100 Point Angst: Gender Implications

I just read an article about the three college students who at some time have scored 100 points or more in college basketball game.  The first two talked about the angst the accomplishment engendered and worries about selfishness.  The third, a recent addition, was overwhelmed with media attention but thought his critics were wrong.

What interested me in the article was the brief mention of two female athletes who scored 100 or more points in a high school game (no woman has done so in college).  There was no mention of angst in their cases, although in one case the opposing team decided to forfeit at halftime.

This brief mention made me wonder as to why no women had scored 100 points in a college game.  All of my suppositions tended to rely on stereotypes: women are nicer, women are less likely to pursue a single mined individual goal while embarrassing the other team and marginalizing their teammates, women run slower so the fast break quick scoring approach would not work.  None of these seem valid.

LIsa Leslie in high school

LIsa Leslie in high school

So I am still wondering why a publicity seeking women’s program does not do what one high school did when they had Lisa Leslie playing for them as described in this New York Times clip:

Leslie might have scored 200 in her big game, but the opposing school quit at halftime. They walked off the court because they thought her 100 points were being orchestrated, and they were right.

Leslie’s coach at Morningside High, Frank Scott…used to pick one game each year to let his senior captain go for the school scoring record. The idea is to let the captain take every shot, and that is how Leslie scored 49 in the first quarter and 52 in the second quarter.

They simply stationed Leslie at midcourt and pressed all game.

Certainly there are sportwomanship questions involved, but I would imagine that somewhere a coach and player would have waved those aside by now.

51% of Americans Express Anti-Black Attitudes: AP Survey

According to an AP survey:

“In all, 51 percent of Americans now express explicit anti-black attitudes, compared with 48 percent in a similar 2008 survey. When measured by an implicit racial attitudes test, the number of Americans with anti-black sentiments jumped to 56 percent, up from 49 percent during the last presidential election. In both tests, the share of Americans expressing pro-black attitudes fell” (Washington Post).

This information saddens me even though it does show some progress over time.  Of course it does not show that electing  Barack Obama has turned America into a racial nirvana.

Here are two of sets of questions and results from the AP PDF.  The explicit section of the question relied on a series of questions such as these using a range of adjectives both positive, like dependable, and negative, like lazy.

 

Certainly the fact fewer people see the phrase “Determined to Succeed” as applying to blacks shows bias.  However, I know I would be one of the people who refused to answer on the grounds that I find it inappropriate to make such large scale generalizations.  I wonder how many people like me who try to be racially progressive took themselves out of the mix on principle.

 

 

Different Standard for Different Races: Racist if Statistically Based?

“Palm Beach, Fla. (CBS TAMPA) – The Florida State Board of Education passed a plan that sets goals for students in math and reading based upon their race. On Tuesday, the board passed a revised strategic plan that says that by 2018, it wants 90 percent of Asian students, 88 percent of white students, 81 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of black students to be reading at or above grade level. For math, the goals are 92 percent of Asian kids to be proficient, whites at 86 percent, Hispanics at 80 percent and blacks at 74 percent. It also measures by other groupings, such as poverty and disabilities, reported the Palm Beach Post”

Is it racist to set lower standards for some groups than for others as the Florida Board of Education has done?  The board points to statistics like this one, “the percentage of white students scoring at or above grade level (as measured by whether they scored a 3 or higher on the reading FCAT) was 69 percent in 2011-2012, according to the state. For black students, it was 38 percent, and for Hispanics, it was 53 percent.”

Given that existing gap, according to the board, it makes sense to set different targets.  I understand that in a neutral statistical world, the choice makes sense as it reflects reality. However, the publication of such goals which explicitly say we as a board expect less from this group than from that group is really troubling.  Some might say the goals reflect the truth and so what if the truth hurts, it is the truth. However, I am thinking there had to be a way to address this particular truth without enshrining lower expectations as an official policy.

In terms of whether setting a policy in this way is racist, I would offer a qualified “no.”  If one defines racism as prejudice plus power, this decision may be made by those with power, but it is based on statistics rather than prejudice.  That answer, though, depends on how one reads the intersection of prejudice and statistics.

 

Census Brief on Multiracial Populations

I am currently reading my way through the recent US Census publication “The Two or More Races Population: 2010.”

There are some numbers in here that really point to the future of America as a place where racial definitions shift, multiply, and become flexible.

Consider for example the fact, “people who reported [being] White as well as Black or African American…grew by over one million people, increasing by 134 percent—and people who reported [being] White as well as Asian…grew by about three-quarters of a million people, increasing by 87 percent.”

That’s a lot of people one could probably not accurately put in a racial box just by looking at them.

America may not be a post-racial nation, but doing racial tallies continues to get more complex.

Here is a telling map and graph showing geographic distribution:

 

PS:  Since the race question on the census does not address Hispanic origin (that is a separate ethnicity question), there is no way of knowing how  Hispanic or Latino identity fits in the mix.  Also, since the census counts Americans of Middle-Eastern or Arab origin as White, that is also an area lacking in differentiation.  In both cases, individuals may note that they are Some Other Race, but that category is not broken down.

Commentary: Majority of Americans Under One…

This cartoon offers one of the best takes on the news that a majority of Americans under one are infants of color:

Another great commentary is Matthew Yglesias’s piece for Slate on the definition of white and how it has shifted over time. He points out that the Irish became “white” not foreign over time and Jews also became “white” not foreign. His prognostication is that eventually some Hispanics and others may be categorized as white. This point is a good one especially given that the Census already separates Hispanic identity from race.

Great Statistics Debunking Crime Myths, Do I Trust Them?

The website colorlines.com posted a colorful infographic debunking “Five Myths About Crime.”  These statistics come from a site with which I would like to agree and make a point I with which I would tend to agree.  However, I am dubious about any statistics, especially ones presented in a flashy format.

This first graphic is catchy, although I am not sure as to the point.  Is the point that those who say black people killing black people is a particular unique plague are wrong?

The citation refers to Human Rights Watch, but where did they get the data?  This seems like an unclear iteration of the well published fact that drug laws are inequitable. What does it mean to be “arrested…2.8 – 5.5 times higher”?

This graph does not go with the heading.  It shows that more blacks are suspended, expelled, arrested and referred to law enforcement.  Those facts are problematic.  But do these statistics prove that the “same offenses” are involved?

I do agree that the idea of black criminality has been overblown by some media, but I am not sure this infographic effectively refutes the assumptions.

Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim: Defining Terms

I know I have been guilty of conflating the terms Arab and Middle Eastern and Muslim in various ways, although I should know better.  So at the end of this post I have copied full definitions as a public service.  These are all from teachmideast.org.   It is also interesting to think of these definitions of Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim in light of the options for race given on the US Census:

Note that neither Arab nor Middle Eastern is an option.  In fact, the United States Census Bureau defines “White” as “A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.”  So, according the US government people of Middle Eastern origins are white.   In my mind that seems to be a different definition of white than the day to day, person on the street version.

For comparison, definitions of Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim:

Who is an Arab?

Arab is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the Arabic language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among them. Some Arabs have blue or green eyes and light hair and skin, others have dark hair and skin and brown eyes.

There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor), Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq (with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen.
In each of these countries there may be different ethnic groups whose mother tongue is not Arabic. Members of these groups may also speak Arabic, but they might not identify themselves as Arabs. For example, in both Chad and Iraq, members of non-Arab ethnic groups use Arabic as a lingua franca to communicate. Also, in many Arab countries, before the founding of the state of Israel, there were active Arabic-speaking Jewish communities; most of these populations moved to Israel after its founding in 1948.
There are also minorities of Arabs in many other countries, such as Iran, Turkey, France, the United States, etc.
[Map of Arabs (color countries with Arab majorities one color, but also give percentages of Arabs in those countries and in countries with significant Arab minorities)]

Who is a Middle Easterner?
To answer “Who is a Middle Eastern?” we must ask ourselves “What is the Middle East?” The Middle East itself is not a fixed term. It was originally coined in the early twentieth century to designate the area between the British colony of India and the Near East (the Balkans and western part of the Ottoman Empire). Of course, the term itself incorporates a European perspective, since the Middle East is only “east” relative to western Europe; had the Chinese had the power to impose their perspective in our maps, the region might have been known as the Midwest!
“Middle East” is not a specific or absolute location, like West Asia or North Africa, which define a relatively clear geographical location by reference to broadly accepted continental borders. Rather, it is a term describing a region, or a geographical area sharing certain characteristics. This certainly complicates deciding who could be classified as a “Middle Eastern”.
Depending on how we define those characteristics, the borders of the Middle East can change. For example, we might describe the Middle East geographically as a hot and arid region in western Asia between the Mediterranean in the west and the Indian subcontinent in the east; or we might describe it historically as a predominantly Muslim area sharing a common cultural heritage based on Arabic; or we might describe it strategically from an outside perspective as a politically volatile region with large reserves of oil.
Each definition has problems and might lead to a different map of the “Middle East.” For example, Turkey, Israel and Iran are not Arabic-speaking countries, yet most maps would include them in the Middle East. The Arabic-speaking countries of North Africa, including Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, are not in Asia. Most current maps leave them out of the Middle East, except for Egypt, despite a long shared history and many cultural similarities with other Arab countries. Yet the same maps often include Iran, Afghanistan and sometimes even Pakistan – countries with different languages, some shared history and some very different cultural and historical bases.
There is no real correct answer to the question, “What is the Middle East?” There are different definitions, which often overlap and often change according to shifting perspectives. One interesting note is that the concept of the Middle East has been adopted in most of the languages of the region themselves: in Arabic, the region is referred to as al-sharq al-awsat, in Turkish orta dogu, in Persian khavarmiyaheh and in Hebrew mizrach tichon. So although the concept is relatively new, came from the outside, and is imprecise, it’s used throughout the region!
This website privileges a historical, linguistic and cultural understanding of the Middle East, and therefore includes the following countries in our map of the Middle East:
Algeria
Bahrain
Egypt
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Jordan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Morocco
Oman
The Palestinian Authority
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Sudan
Syria
Tunisia
Turkey
United Arab Emirates
Yemen
Who is a Muslim?
By most estimates, about one-fifth of humanity’s six billion plus people, or approximately 1.3 billion, is Muslim. While we tend to think of Muslims as being in the Middle East, perhaps because that is where Islam began, most Muslims don’t live there. In fact, the country with the most Muslims is Indonesia in southeast Asia (179 million Muslims), and the largest regional concentration of Muslims is in the South Asian countries of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, with nearly half a billion Muslims. Africa also has a very large Muslim population-not only are there over 180 million Muslims in North Africa, but also approximately 220 million Muslims in the countries of sub-Saharan Africa as well. There are also minority Muslim communities in countries across the world, from China to western Europe to Canada and the United States. Think about the cultural diversity of these Muslims all over the world, from Indonesia to Senegal, from Boston to Bangladesh, from Syria to Germany!

The definition of Muslim varies depending on which criteria you use. Most textbooks give a definition based on practice of the “five pillars” of Islam, so that Muslims are those who give the profession of faith, pray five times a day, fast during Ramadan, give charity to the needy, and make the pilgrimage to Mecca at least once during their lifetimes. On the other hand, all Muslims, like members of all human religions, are not equally devout and don’t practice Islam exactly the same way, so you might consider Islam to also be a cultural identity and heritage as well as a religious belief.
Some cast the net very widely, and argue that a Muslim is anyone who believes in one of the monotheistic religions, including Jews and Christians, since “muslim” literally means one who submits to the will of God. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are exclusionist definitions of Islam that would write off anyone who isn’t a “good enough” Muslim, or who has a different doctrinal or political belief, by the standards of a particular group.

Ambiguous Scene: Positive or Negative Cross-Race Interaction?


Picture from Anderson Cooper 360 race study on CNN

This study will be the focus of a show on CNN. The quick introductory blurb interested me as it said 38% of black first graders had a negative interpretation of the scene whereas 70% of white first graders did. I am looking forward to reading the study and seeing the show for an explanation.  I am also interested in the fact that those pictures are said to be neutral.  I am not sure about the facial expressions’ neutrality.

Pew Study on Labels–Hispanic or Latino or Something Else

The study “When Labels Don’t Fit: Hispanics and Their Views of Identity” from the Pew Hispanic Center released recently has pushed me to actually look up the difference between the terms Latino and Hispanic.  (I know I am rather late to this project.)  The Pew study uses the terms interchangeably but also says that many respondents did not prefer either term.  See graph on left.

In looking at a range of sources from the reliable to the semi-reliable I first figured out that Latino means from Latin America and Latin America is defined as those countries in the Americas where Romance Languages (from Latin) are spoken, primarily the languages of Spanish, Portuguese, and French (Wikipedia).  Thus, not just Spanish speaking countries.

On the other hand, Hispanic implies “descended from a Spanish-speaking land or culture” (CNN).  These definitions are, though, not set in stone see for example dictionary.com “Latino: a person of Latin-American or Spanish-speaking descent” and “Hispanic: a person of Latin-American or Spanish descent living inthe US.”  Those definitions seem virtually interchangeable.

This whole question may simply point to the difficulty involved in the labeling large groups of people by bureaucratic entities in which the group being labeled is unrepresented or underrepresented.