Search results

The US Congress is a racialized governing institution that plays an important role structuring the racial hierarchy in the nation. Despite Congress’s influence, there is little theoretical and empirical research on its racialized structure – that is, how it operates and the racial processes that shape it. This lacuna has developed from a narrow conceptualization of Congress as a political institution, and it ignores how it is a multifaceted organization that features a large and complex workplace. Congressional staff are the invisible force in American policymaking, and it is through their assistance that members of Congress can fulfill their responsibilities. However, the congressional workplace is stratified along racial lines. In this chapter, I theorize how the congressional workplace became racialized, and I identify the racial processes that maintain a racialized workplace today. I investigate how lawmakers have organized their workplace and made decisions about which workers would be appropriate for different types of roles in the Capitol. Through a racial analysis of the congressional workplace, I show a connection between Congress as an institution and workplace and how racial domination is a thread that connects and animates both its formal and informal structures.

Children and youth of color in White and adult-dominated societies confront racism and adultism that shapes their peer cultures. Yet, the “new” sociology of childhood lacks the theory and methodology to explore racialized peer cultures. Thus, this chapter aims to sharpen its research tools. Theoretically, this chapter draws from Technologies of the Self (Foucault, 1988) and Critical Race Theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012) to enhance Valentine’s (1997) “adult-youth binary” and Corsaro’s (2015) “interpretive reproduction.” Methodologically, it combines the “doing research with children” approach (Greig, Taylor, & MacKay, 2013) with Critical Race Methodology (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002) to do research with youth of color. These enhanced research tools are then used to explore how boys and girls of color (n = 150), 9- to 17-year olds, experience peer culture in suburban schools, under police surveillance, and on social media. In the field, interviewers navigated their adult privilege and racial/ethnic positionalities in relation to that of participants and the racial dynamic in the research setting, ultimately aiming to co-create a safe space for counter-storytelling. As a result, this chapter captured how White-dominated peer cultures used racial microaggressions against youth of color in suburban schools, boy peer cultures navigated racialized policing, and online-offline peer cultures curtailed protective and controlling racialized adult surveillance. Theoretically, the racially enhanced interpretive reproduction and adult-youth binary exposed the adultism-racism intersection that shapes youth peer cultures. Methodologically, counter-storytelling revealed the painful realities that youth of color face and that those with adult and/or White privilege would rather ignore.

In this chapter, EYES theory proposes that international students view themselves and appraise their social standing of their own race based in relationship to extant social perceptions of racial stereotypes in the United States. These stereotypes are determined by geography which exude from the legacy of enslavement in the United States. EYES theory proposes that international students view racial differences through these dynamics by assessing their own identity in regards to race, colorsim and group identification. Specifically, international students use racial groups to classify, rank, and understand racial differences that are informed by these social geographies that impart a white/black racial discourse by which international students navigate their social status. EYES theory challenges the intellectual perception of heterogeneity among international students and in regards to race posits that international students experience mico and macrolevel contexts regarding race due to the socio-historical legacy of racism in the United States. The authors anticipate that EYES theory may have implications for study in other geographical contexts where a black white dichotomy serves as the parameter for understanding racial relationships and hegemony.

Critical race theory (CRT) seems to face a never-ending baptism by fire. When the Trump administration sought to ban CRT from American federal training courses in 2020, this may have come as a shock to few (Lang, 2020). Perhaps of greater surprise was that mutual sentiments resonated with the UK Minister for Equalities Kemi Badenoch, a black female, who appears to oppose the teaching of CRT in principle (Thrilling, 2020). The resurgence of such denunciations is problematic in a Western world which is primed for social activism, particularly for scholars in higher education institutions, where CRT has been gaining traction as a guiding framework for research into antiracism, fairness and affirmative action. This chapter suggests that the condemnation of CRT is neither unexpected nor is it altogether absurd. Nevertheless, it aims to provide a balanced metatheoretical ‘criticism’ of CRT and offer a view on the suitability of, and prospects for, its activist research agenda in higher education. Quite often, criticisms of CRT reflect issues with its origin as a troubled bricolage of conveniently assembled ‘tenets’, which do not lend themselves easily to the burden of evidentiary production required in higher education research and practice. In this review, I analyse CRT, through its bricolage-style characteristics, as primarily an explanatory theory, with respect to its application against racialised issues in higher education policy. It is hoped this chapter offers academic and activist researchers a way past the shadow of CRT's bricolage, by defusing some of the misgivings towards its inherent limitations.

To examine the race making experiences of multiracial men in carceral facilities.

I interviewed 58 incarcerated multiracial males.

Officially, multiracial incarcerated people are ascribed monoracial labels. They describe the variables used by those who racially categorize them and how their expectations about how others see them influence their racial self-identity. It is possible, they report, to maintain a multiracial self-identity, even if it is unofficially. They also describe interacting with men outside their racial category, behavior that supports the color-blind ideology.

Previous work on race making in carceral facilities has been collected in California; the present data were collected in the northeast. In addition, this research is the first study to consider the experiences of race making among incarcerated multiracial people.

Race scholars often refer to the colonization of Indigenous peoples in the Americas and the enslavement of Africans as a founding moment in the making of today's racial hierarchies. Yet their narrative of this initial moment often mischaracterizes early European states, erases Indigenous and African states, and naturalizes racial group belonging. Such practices are counterproductive to the antiracist project. Following the lead of decolonial scholarship, much recent work by historians has sought to recover and reconstruct the institutions, social structures, and agency of African and Indigenous peoples, as well as revisit assumptions about European power, institutions, and agency in their historical encounters with their continental “others.” I highlight the potential of this approach for sociologists of “race” by narrating two significant historical events in the making of the modern Atlantic world: the conquest of Tenochtitlán, the capital of the Aztec empire, and the transatlantic enslavement of subjects of the kingdoms of Kongo and Ndongo (in today's Angola) in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I analyze how particular European, Indigenous, and African actors made decisions in the context of their own and others' historically situated and dynamic political and social structures. I read these historical events through the lens of decolonial scholarship, and sociological literatures on group-making, state formation, and the emergence of capitalism, to make sense of the violent social process that led to the breakup of African, Indigenous, and European political and social structures and the making of colonial and racially hierarchical social structures in the Atlantic world.

This chapter addresses the complex problem of racial, ethnic, and economic segregation in the United States. How can pedagogy address this fundamental problem, by engaging students directly in efforts to dismantle segregationist housing policies? I begin by reviewing the history of public policies that have generated hypersegregation in American cities. I then describe a set of learning activities designed to help graduate students: (1) understand the ways in which we continue to segregate ourselves via public policy, (2) participate in the spheres in which such policy decisions are made, and (3) critically examine the role of our own institution in racialized neighborhood change. The learning activities presented include critical examination of exclusionary zoning policy; participation in public events, including protests, government hearings, and community meetings; and investigation into the complex causes of gentrification in a neighborhood adjacent to our University. Examples from student products are included. This chapter presents a series of novel learning activities designed to help students understand the real connections between public policy, structural racism, and housing opportunity. I present an approach to teaching that empowers students to participate actively in civic life.

A central tenet of Progressive era responses to prostitution was the alleged over-representation of white, US-born daughters of foreign parentage in the prostitution population. We detail a statistical error in an influential 1913 study from the New York State Reformatory for Women at Bedford as an important source of this tenet. Using archival data to more accurately reconstruct the Reformatory population, we find that Black women constituted the only over-represented group, but were all but ignored by reformers. We foreground how ideas about race and immigration informed the social response to prostitution in this period, highlighting the importance of critically analyzing historical sources.

This chapter examined the lived experiences of first generation Asian immigrant student activists, who waged a powerful struggle against school violence in a large urban high school. Their struggle resisted the hegemonic practices of the district bureaucracy around racial harassment, bullying, and treatment of immigrant students, especially English Language Learners (ELLs). Mobilizing both inside and outside of school, the student activists initiated legal action, organized among their high school peers and in the Asian community, and disrupted dominant discourses about the Asian community and the abilities of first generation immigrant youth.

Using ethnographic methods such as interviews, focus groups, and analysis of archival data, the author focused on four student leaders from working class backgrounds, examining the identities and literacies they developed in the process of understanding the power dynamics between dominant institutions and racialized communities. Moreover, using the lenses of Bourdieusian and Freirean social theory, this qualitative study looked at the roles that culture and ideology, broadly construed, played in the young people’s political development and their post-secondary trajectories. This work also built on the work of Shawn Ginwright, Julio Cammarota, and Michelle Fine on youth activism and community change. The significance of this chapter lies in its contribution to the research about the intersectionality of race/ethnicity, class, immigration status, and youth activism, in particular for first generation immigrant youth.