My awareness/sensitivity to the Hispanic-Latino-Chicano-Spainard issue is due, actually, to a NY Times article a few months ago, I think it was, talking about how the census is really stifling in the way it really only allows for black, white, yellow, and red -- because it's erasing an entire range of people who are of South or Central American ancestry and wrapping them up as "white" even though the same people experience daily discrimination for NOT being "white". So it doesn't seem right that if I'm trying to get a sense of whether or not one considers oneself to be, basically, part of the "dominant paradigm" that I then skip an entire group of people who -- for all intents and purposes -- are NOT treated as part of the dominant paradigm, not in that everyday sense.
Basically, in what I'm measuring, I want to figure out if a group's perceptions and attitudes shift, the farther one moves away from the central/dominant "white" position -- which means also measuring in which direction that shift occurs: Asian, South European, Central American, First Nation, and so on.
Unless I just say to hell with it and ask people for skin tone, eye color, hair color, and whether they have an epicanthic fold... which just feels to me to be REALLY rude. Strange, hunh, that I can rationalize asking "where did your family come from, oh, maybe like twelve generations ago" but not ask bluntly, "would you consider yourself white/black/red/etc" ... cripes.
On the other hand -- yes, I know I'm making it harder on myself by trying to allow for a person's right to actually be listed on a damn list instead of feeling, once again, like they have to settle for "I guess this is the closest thing" -- but I think I'd rather make it harder on myself than be one more person reinforcing the notion that anyone doesn't deserve the respect of seeing themselves in a list of options. At least, that's what might make it worth it, to me.
D'ya think I should just go with the map, and maybe say: "pick the region where the majority population looks the most like you?"
no subject
Date: 14 May 2010 09:50 pm (UTC)Basically, in what I'm measuring, I want to figure out if a group's perceptions and attitudes shift, the farther one moves away from the central/dominant "white" position -- which means also measuring in which direction that shift occurs: Asian, South European, Central American, First Nation, and so on.
Unless I just say to hell with it and ask people for skin tone, eye color, hair color, and whether they have an epicanthic fold... which just feels to me to be REALLY rude. Strange, hunh, that I can rationalize asking "where did your family come from, oh, maybe like twelve generations ago" but not ask bluntly, "would you consider yourself white/black/red/etc" ... cripes.
On the other hand -- yes, I know I'm making it harder on myself by trying to allow for a person's right to actually be listed on a damn list instead of feeling, once again, like they have to settle for "I guess this is the closest thing" -- but I think I'd rather make it harder on myself than be one more person reinforcing the notion that anyone doesn't deserve the respect of seeing themselves in a list of options. At least, that's what might make it worth it, to me.
D'ya think I should just go with the map, and maybe say: "pick the region where the majority population looks the most like you?"