Skip to Content

Register
Log-in
Search
- The Free Speech / Pro White Wiki
- Page Index
- User Index
- Global
- What's New
- Wiki Index

0.0
1
2
3
4
5

0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/06/26 03:09

From 118.1 to 119.1 From 121.1 to 122.1

From version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 05:50

Change comment: Uploaded new attachment "Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf", version 1.2

To version

edited by XWikiGuest
on 2025/06/19 19:12

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Author

@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
--XWiki.AdminAngriff
++XWiki.XWikiGuest

Content

@@ -647,6 +647,427 @@
  = Dating =
++{{expandable summary="Study: Positioning Multiraciality in Cyberspace – Treatment of Multiracial Daters in an Online Dating Website"}}
++**Source:** *Social Forces*
++**Date of Publication:** *2016*
++**Author(s):** *Stephanie M. Curington, Kevin K. Anderson, and Jennifer Glass*
++**Title:** *"Positioning Multiraciality in Cyberspace: Treatment of Multiracial Daters in an Online Dating Website"*
++**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow007](https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow007)
++**Subject Matter:** *Race and Dating, Multiracial Identity, Online Behavior*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Data drawn from **over 1 million messaging records** from an online dating site.
++   - Focused on how **monoracial users** (especially Whites) interact with **multiracial daters**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Multiracial Black/White and Asian/White women** received **fewer responses from White men** than their monoracial counterparts.
++   - White daters showed **stronger preferences for monoracial identities**, particularly **own-race pairings**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Multiracial men** fared worse than multiracial women across most pairings.
++   - **Latina/White and Asian/White multiracial women** were **more positively received by Black and Hispanic men**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - White users demonstrated a clear pattern of **in-group preference**, preferring other White users (monoracial or partially White) over more ambiguous multiracial identities.
++   - Authors suggest this reflects **"boundary-maintaining behavior"** and **"latent racial bias"**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Multiracial women with partial minority backgrounds** were more acceptable to non-White men than White men.
++   - Multiracial daters were **often treated as ambiguous or “less desirable”** in ways the authors frame as **resistance to racial integration**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - The most rejected group? **Black/White multiracial men**, especially by **White women**, which the authors do not frame as bias in the same way.
++   - The study shows **asymmetrical concern** — when Whites select inwardly, it's seen as racial boundary policing; when minorities do it, it's not pathologized.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Large, real-world dataset gives useful behavioral insight into **racial preferences in dating**.
++   - Raises legitimate questions about **how race, desire, and group identity intersect**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Frames **normal in-group preference among Whites as "resistance to multiraciality"**, rather than neutral human patterning.
++   - Ignores **similar or stronger in-group preference among Black and Asian users**, which could indicate *universal patterns*, not White exceptionalism.
++   - Uses CRT framing to subtly **morally indict Whites for preferring Whites**, while exempting other groups.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Treat all in-group preference equally across racial groups — not just when Whites do it.
++   - Disaggregate by age, education, and regional variation to control for confounds.
++   - Consider whether **multiracial identity is ambiguous** by nature and if that ambiguity reduces clarity of signals in dating.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides a data point in the **ongoing academic effort to pathologize White selectiveness**, even in private, personal domains like dating.
++- Demonstrates how **racial preferences are only considered “problematic” when they preserve White group boundaries**.
++- Supports analysis of **how DEI-aligned narratives seek to dissolve in-group loyalty under the guise of openness and inclusion**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate how **media and dating platforms reinforce multiracialism as normative** despite evidence of natural in-group selection.
++2. Study the **psychological effects of being told your preferences are morally wrong if you're White**.
++3. Explore how **multiracial identities are strategically framed** depending on political or cultural goals — exoticization, integration, or guilt projection.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:Curington et al. - Positioning Multiraciality in Cyberspace Treatment of Multiracial Daters in an Online Dating Websit.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: “A Little More Ghetto, a Little Less Cultured”: Are There Racial Stereotypes about Interracial Daters?"}}
++**Source:** *Sociology of Race and Ethnicity*
++**Date of Publication:** *2020*
++**Author(s):** *Andrew R. Flores and Ariela Schachter*
++**Title:** *"“A Little More Ghetto, a Little Less Cultured”: Are There Racial Stereotypes about Interracial Daters?"*
++**DOI:** [10.1177/2332649219871232](https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649219871232)
