|
|
| Author |
Message |
ImBack
Wizard
Joined: 28 Jun 2006
{Posts: 587 }
|
 Posted: Tue 10 Jun 2008 07:22 Post subject: |
 |
|
REPLY TO FRANK:
Okay Frank thank you very much. It seems you have beat me to the punch by 20 years trying to solve this problem, but there is one thing I think you didn't mention - perhaps because it has only been applied recently (I THINK): THE SOCIAL DISTANCE INDEX.
The social distance index is calculated in a number of different ways, and yes they are subjective, but, they are replicable. Standard tests are availiable to test for social distance between groups.
Consider that, social distance correctly defines racial heirarchy according to the endogamous test or close to it...
Social Distance to Whites:
- Asians
- Other non-Whites
- Mulattos / Mexicans
- Blacks
This is a summary of a study I read. I can post it if you would like to see it.
What do you think of this idea? I think its brilliant! 
I think using this standard we can solve the problem. Why haven't you accepted it? What is wrong with it? Something I'm not seeing..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 4537 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Tue 10 Jun 2008 10:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| ImBack wrote: | | This is a summary of a study I read. I can post it if you would like to see it. |
By all means. I would love to hear more about the "social distance index." How is it computed? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ImBack
Wizard
Joined: 28 Jun 2006
{Posts: 587 }
|
| Posted: Tue 10 Jun 2008 23:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| fwsweet wrote: | | ImBack wrote: | | This is a summary of a study I read. I can post it if you would like to see it. |
By all means. I would love to hear more about the "social distance index." How is it computed? |
Hi Frank,
I couldn't find the study itself - its somewhere burried on my hardrive with the older sociological studies I looked at. But its no matter because this is common in sociological research. So here goes another study using a different standardized measure:
*************
Publication Info:
Morgan, Harry, Social Distance: Self Reports by Black and White School Age Children, The Negro Educational Review, v57 n1-2 p15-33 Spr-Sum 2006
Abstract:
This study accessed selected social values held by children toward racially different peers within the context of school related experiences. The degree of social acceptance by Black and White children of each other was quantified. Using a modified social distance scale first developed by Park and Borgadus, seven statements were scaled to seek children's willingness to participate in a social relationship with other-race persons. Of the 389 distributed copies of instructions and statements, there were 367 usable responses from 175 girls and 192 boys. In this group, 134 were Black and 233 were White. Means and one-way analysis of variance were reported by race and gender. Black and White children in the lower grades (4-6) reported less social distance by race than did children in higher grades (7-9 and 10-12). Also, the longer children remained in school, the greater the likelihood that social distance will develop between White and Black children. How children construct their knowledge of race is discussed. (Contains 10 tables and 11 figures.)
**********************
If you google: "social-distance" race
You will find a number of studies using various different methods of asseting the social distance index. I am not familiar with the exact calculation methods (which seem rather arbitray), but they are all based on rating values for attitudes which are perceived to be important for race relations. Most use a variation of the "Bogardus Social Distance Scale, or some modification of it." Because most sociologists seem to agree on most of the questions, I think its at least as accurate a way of assessing the social distance measure, as any other sociological tool that involves response-ratings.
HERE IS A PAPER WHICH EXPLAINS SOCIAL DISTANCE AND ITS USE IN SOCIOLOGY:
http://www.cybergeo.eu/index227.html
What do you think? I am very excited about using this measure as an addition (rather than subsititute) to exogamy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gawosany
New User
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
{Posts: 12 }
|
| Posted: Fri 13 Jun 2008 23:40 Post subject: |
|
|
My Puerto Rican teacher taught us the same thing. How most people view human beings on this sort of scale.
Whites
Asians
Mixed or others
Latinos
Blacks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gawosany
New User
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
{Posts: 12 }
|
| Posted: Fri 13 Jun 2008 23:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| Also, I thought Puerto Ricans could be of any color? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Miller
Mentor
Joined: 26 May 2007
{Posts: 394 }
Location: San Antonio, Texas
|
| Posted: Sun 15 Jun 2008 05:34 Post subject: Re: RESPONSE TO FRANK'S DEFINITION OF WHITENESS |
|
|
| ImBack wrote: |
1. I certainly see why endogamy/exogamy is considered the main test of acceptability as a member of an ethnic group. But I have a few reservations about this being the sole measure. |
Another measure that could be used... African Americans and Latinos are the only two ethnicities that are overrepresented in the US prison population. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 4537 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jun 2008 18:38 Post subject: |
|
|
| ImBack wrote: | | ... "social distance index" ... |
I understand. The concept of "social distance" seems interesting and potentially as objective and replicable as any other questionnaire-based data collection method. Unfortunately I cannot use it in my studies. It requires that the subjects be able to answer questions, either verbally or on a form. And the people who I study cannot answer--they have been dead for many years. In order to study the ebb and flow of social acceptance into the maintream, I need a yardstick that can be applied to the past. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ImBack
Wizard
Joined: 28 Jun 2006
{Posts: 587 }
|
| Posted: Thu 19 Jun 2008 00:35 Post subject: |
|
|
| fwsweet wrote: | | ImBack wrote: | | ... "social distance index" ... |
I understand. The concept of "social distance" seems interesting and potentially as objective and replicable as any other questionnaire-based data collection method. Unfortunately I cannot use it in my studies. It requires that the subjects be able to answer questions, either verbally or on a form. And the people who I study cannot answer--they have been dead for many years. In order to study the ebb and flow of social acceptance into the maintream, I need a yardstick that can be applied to the past. |
We can solve the problem partially by finding a correlation between social distance score and intermarriage rate.
I am willing to bet that the correlaton will be greate than 80%. This is a big guess, but if I could show it were true, then it would indicate that the two measures are practically interchangeable. This means we could compare measures of social distance in current studies to measures of intermarriage for historical populations, does it not?
At the very least that would provide fluid transition from one approach to a better one without a great increase in innaccuracy.
Its too bad though about not being able to raise the dead and make them take the bogardus scale. Oh well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ImBack
Wizard
Joined: 28 Jun 2006
{Posts: 587 }
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jewcepticon
New User
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
{Posts: 10 }
|
| Posted: Thu 18 Sep 2008 13:30 Post subject: |
|
|
Its all relative really, When an American thinks PR he thinks this
but it registers as non white
but when they think italian they think
 but it registers as white |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gemini072
Moderator
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2678 }
|
| Posted: Thu 18 Sep 2008 13:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| Jewcepticon wrote: |
but when they think italian they think
but it registers as white |
I actually believe that people think "ethnic -white" when they think of Italians. They might not say/think those actual words. But I think a lot of people see them as a 'different' group. I know a good amount of Italians that don't see themself as white, or only white.
When I think Sylvester Stallone most probably think Italian not 'white' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Miller
Mentor
Joined: 26 May 2007
{Posts: 394 }
Location: San Antonio, Texas
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 01:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| Jewcepticon wrote: | Its all relative really, When an American thinks PR he thinks this
|
When people talk about the majority of Puerto Ricans considering themselves "white", it baffles me, because when I think of Puerto Ricans, I think of THESE:
These guys considering themselves white? Denying African ancestry? I just don't see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 4537 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 03:15 Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard Miller wrote: | | These guys considering themselves white? Denying African ancestry? I just don't see it. |
But those are two different things! Judging by the census, the vast majority of Puerto Ricans consider themselves White. But at the same time, the vast majority are also proud of their African (and Native American) ancestry. Your implication that considering yourself White means denying African ancestry is bizarre. Where does it say that Whites cannot have any African ancestry? Damn near every time I lecture on DNA, White folks come up to tell me that their autosomal admixture came back with some African ancestry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G-Man
Moderator
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2612 }
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 13:48 Post subject: |
|
|
My own experience growing around them up has been that Puerto Ricans by and large considered themselves their own separate group-neither black nor white.
Also, based on my experience many Puerto Ricans appeared to have ambivalent attitudes about their African ancestry. Some instances were hilarious, and I have quite a few stories to tell from school days.
Others subsumed all of their ancestries under the umbrella of Puerto Rican. And still others (a minority) saw themselves as black or "blackish.”
In my high school and neighborhood even the ones who looked no different from the Italian-American kids or even the Irish-American kids saw themselves as some kind of non-white person or just Puerto Rican. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Miller
Mentor
Joined: 26 May 2007
{Posts: 394 }
Location: San Antonio, Texas
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 14:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| fwsweet wrote: |
But those are two different things! Judging by the census, the vast majority of Puerto Ricans consider themselves White. But at the same time, the vast majority are also proud of their African (and Native American) ancestry. Your implication that considering yourself White means denying African ancestry is bizarre. Where does it say that Whites cannot have any African ancestry? Damn near every time I lecture on DNA, White folks come up to tell me that their autosomal admixture came back with some African ancestry. |
Frank, I'M not accusing anyone of that. As you can see, I'm questioning OTHERS on where they get it from.
Honestly, however, if I were a betting man, I would say that Fat Joe and Tru-Life would feel closer to blacks - but that's just a guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G-Man
Moderator
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2612 }
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 18:45 Post subject: |
|
|
| Richard Miller wrote: | | fwsweet wrote: |
But those are two different things! Judging by the census, the vast majority of Puerto Ricans consider themselves White. But at the same time, the vast majority are also proud of their African (and Native American) ancestry. Your implication that considering yourself White means denying African ancestry is bizarre. Where does it say that Whites cannot have any African ancestry? Damn near every time I lecture on DNA, White folks come up to tell me that their autosomal admixture came back with some African ancestry. |
Frank, I'M not accusing anyone of that. As you can see, I'm questioning OTHERS on where they get it from.
Honestly, however, if I were a betting man, I would say that Fat Joe and Tru-Life would feel closer to blacks - but that's just a guess. |
Alot of Nuyoricans do and it doesn't always have to do with appearance of the Puerto Rican. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Miller
Mentor
Joined: 26 May 2007
{Posts: 394 }
Location: San Antonio, Texas
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 20:55 Post subject: |
|
|
| G-Man wrote: | | Alot of Nuyoricans do and it doesn't always have to do with appearance of the Puerto Rican. |
I'm aware of that, but I wasn't commenting on these guys' phenotypes. These guys whose pictures I posted; lighten their skin, hair, and eyes; and my money would still be on them choosing a black identity over a white one, if forced to do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
onlyhuman77
Regular User
Joined: 15 Apr 2008
{Posts: 98 }
Location: Harlem, NYC
|
| Posted: Fri 19 Sep 2008 21:53 Post subject: |
|
|
| G-Man wrote: | | Richard Miller wrote: | | fwsweet wrote: |
But those are two different things! Judging by the census, the vast majority of Puerto Ricans consider themselves White. But at the same time, the vast majority are also proud of their African (and Native American) ancestry. Your implication that considering yourself White means denying African ancestry is bizarre. Where does it say that Whites cannot have any African ancestry? Damn near every time I lecture on DNA, White folks come up to tell me that their autosomal admixture came back with some African ancestry. |
Frank, I'M not accusing anyone of that. As you can see, I'm questioning OTHERS on where they get it from.
Honestly, however, if I were a betting man, I would say that Fat Joe and Tru-Life would feel closer to blacks - but that's just a guess. |
Alot of Nuyoricans do and it doesn't always have to do with appearance of the Puerto Rican. |
I know of one Puerto Rican woman that identifies as " 1/2 black 1/2/white" (her words not mine) despite having a Caucasian phenotype (blondish brown hair, light brown eyes & freckles) I have seen her parents in pictures and both look more American Indian and Caucasian with big wavy straight hair than having strong SSA admixture.
It's my belief that her identification as biracial (African/Caucasian) has more to do with the choices she has made in terms of friends, and guys she dates, and her child who is 1/2 African American over her belief that one of her parents is more African and the other is more Caucasian.
I also know of another Puerto Rican friend. When I was hanging out with his family it was funny that his family calls him Chocolate, Choco or Cocoa or something with Chocolate in it as a nick name. And that is because his complexion is so dark. He is the darkest Puerto Rican I have ever met. And he identifies as Puerto Rican, not Black, not African American he doesn't identify based on his phenotype.
When I have introduced him to my other friends they are totally surprised that he is not African American and that he is 100% Puerto Rican, (many of my friends are spanish or European) but then as the day progresses they examine him closer (mainly my Puerto Rican friends) and now they can tell that he is one of their own.
Both my friends are New York born Puerto Ricans and they are at opposite ends of the Puerto Rican Caucasian to African spectrum. One identifies racially as biracial the other by culture as Puerto Rican or latino, but neither identify as Caucasian. So out of about eight Puerto Rican friends and associates, these are the only two that don't racially identify (even jokingly) as caucasian.
But getting a Latin to identify racially over culture is already a difficult thing to do unless they are Cuban, just my experiance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G-Man
Moderator
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2612 }
|
| Posted: Sun 21 Sep 2008 18:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| onlyhuman77 wrote: | [
But getting a Latin to identify racially over culture is already a difficult thing to do unless they are Cuban, just my experiance. |
True and it often has no bearing on how they relate to other people.
On a related note there was a topic similar to this over at the Human Biodiversity Forum that got very heated.
People in the U.S. with a racialized outlook on life (I'm including mulatto race nationalist types as well) have difficulty wrapping their heads around this fact of at least Latino existence in New York City. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CIMMERIAN
New User
Joined: 11 Apr 2008
{Posts: 33 }
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Sep 2008 20:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| G-Man wrote: | | onlyhuman77 wrote: | [
But getting a Latin to identify racially over culture is already a difficult thing to do unless they are Cuban, just my experiance. |
True and it often has no bearing on how they relate to other people.
On a related note there was a topic similar to this over at the Human Biodiversity Forum that got very heated.
People in the U.S. with a racialized outlook on life (I'm including mulatto race nationalist types as well) have difficulty wrapping their heads around this fact of at least Latino existence in New York City. |
True. How is it that some like yourself have been able to see it thru our perspective? (I;m assuming you're not Latino) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
