Essay Exam

't

I) Z)

3) Lf)

'C~)

Q~

....-~,··· 6 ................. • ••• •••••,, ......... '-.''I'

what were painful racially conflicted chapters in its national history; (Others think that race and ethnicity are unrelated to their own lives and should be the concern of those in barrios, ghettos, and ethnic studies pro- grams. Wome worry about race and ethnicity but avoid talking about them for fear of being thought racist.IYet others think that even noticing race and ethnicity is wrong and that these concepts should not be taken into account when someone is deciding how to interact with another person.{Still others believe that U.S. Americans have not begun to talk seriously about these topics and that no one can understand society with- out analyzing how race and ethnicity are linked and deeply intertwined with wealth, status, life chances, and well-being in general.

Given the wide range of possible reactions, we might ask, Why are race and ethnicity so central to our lives and at the same time so difficult and taboo?

In this essay, the authors propose an understanding of race and ethnic- ity that, at first, may be hard to accept.tC~ntrary to what most people believe, race and ethnicity are not things that people have or are. Rather, they are actions that people do. 1l'R;ce and ethnicity are social, historical,. and philosophical processes that people have done for hundreds of years and are still doing. IThey emerge through the social ·transactions that take place among different kinds of people, in a variety of institutional structures (e.g., schools, workplaces, government offices, courts, media), over time, across space, and in all kinds of situations.

Our framework for understanding them draws on the work of schol- ars of race and ethnicity around the world, including professors asso- ciated with the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity (CCSRE) at Stanford University. Over the past several decades, the topics ofrace and ethnicity have become increasingly central to the research and theorizing of sociologists, psychologists, and h~rians as well as schol- ars in the humanities, the law, and education.lPsychologists most often focus on why people stereotype others and on the multiple negative out- comes for those who are the target of these stereotypes (e.g., Baron and Banaji 2006; Dovidio, Glick, and Rudman 2005; Eberhardt and Fiske 1998; Jones 1997; Steele 1992), while sociologists often concentrate on racism as a system of beliefs that justifies the privilege of the dominant

I Although the term doing race has yet to gain wide currency either. within or outside the academy, several ,race scholars have previously used the phrase to mean something very close to what we use it to mcai'i. Sec, for example, John Jackson'sHarleml(Jor/d and Amy Best's "Doing Race in the Context of Feminist Interviewing."

.l...J'VlHi:) .1'.d\..\..

group (e.g., Bonilla-Silva 2003; Brown et al. 2005; Feagin 2006; Omi and Winant 1994; Massey and Denton 1998; Wilson 1990). For their part, his- torians reveal the sources of various notions of race and how these no- tions are perpetuated in both informal and formal practices over time (e.g., Fredrickson 1971, 2002; Roediger 1991). Philosophers focus on the philosophical foundations of racist schemas (e.g., Alcoff 2005; Goldberg 2009, 1993; Mills 1998; West 1993; Fanon 1952), while literary critics focus on meanings conveyed by the motifs, images, and narratives that recur in the representations of racialized people and characters:(Gates 1988; Lott 1993; Morrison 1992; Said 1978; Sundquist 1993, 2005). While scholars from different disciplines take a variety of approaches to the topics, they share the view that race and ethnicity are central to understanding both individual and societal experience in the twenty-first century.

To illustrate the central point of this essay-that race and ethnicity are everyday doings involving routine social interactions as well as the institutional policies and practices of our society-we begin by describ- ing eight conversations people commonly have about these topics. We conclude Section I by providing new and comprehensive definitions of these terms. In Section II, we reveal the centrality of race and ethnicity to the U.S. American story (Omi and Winant 1994; Higginbotham and Andersen 2005) and show why current popular understandings of them create widespread confusion and discord. We further show that all of us-regardless of the races or ethnicities we claim or to which we are assigned-are involved in doing race and ethnicity, often in unseen and subtle ways. The workings of race and ethnicity, we contend, are the result of universal human endeavors and concerns. In Section III, we explain why achieving a just society requires attending to, rather than ignoring, race and ethnicity. We then return to a discussion of strategies for forging new, more productive conversations about them. Finally, we conclude with some alternative and positive ways people can appre- ciate ethnic and racial differences, and propose six suggestions for how we can all learn to do race and ethnicity differently.

EIGHT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT RACE AND ETHNICITY

In the process of teaching a course called Introduction to Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity, the authors of this essay have identified eight types of conversations that people have with one another as they make sense of events in which race and ethnicity figure prominently (see Table i.1). By "conversations" we mean interpretive frameworks, or

'

)

._..~,•••5 &.._U'-'""• J II.II &ll\_I \.l\..l-l\..\_IU'JI

TABLE 1.1 EIGHT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT RACE AND ETHNICITY

1. We're beyond race. 2. Racial diversity is killing us. 3. Everyone's a little bit racist. 4. That's just identity politics. 5. It's a black thing-you wouldn't understand. 6. I'm __ and I'm proud. 7. