May 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar
My Photo

C.N.W.

  • : CERTIFIED NATIVE WASHINGTONIAN
    Locations of visitors to this page
  • BlogItalia.it - La directory italiana dei blog: blog italia
  • Feed XML offerto da BlogItalia.it:
  • :

  • Her Blog Directory:
  • :

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 09/2004

« Slavery: Christiane Taubira's fight for our global collective memory | Main | A capable woman - leading - 1930s Hollywood »

10 May 2005

Coming Out Colored™ - In spite of the Implicit Association Test (IAT)

Aunt_jemima_msuedu_daggy

A couple of days ago I took the online Implicit Association Test, or IAT, posted on Harvard University's website. I took the test for race, which a lot of people are talking about internationally. I saw something about it on CNN and read about it in an online discussion community I use. That online community seems to have some U.S. people of color along with mostly white American members, plus internationals of various, mostly unknown, sometimes vague ethnic & racial backgrounds. Before taking the IAT I was stunned to read a note on the website which seemed to say I should expect my test results to show "a bias in favor of whites (paraphrasing it)."

Elder_grace_book_chester_higgings_photos_2 1950s_calvert53_colofindernet

Well, my test results did not show a bias in favour of whites. Is that supposed to make me weird or something? The IAT website does not offer any comments for those of us who might actually have a "preference" for Blacks, Asians, or other people of colour. There are a number of white people who fall into that category; some whites refer to such persons as "race traitors." More on this later and on Coming Out Colored. Why would anyone claim to be surprised by other folks' "whites up, Blacks down" test results when most of us -of all colors- know and experience daily exactly how whites are favoured? There are exceptions but most of us are living in a GLOBAL world where all types of images of women (overwhelmingly white) and of white people in general are commodified, packaged, valorised (assigned ostensible $ value), then bought and sold. Particularly in both Europe and the Americas - both North and South America. (HINT: The world should be examining Latin racism more closely and a lot more often.) Overwhelmingly in Las Americas and in Europe advertising and organisations choose and promote white faces, white bodies and white customs - blond(e)s in particular. Brown and black bodies, minds and faces - of every shade - regularly are marginalised, devalued and excluded, both unconsciously and consciously. Yet among all of us we also have 'racial pecking orders within racial pecking orders' - including by and toward East and South Asians and by and toward Near and Middle Eastern people, etc. For these reasons and others more pro-active I started a media/society research information website called COMING OUT COLORED - Negotiating the Digital divide in social Computing. I invite you to read my entry on the IAT over at Coming Out Colored.

Comments

I stumbled on your site looking for AIT. Looks pretty interesting. I'm going to spend some time with it. Best wishes. kps

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

the commons