Years ago, in a sociology textbook, there was reference to an interesting study.

Thirty-six women were recruited for the project and separated into groups of twelve. Each group was selected to grapple with particular divisive cultural concerns. One group was composed of six Jewish women and six Christian. Another had six lesbians and six straight women. And yet another had six black women and six white.

Each group met weekly on an alternating basis. One week the entire dozen would convene. On the following week the two halves of the group would meet separately. Everyone who applied to be in the project was required to participate for two full years.

The study results were encouraging. Participants reported that they had made progress in understanding the concerns of the other differently-situated women.

My first wife was half Navajo and half “White”. Her parents strategy was for her to “cross to white,” so they made a point of not teaching her any Navajo (language). The result? Lots of identity confusion. Back on the Rez she gets left out because she can’t speak Navajo, but for the last 20 years the “White” academic world has rewarded her for being a female Native American (who happens to be competent.) If she fully “crossed to White,” she would lose the gender/race identification that has been an advantage to her.

Whatever. my true issue with both you and cinnamon’s comments were the assumptions that had to be true in order for your statements to be true. until people at least acknowledge their assumptions that they have about race and different races just may not be true, a true discussion about race is not and can not happen

The point here is that no matter what the identification, people with minority race backgrounds usually are made acutely aware of any stigma associated with one part of their ancestry or another, and know from first hand experience the biased behavior that can result.

You have this based upon what? I’m sorry but the experience of your ex does not reflect the experience of the rest of us. If you want to offer some data to bolster this, I’d be interested in looking at it.

In response to cinnamonape @ 130 (show text)

Just also wanted information that backed up this statement as well:

The far more common tendency was for individuals who had “white features” to cross to white

as I know the opposite to be true. some did pass but others chose not to and it may have been nothing more than the belief that being black was not necessarily a bad thing

My first wife was half Navajo and half “White”. Her parents strategy was for her to “cross to white,” so they made a point of not teaching her any Navajo (language). The result? Lots of identity confusion. Back on the Rez she gets left out because she can’t speak Navajo, but for the last 20 years the “White” academic world has rewarded her for being a female Native American (who happens to be competent.) If she fully “crossed to White,” she would lose the gender/race identification that has been an advantage to her.

The point here is that no matter what the identification, people with minority race backgrounds usually are made acutely aware of any stigma associated with one part of their ancestry or another, and know from first hand experience the biased behavior that can result.

Bob in HI

The far more common tendency was for individuals who had “white features” to cross to white

as I know the opposite to be true. some did pass but others chose not to and it may have been nothing more than the belief that being black was not necessarily a bad thing