++**Subject Matter:** *Interracial Dating, Racial Stereotyping, Online Behavior*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Used **experimental survey data** from a nationally representative sample (N = 1,070).
++   - Participants evaluated hypothetical dating profiles of White individuals who expressed interest in Black, Latino, or Asian partners.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **White men interested in Black women** were rated as **less cultured, more aggressive, and lower class**.
++   - White women interested in Black men were **viewed as less intelligent and more promiscuous**.
++   - **Interest in Asian partners** did not carry the same negative stereotypes; in some cases, it improved perceived desirability.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Latino partners** were seen more neutrally, though men who dated them were seen as more “dominant.”
++   - Across the board, **Whites who dated within their race were viewed most favorably**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Interracial daters—especially those dating Black individuals—are **subject to negative assumptions** about intelligence, class, and morality.
++   - Stereotypes persist even in **hypothetical online contexts**, showing deep cultural associations.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White men who prefer Black women face **masculinity-linked stigma**, often tied to “urban” or “ghetto” tropes.
++   - White women dating Black men are **framed as sexually deviant or socially undesirable**, particularly by other Whites.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - The most negatively perceived pairing was **White woman/Black man**, reinforcing long-standing cultural anxieties.
++   - Respondents judged interracial daters not just by race but by **projected cultural assimilation or rejection**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Reveals **latent racial boundaries** in contemporary dating preferences.
++   - Uses **controlled experimental design** to expose socially unacceptable but real biases.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Relies on **self-reported reactions to profiles**, not real-world dating behavior.
++   - **Fails to analyze anti-White framing** in the assumptions about White participants who prefer other races.
++   - Assumes stigma is irrational without investigating **rational in-group preference or cultural concerns**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include **reverse scenarios** (e.g., Black or Latino individuals expressing preference for Whites).
++   - Examine how **media portrayal of interracial couples** influences perception and desirability.
++   - Account for **class and education overlaps** that could explain perceived traits.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Highlights how **Whites who date outside their race—particularly with Blacks—are pathologized**, even within their own community.
++- Shows that **Whiteness is penalized** when paired with non-Whiteness, reinforcing social costs for racial mixing.
++- Useful for understanding **how stigma around interracial relationships is unevenly applied**, with anti-White moral overtones.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Study how **in-group dating preferences differ across races** and are morally interpreted.
++2. Investigate how **class and education** affect perceptions of interracial relationships.
++3. Examine whether **Whites are disproportionately judged** when deviating from group norms vs. other races.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_2332649219871232.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: E Pluribus, Pauciores (Out of Many, Fewer): Diversity and Birth Rates"}}
++**Source:** *National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2024*
++**Author(s):** *Umit Gurun, Daniel Solomon*
++**Title:** *"E Pluribus, Pauciores (Out of Many, Fewer): Diversity and Birth Rates"*
++**DOI:** [10.3386/w31978](https://doi.org/10.3386/w31978)
++**Subject Matter:** *Demography, Social Cohesion, Diversity Effects on Fertility*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Used large-scale demographic, economic, and census data across **1,800+ U.S. counties**.
++   - Found a **strong negative correlation between local diversity and White fertility rates**.
++   - Quantified impact: a 1 SD increase in ethnic diversity leads to a **4–6% drop in birth rates**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Decline most pronounced among **non-Hispanic Whites**, especially in suburban and semi-urban areas.
++   - **No significant birth rate drop observed among Hispanic or Black populations** under the same conditions.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Diversity increases linked to **reduced marriage rates**, especially among Whites.
++   - Authors suggest **“erosion of social cohesion and trust”** as mediating factors.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Ethnic diversity significantly **reduces total fertility rates**, independent of economic or educational variables.
++   - **Social fragmentation** and perceived dissimilarity drive fertility suppression.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White populations respond to diversity with lower family formation.
++   - **Cultural distance** and loss of shared norms are possible causes.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - High-diversity metro areas saw steepest declines in White birth rates over the past two decades.
++   - Study challenges mainstream assumptions that diversity has neutral or positive demographic effects.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Offers **quantitative backing for claims long treated as taboo** in public discourse.
