0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 120.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 06:04
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 115.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 05:42
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -647,287 +647,6 @@
647 647  
648 648  = Dating =
649 649  
650 -{{expandable summary="Study: Positioning Multiraciality in Cyberspace – Treatment of Multiracial Daters in an Online Dating Website"}}
651 -**Source:** *Social Forces*
652 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
653 -**Author(s):** *Stephanie M. Curington, Kevin K. Anderson, and Jennifer Glass*
654 -**Title:** *"Positioning Multiraciality in Cyberspace: Treatment of Multiracial Daters in an Online Dating Website"*
655 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow007](https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow007)
656 -**Subject Matter:** *Race and Dating, Multiracial Identity, Online Behavior*
657 -
658 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
659 -1. **General Observations:**
660 - - Data drawn from **over 1 million messaging records** from an online dating site.
661 - - Focused on how **monoracial users** (especially Whites) interact with **multiracial daters**.
662 -
663 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
664 - - **Multiracial Black/White and Asian/White women** received **fewer responses from White men** than their monoracial counterparts.
665 - - White daters showed **stronger preferences for monoracial identities**, particularly **own-race pairings**.
666 -
667 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
668 - - **Multiracial men** fared worse than multiracial women across most pairings.
669 - - **Latina/White and Asian/White multiracial women** were **more positively received by Black and Hispanic men**.
670 -{{/expandable}}
671 -
672 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
673 -1. **Primary Observations:**
674 - - White users demonstrated a clear pattern of **in-group preference**, preferring other White users (monoracial or partially White) over more ambiguous multiracial identities.
675 - - Authors suggest this reflects **"boundary-maintaining behavior"** and **"latent racial bias"**.
676 -
677 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
678 - - **Multiracial women with partial minority backgrounds** were more acceptable to non-White men than White men.
679 - - Multiracial daters were **often treated as ambiguous or “less desirable”** in ways the authors frame as **resistance to racial integration**.
680 -
681 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
682 - - The most rejected group? **Black/White multiracial men**, especially by **White women**, which the authors do not frame as bias in the same way.
683 - - The study shows **asymmetrical concern** — when Whites select inwardly, it's seen as racial boundary policing; when minorities do it, it's not pathologized.
684 -{{/expandable}}
685 -
686 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
687 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
688 - - Large, real-world dataset gives useful behavioral insight into **racial preferences in dating**.
689 - - Raises legitimate questions about **how race, desire, and group identity intersect**.
690 -
691 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
692 - - Frames **normal in-group preference among Whites as "resistance to multiraciality"**, rather than neutral human patterning.
693 - - Ignores **similar or stronger in-group preference among Black and Asian users**, which could indicate *universal patterns*, not White exceptionalism.
694 - - Uses CRT framing to subtly **morally indict Whites for preferring Whites**, while exempting other groups.
695 -
696 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
697 - - Treat all in-group preference equally across racial groups — not just when Whites do it.
698 - - Disaggregate by age, education, and regional variation to control for confounds.
699 - - Consider whether **multiracial identity is ambiguous** by nature and if that ambiguity reduces clarity of signals in dating.
700 -{{/expandable}}
701 -
702 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
703 -- Provides a data point in the **ongoing academic effort to pathologize White selectiveness**, even in private, personal domains like dating.
704 -- Demonstrates how **racial preferences are only considered “problematic” when they preserve White group boundaries**.
705 -- Supports analysis of **how DEI-aligned narratives seek to dissolve in-group loyalty under the guise of openness and inclusion**.
706 -{{/expandable}}
707 -
708 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
709 -1. Investigate how **media and dating platforms reinforce multiracialism as normative** despite evidence of natural in-group selection.
710 -2. Study the **psychological effects of being told your preferences are morally wrong if you're White**.
711 -3. Explore how **multiracial identities are strategically framed** depending on political or cultural goals — exoticization, integration, or guilt projection.
712 -{{/expandable}}
713 -
714 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
715 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:Curington et al. - Positioning Multiraciality in Cyberspace Treatment of Multiracial Daters in an Online Dating Websit.pdf]]
716 -{{/expandable}}
717 -{{/expandable}}
718 -
719 -
720 -{{expandable summary="Study: The White Man’s Burden: Gonzo Pornography and the Construction of Black Masculinity"}}
721 -**Source:** *Porn Studies*
722 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
723 -**Author(s):** *Noah Tsika*
724 -**Title:** *"The White Man’s Burden: Gonzo Pornography and the Construction of Black Masculinity"*
725 -**DOI:** [10.1080/23268743.2015.1025389](https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2015.1025389)
726 -**Subject Matter:** *Pornography Studies, Race and Sexuality, Cultural Critique*
727 -
728 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
729 -1. **General Observations:**
730 - - This is a **qualitative content analysis** of gonzo pornography, particularly interracial porn involving Black men and White women.
731 - - The author reviews **select films, not a dataset**, using them to extrapolate broad cultural claims about race and sexuality.
732 -
733 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
734 - - Claims that **interracial porn “others” and dehumanizes Black men**, yet selectively **frames Black male sexual aggression as liberatory**.
735 - - The author accuses White male consumers of **fetishizing Black men** as both threats and tools for their own “colonial guilt.”
736 -
737 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
738 - - No empirical evidence, just interpretive readings of scenes and film dialogue.
739 - - Repeatedly criticizes **White directors and actors** as complicit in perpetuating “White supremacy through porn.”
740 -{{/expandable}}
741 -
742 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
743 -1. **Primary Observations:**
744 - - Argues that **gonzo interracial porn functions as racial propaganda**, reinforcing White guilt while commodifying Black masculinity.
745 - - Portrays White women as willing participants in a fantasy of racial domination that allegedly “liberates” Black men.
746 -
747 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
748 - - White male viewers are pathologized as both sexually repressed and voyeuristically complicit in anti-Black racism.
749 - - Black male performers are framed as both victims of racial commodification and **agents of resistance through hypersexuality**.
750 -
751 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
752 - - 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.
753 - - The narrative treats **racially charged sexual violence as deconstructive**, only when it reverses traditional racial dynamics.
754 -{{/expandable}}
755 -
756 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
757 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
758 - - Useful in showcasing how **critical race theory invades even the most apolitical domains** (porn consumption) and turns them into race war battlegrounds.
759 - - Offers insight into how **White heterosexuality is recoded as colonialism** in activist academia.
760 -
761 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
762 - - **No statistical basis**, relies entirely on biased interpretive analysis of fringe media.
763 - - Presumes **intent and audience motivation** without surveys, viewership data, or cross-cultural comparison.
764 - - Treats Black aggression as empowering and White sexuality as inherently oppressive — a double standard.
765 -
766 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
767 - - Include comparative data on how different racial groups are portrayed in pornography across genres.
768 - - Analyze how **minority-run porn studios frame interracial themes** — not just White-directed media.
769 - - Address how racial fetishization **harms all groups**, not just Black men.
770 -{{/expandable}}
771 -
772 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
773 -- Exemplifies how **racialized sexual narratives are reinterpreted to indict White identity**, even in consumer entertainment.
774 -- Shows how **DEI and CRT frameworks are applied to pornographic material** to pathologize White maleness while sanctifying non-White hypermasculinity.
775 -- Highlights the **academic bias that treats transgressive content as empowering when it serves anti-White narratives**.
776 -{{/expandable}}
777 -
778 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
779 -1. Study how **interracial porn narratives differ when produced by non-White vs. White directors**.
780 -2. Examine **how racial power is portrayed in same-sex vs. heterosexual interracial porn**.
781 -3. Investigate whether the **fetishization of Black masculinity fuels unrealistic expectations and destructive stereotypes** for both Black and White men.
782 -{{/expandable}}
783 -
784 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
785 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:Dinest - The White Man's Burden Gonzo Pornography and the Construction of Black Masculinity.pdf]]
786 -{{/expandable}}
787 -{{/expandable}}
788 -
789 -
790 -{{expandable summary="Study: Gendered Racial Exclusion Among White Internet Daters"}}
791 -**Source:** *Social Science Research*
792 -**Date of Publication:** *2009*
793 -**Author(s):** *Cynthia Feliciano, Belinda Robnett, Golnaz Komaie*
794 -**Title:** *"Gendered Racial Exclusion Among White Internet Daters"*
795 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.04.004](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.04.004)
796 -**Subject Matter:** *Online Dating, Racial Preferences, CRT Framing of White Intimacy*
797 -
798 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
799 -1. **General Observations:**
800 - - Based on data from **Love@aol.com**, analyzing **over 6,000 profiles** from California.
801 - - The study investigated **racial preferences listed explicitly** in dating profiles.
802 -
803 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
804 - - **White women were least likely to express openness to interracial dating**, particularly with Black and Asian men.
805 - - **White men also showed exclusion**, but were more open than White women.
806 -
807 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
808 - - The authors labeled preference for one’s own race as **“racial exclusion”**.
809 - - Profiles by non-White users expressing same-race preferences were **not similarly problematized**.
810 -{{/expandable}}
811 -
812 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
813 -1. **Primary Observations:**
814 - - **White in-group preference was framed as discriminatory**, regardless of intent or context.
815 - - Dating preferences were interpreted as a **“reinforcement of racial hierarchies”**.
816 -
817 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
818 - - The study suggested **White women’s selectivity** stemmed from **cultural and structural advantages**, implying racial gatekeeping.
819 - - Did not critically examine **non-White preferences** for their own race.
820 -
821 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
822 - - 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.
823 - - **No racial preference was criticized except when it protected White boundaries.**
824 -{{/expandable}}
825 -
826 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
827 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
828 - - Large dataset from real-world dating profiles.
829 - - Provides rare insight into **gendered patterns of racial preference**.
830 -
831 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
832 - - **Frames personal preference as political discrimination** when expressed by White users.
833 - - **Fails to control for cultural compatibility, attraction patterns, or religious values.**
834 - - **Double standard** in analysis — **non-White selectivity is ignored or justified.**
835 -
836 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
837 - - Should distinguish **racial animus from in-group preference**.
838 - - Include **psychological, aesthetic, and cultural compatibility data**.
839 - - Apply **equal critical lens to all racial groups**, not just Whites.
840 -{{/expandable}}
841 -
842 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
843 -- Reinforces how CRT-aligned research pathologizes **White in-group dating preferences**.
844 -- Supports the claim that **White intimacy boundaries are uniquely scrutinized** and politicized.
845 -- Demonstrates how even non-political behavior (e.g., dating) is racialized when it involves Whites.
846 -{{/expandable}}
847 -
848 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
849 -1. Study how **dating preferences vary by upbringing, media influence, and culture**, not just race.
850 -2. Analyze **racial preferences across all groups** with equal rigor and skepticism.
851 -3. Examine the **mental health impact of stigmatizing in-group preference** among Whites.
852 -{{/expandable}}
853 -
854 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
855 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.ssresearch.2009.04.004.pdf]]
856 -{{/expandable}}
857 -{{/expandable}}
858 -
859 -
860 -{{expandable summary="Study: Black Penis and the Demoralization of the Western World"}}
861 -**Source:** *Journal of European Psychoanalysis*
862 -**Date of Publication:** *2009*
863 -**Author(s):** *Kristen Fink* *Jewish*))
864 -**Title:** *"Black Penis and the Demoralization of the Western World: Sexual relationships between black men and white women as a cause of decline"*
865 -**DOI:** *Unavailable – Psychoanalytic essay publication*
866 -**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sexuality, Psychoanalysis, Cultural Demoralization*
867 -
868 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
869 -1. **General Observations:**
870 - - This is a **psychoanalytic essay**, not an empirical study.
871 - - Uses **Freudian and Lacanian theory** to explore symbolic meanings of interracial sex.
872 - - Frames **Black male–White female pairings** as psychologically disruptive to the White male ego and Western civilization.
873 -
874 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
875 - - Positions **Black men as symbolic rivals** to emasculated Western (White) men.
876 - - **White women’s interracial attraction** is framed as rebellion or rejection of Western order.
877 -
878 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
879 - - The essay proposes that **sexual representation in media** is demoralizing to White culture.
880 - - Uses **high theory language** to justify what is ultimately an anti-White cultural narrative.
881 -{{/expandable}}
882 -
883 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
884 -1. **Primary Observations:**
885 - - **Interracial sexual dynamics** are framed as central to **Western decline**.
886 - - **White masculinity is portrayed as passive, obsolete, or neurotic** in contrast to hypermasculinized Blackness.
887 -
888 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
889 - - Suggests White men internalize emasculation through exposure to interracial symbolism.
890 - - Sees **cultural loss of confidence** in White society as stemming from racial-sexual symbolism.
891 -
892 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
893 - - Analyzes media tropes (e.g., interracial porn, pop culture) through the lens of psychoanalytic guilt and transgression.
894 - - Never critiques the **ideological project of glorifying Blackness at the expense of White identity**.
895 -{{/expandable}}
896 -
897 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
898 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
899 - - Reveals how **elite academic disciplines like psychoanalysis** are used to mask anti-White narratives in esoteric jargon.
900 - - Serves as **ideological evidence** of demoralization tactics embedded in cultural theory.
901 -
902 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
903 - - No empirical data, surveys, or statistical analysis — purely speculative.
904 - - **Does not critique hypersexualization of Black men** or the dehumanizing aspects of the fetish.
905 - - Assumes **White masculinity must passively accept its symbolic erasure** as psychoanalytically “natural.”
906 -
907 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
908 - - Include **perspectives from White men and women** on how these portrayals affect their psychological well-being.
909 - - Disentangle psychoanalytic theory from **racial guilt ideology**.
910 - - Explore **mutual respect-based frameworks** for interracial dynamics rather than ones rooted in humiliation or power symbolism.
911 -{{/expandable}}
912 -
913 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
914 -- Illustrates how **race, sex, and culture are manipulated to undermine White self-perception**.
915 -- Demonstrates how **academic elites frame White decline as psychologically necessary or deserved**.
916 -- Provides ideological background for modern media trends that eroticize racial power imbalance.
917 -{{/expandable}}
918 -
919 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
920 -1. Analyze how psychoanalytic language is used to **justify racial inversion in cultural dominance**.
921 -2. Examine the **role of pornography in demoralization campaigns** targeting White men.
922 -3. Explore how elite journals create **ideological cover for overt anti-White sentiment**.
923 -{{/expandable}}
924 -
925 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
926 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.Fink_Black_Penis_Demoralization.pdf]]
927 -{{/expandable}}
928 -{{/expandable}}
929 -
930 -
931 931  {{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"}}
932 932  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
933 933  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
... ... @@ -2121,69 +2121,3 @@
2121 2121  {{/expandable}}
2122 2122  {{/expandable}}
2123 2123  
2124 -
2125 -{{expandable summary="Study: Cultural Voyeurism – A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Interaction"}}
2126 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
2127 -**Date of Publication:** *2018*
2128 -**Author(s):** *Osei Appiah*
2129 -**Title:** *"Cultural Voyeurism: A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Interaction"*
2130 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
2131 -**Subject Matter:** *Intergroup contact, racial stereotypes, media, identity formation*
2132 -
2133 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
2134 -1. **No empirical dataset** — this is a theoretical framework paper, not a quantitative study.
2135 -2. **Heavily cites prior empirical work**, including:
2136 - - Czopp & Monteith (2006) on “complimentary stereotypes”
2137 - - Armstrong et al. (1992), Entman & Rojecki (2000) on media distortion of race
2138 - - Pettigrew et al. (2011) on intergroup contact
2139 -
2140 -3. **Statistical implications:** Repeatedly emphasizes the role of media in shaping racial beliefs when direct interracial contact is absent.
2141 -{{/expandable}}
2142 -
2143 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
2144 -1. **Primary Observations:**
2145 - - Defines *cultural voyeurism* as the process of using media to observe and learn about other racial/ethnic groups.
2146 - - Claims it can both reinforce stereotypes and reduce prejudice depending on context.
2147 - - Suggests that Whites’ fascination with Black culture (e.g., hip-hop, athleticism) is a driver of empathy and improved race relations.
2148 -
2149 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2150 - - White youth are singled out as cultural voyeurs increasingly emulating Black identity for social cachet (“coolness”).
2151 - - Positive media portrayals of Blacks (e.g., in entertainment) said to reduce racial bias.
2152 -
2153 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2154 - - No case study provided, but mentions “Duck Dynasty” and “hip-hop culture” as stereotyped White/Black identity constructs respectively.
2155 -{{/expandable}}
2156 -
2157 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
2158 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2159 - - Recognizes media’s dual role in shaping intergroup perception.
2160 - - Accurately captures the obsession with racial “coolness” as a social phenomenon.
2161 -
2162 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2163 - - Frames White identification with Black culture as inherently progressive, ignoring issues of **anti-White displacement**.
2164 - - Treats *positive stereotypes of minorities* (e.g., athleticism, musicality) as meaningful substitutes for structural reality.
2165 - - Lacks any meaningful inquiry into *reverse cultural voyeurism* (i.e., non-Whites voyeuristically consuming and appropriating White identity or values).
2166 -
2167 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2168 - - Should confront whether “cultural voyeurism” ultimately erodes group boundaries and majority cultural integrity.
2169 - - Needs empirical validation of claims.
2170 - - Avoids uncomfortable realities about how White identity is increasingly stigmatized in media — which undermines genuine empathy or parity.
2171 -{{/expandable}}
2172 -
2173 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
2174 -- Helps explain how **media conditioning** primes young Whites to *admire, emulate, and eventually submit* to Black cultural dominance.
2175 -- Directly supports the narrative that **pro-White identity is systematically delegitimized**, while pro-Black identity is commodified and glamorized — then sold back to White youth.
2176 -- Useful in chapters/sections covering cultural appropriation *in reverse* — not by Whites, but **of Whiteness** by outsiders for critique and exploitation.
2177 -{{/expandable}}
2178 -
2179 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
2180 -1. Are there longitudinal studies showing cultural voyeurism weakening in-group preference among Whites?
2181 -2. Does this phenomenon correspond to decreased fertility, civic participation, or political alignment with group interest?
2182 -3. How do non-Western societies handle voyeuristic consumption of majority culture — do they permit or punish it?
2183 -{{/expandable}}
2184 -
2185 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
2186 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf]]
2187 -{{/expandable}}
2188 -{{/expandable}}
2189 -
Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -472.9 KB
Content
lai2014.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -15.4 MB
Content