's avery good reason that I won't provide the evidence. Aside from the copyright restrictions, I'm not going to type in a 200-page book to an Internet forum.

You are in deep manure, and you know it.

Yeah, whatever. If your expectation is that I provide a factually-accurate precis of thirty years worth of research by a top psychologist that's nevertheless short enough to fit into an Internet message board.... my only response would be "welcome to real life, princess, please enjoy your stay."

"Colour me unimpressed" indeed.

In which case, it should be easy for you to answer the questions:

• Do other groups than blacks act the same way? Whites trying to be as white as possible?
  
• What is the difference between white behavior and black behavior?
  
• How many blacks self-identify as blacks because they find it beneficial if they are in a strongly black community?
  
• Out of how many blacks in all?
  
• Can you explain what a "prototypically black" is?
  
• What is this measuring tool that a funds officer/administrator has to measure up against?

If you know something, share it with the rest of us. Why do you refuse to do this?

Because I've already provided the layman's answer to the relevant questions, and you're demonstrably not qualified to read or understanding the expert's. The sociological and experimental details are neither interesting enough for me to re-read and re-type, nor are they relevant enough to matter, nor am I willing to burden you with decontextualized and therefore easily misunderstood information when you obviously don't understand the contextualized summaries I've already provided.

Or in other words -- I've already shared. I've cited evidence from my very first post in this discussion, including a web page that you've obviously either not read or not understood. (If you had, you wouldn't even bother to ask the question about "prototypically black.")

You have a tendency to hide behind demands for evidence when you're losing a discussion. Well. I call. I've provided the evidence supporting my point of you; you've merely expressed your incredulity (as though your ignorance were somehow evidence against me) while refusing to check out the citations I've provided.

Consider your bluff called. Read the citations provided(and refute them) or provide evidence that any statement I've made in this entire discussion has been wrong.