++   - Applies **robust statistical methods** and cross-validates with multiple data sources.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Avoids discussing **racial preference, ethnic tension, or cultural conflict** explicitly.
++   - Authors stop short of acknowledging **the demographic replacement implication** of sustained low White fertility.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include **qualitative data on reasons for delayed or avoided parenthood** among Whites in diverse areas.
++   - Examine **media messaging and policy environments** that could accelerate these trends.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Confirms a **central premise** of the White demographic decline thesis.
++- Demonstrates that **diversity is not neutral** but **functionally suppressive to White reproduction**.
++- Offers solid **empirical support against the utopian assumptions** of multiculturalism.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Examine **fertility effects of diversity in European countries** experiencing immigration-driven change.
++2. Study **how school demographics and crime perception** affect reproductive decision-making.
++3. Explore **policy frameworks that support demographic stability for founding populations**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:12.Gurun_Solomon_Diversity_BirthRates.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: The White Man’s Burden: Gonzo Pornography and the Construction of Black Masculinity"}}
++**Source:** *Porn Studies*
++**Date of Publication:** *2015*
++**Author(s):** *Noah Tsika*
++**Title:** *"The White Man’s Burden: Gonzo Pornography and the Construction of Black Masculinity"*
++**DOI:** [10.1080/23268743.2015.1025389](https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2015.1025389)
++**Subject Matter:** *Pornography Studies, Race and Sexuality, Cultural Critique*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - This is a **qualitative content analysis** of gonzo pornography, particularly interracial porn involving Black men and White women.
++   - The author reviews **select films, not a dataset**, using them to extrapolate broad cultural claims about race and sexuality.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Claims that **interracial porn “others” and dehumanizes Black men**, yet selectively **frames Black male sexual aggression as liberatory**.
++   - The author accuses White male consumers of **fetishizing Black men** as both threats and tools for their own “colonial guilt.”
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - No empirical evidence, just interpretive readings of scenes and film dialogue.
++   - Repeatedly criticizes **White directors and actors** as complicit in perpetuating “White supremacy through porn.”
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Argues that **gonzo interracial porn functions as racial propaganda**, reinforcing White guilt while commodifying Black masculinity.
++   - Portrays White women as willing participants in a fantasy of racial domination that allegedly “liberates” Black men.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White male viewers are pathologized as both sexually repressed and voyeuristically complicit in anti-Black racism.
++   - Black male performers are framed as both victims of racial commodification and **agents of resistance through hypersexuality**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Cites scenes where Black male actors degrade or dominate White women as **“transgressive acts” that destabilize White power**, rather than examples of racial hostility or objectification.
++   - The narrative treats **racially charged sexual violence as deconstructive**, only when it reverses traditional racial dynamics.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Useful in showcasing how **critical race theory invades even the most apolitical domains** (porn consumption) and turns them into race war battlegrounds.
++   - Offers insight into how **White heterosexuality is recoded as colonialism** in activist academia.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **No statistical basis**, relies entirely on biased interpretive analysis of fringe media.
++   - Presumes **intent and audience motivation** without surveys, viewership data, or cross-cultural comparison.
++   - Treats Black aggression as empowering and White sexuality as inherently oppressive — a double standard.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include comparative data on how different racial groups are portrayed in pornography across genres.
++   - Analyze how **minority-run porn studios frame interracial themes** — not just White-directed media.
++   - Address how racial fetishization **harms all groups**, not just Black men.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Exemplifies how **racialized sexual narratives are reinterpreted to indict White identity**, even in consumer entertainment.
++- Shows how **DEI and CRT frameworks are applied to pornographic material** to pathologize White maleness while sanctifying non-White hypermasculinity.
++- Highlights the **academic bias that treats transgressive content as empowering when it serves anti-White narratives**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Study how **interracial porn narratives differ when produced by non-White vs. White directors**.
++2. Examine **how racial power is portrayed in same-sex vs. heterosexual interracial porn**.
++3. Investigate whether the **fetishization of Black masculinity fuels unrealistic expectations and destructive stereotypes** for both Black and White men.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:Dinest - The White Man's Burden Gonzo Pornography and the Construction of Black Masculinity.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Gendered Racial Exclusion Among White Internet Daters"}}
++**Source:** *Social Science Research*
++**Date of Publication:** *2009*
++**Author(s):** *Cynthia Feliciano, Belinda Robnett, Golnaz Komaie*
++**Title:** *"Gendered Racial Exclusion Among White Internet Daters"*
++**DOI:** [10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.04.004](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.04.004)
++**Subject Matter:** *Online Dating, Racial Preferences, CRT Framing of White Intimacy*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Based on data from **Love@aol.com**, analyzing **over 6,000 profiles** from California.
++   - The study investigated **racial preferences listed explicitly** in dating profiles.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **White women were least likely to express openness to interracial dating**, particularly with Black and Asian men.
++   - **White men also showed exclusion**, but were more open than White women.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - The authors labeled preference for one’s own race as **“racial exclusion”**.
++   - Profiles by non-White users expressing same-race preferences were **not similarly problematized**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **White in-group preference was framed as discriminatory**, regardless of intent or context.
++   - Dating preferences were interpreted as a **“reinforcement of racial hierarchies”**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - The study suggested **White women’s selectivity** stemmed from **cultural and structural advantages**, implying racial gatekeeping.
++   - Did not critically examine **non-White preferences** for their own race.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Highlighted that **Latina and Asian women were more open to White men** than to men of their own ethnicity, which was not treated as exclusionary.
++   - **No racial preference was criticized except when it protected White boundaries.**
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Large dataset from real-world dating profiles.
++   - Provides rare insight into **gendered patterns of racial preference**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Frames personal preference as political discrimination** when expressed by White users.
++   - **Fails to control for cultural compatibility, attraction patterns, or religious values.**
++   - **Double standard** in analysis — **non-White selectivity is ignored or justified.**
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Should distinguish **racial animus from in-group preference**.
++   - Include **psychological, aesthetic, and cultural compatibility data**.
++   - Apply **equal critical lens to all racial groups**, not just Whites.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Reinforces how CRT-aligned research pathologizes **White in-group dating preferences**.
++- Supports the claim that **White intimacy boundaries are uniquely scrutinized** and politicized.
++- Demonstrates how even non-political behavior (e.g., dating) is racialized when it involves Whites.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Study how **dating preferences vary by upbringing, media influence, and culture**, not just race.
++2. Analyze **racial preferences across all groups** with equal rigor and skepticism.
++3. Examine the **mental health impact of stigmatizing in-group preference** among Whites.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.ssresearch.2009.04.004.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Black Penis and the Demoralization of the Western World"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of European Psychoanalysis*
++**Date of Publication:** *2009*
++**Author(s):** *Kristen Fink* *Jewish*))
++**Title:** *"Black Penis and the Demoralization of the Western World: Sexual relationships between black men and white women as a cause of decline"*
++**DOI:** *Unavailable – Psychoanalytic essay publication*
++**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sexuality, Psychoanalysis, Cultural Demoralization*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - This is a **psychoanalytic essay**, not an empirical study.
++   - Uses **Freudian and Lacanian theory** to explore symbolic meanings of interracial sex.
++   - Frames **Black male–White female pairings** as psychologically disruptive to the White male ego and Western civilization.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Positions **Black men as symbolic rivals** to emasculated Western (White) men.
++   - **White women’s interracial attraction** is framed as rebellion or rejection of Western order.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - The essay proposes that **sexual representation in media** is demoralizing to White culture.
++   - Uses **high theory language** to justify what is ultimately an anti-White cultural narrative.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Interracial sexual dynamics** are framed as central to **Western decline**.
++   - **White masculinity is portrayed as passive, obsolete, or neurotic** in contrast to hypermasculinized Blackness.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Suggests White men internalize emasculation through exposure to interracial symbolism.
++   - Sees **cultural loss of confidence** in White society as stemming from racial-sexual symbolism.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Analyzes media tropes (e.g., interracial porn, pop culture) through the lens of psychoanalytic guilt and transgression.
++   - Never critiques the **ideological project of glorifying Blackness at the expense of White identity**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Reveals how **elite academic disciplines like psychoanalysis** are used to mask anti-White narratives in esoteric jargon.
++   - Serves as **ideological evidence** of demoralization tactics embedded in cultural theory.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - No empirical data, surveys, or statistical analysis — purely speculative.
++   - **Does not critique hypersexualization of Black men** or the dehumanizing aspects of the fetish.
++   - Assumes **White masculinity must passively accept its symbolic erasure** as psychoanalytically “natural.”
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include **perspectives from White men and women** on how these portrayals affect their psychological well-being.
++   - Disentangle psychoanalytic theory from **racial guilt ideology**.
++   - Explore **mutual respect-based frameworks** for interracial dynamics rather than ones rooted in humiliation or power symbolism.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Illustrates how **race, sex, and culture are manipulated to undermine White self-perception**.
++- Demonstrates how **academic elites frame White decline as psychologically necessary or deserved**.
++- Provides ideological background for modern media trends that eroticize racial power imbalance.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Analyze how psychoanalytic language is used to **justify racial inversion in cultural dominance**.
++2. Examine the **role of pornography in demoralization campaigns** targeting White men.
++3. Explore how elite journals create **ideological cover for overt anti-White sentiment**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.Fink_Black_Penis_Demoralization.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
  {{expandable summary="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"}}
  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
@@ -1192,6 +1192,74 @@
  {{/expandable}}
++{{expandable summary="Study: School Choice Is Not Enough: The Impact of Critical Social Justice Ideology in American Education"}}
++**Source:** *Social Science Research Network (SSRN)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2020*
++**Author(s):** *Eric Kaufmann, David Goldberg*
++**Title:** *"School Choice Is Not Enough: The Impact of Critical Social Justice Ideology in American Education"*
++**DOI:** [10.2139/ssrn.3730517](https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3730517)
++**Subject Matter:** *K–12 Education, CRT, Indoctrination, Teacher Training*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Surveyed **over 800 educators** and analyzed **curricula, training materials, and administrator communications**.
++   - Found that **CSJ ideology is deeply embedded in public school systems**, including charter and magnet schools.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Teachers reported being trained to believe **Whiteness = privilege + harm**, not just historical context.
++   - Administrators disproportionately **disciplined or suppressed dissenting White teachers or parents**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Majority of educators fear retribution** if they question CSJ orthodoxy.
++   - **Curriculum mandates racial self-critique** primarily for White students, often starting in elementary grades.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - CSJ ideology **functions as an implicit worldview**, not a neutral teaching tool.
++   - “Equity” in practice means **dismantling of perceived White dominance**, often through emotional manipulation of students.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White students and teachers report **feeling targeted or dehumanized** in diversity sessions.
++   - Minority students were often **placed in victim-centric identity frameworks**, reinforcing grievance politics.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - In several documented districts, **student activities included “unlearning Whiteness” workshops**.
++   - One district mandated that teachers **“de-center White perspectives”** in all classroom subjects.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - One of the few empirical studies documenting **systemic ideological bias in education**.
++   - Strong evidentiary base drawn from **firsthand educator testimony** and training materials.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Study is based on **self-reported perceptions**, though many are substantiated with examples.
++   - Focus is primarily U.S.-centric; international parallels not explored.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies could **quantify the academic and emotional impact** on White students.
++   - Comparative analysis with **non-CSJ schools** (e.g., classical models) would clarify causal impact.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Documents how **CRT-aligned ideology disproportionately targets White students and teachers**.
++- Confirms that **school choice fails to protect against ideological indoctrination** when CSJ is systemic.
++- Supports the need for **explicitly anti-indoctrination educational frameworks** grounded in neutrality and merit.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **legal protections for students against compelled ideological speech**.
++2. Study **alternatives to CSJ pedagogy**, such as classical liberal education or civic humanism.
++3. Examine **psychological outcomes** of guilt-based racial framing among White children.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:11.Goldberg_Kaufmann_CSJ_Education_Impact.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
  {{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
  **Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
  **Date of Publication:** *2019*

XWiki AI Chat

Model:

Temp:

Stream: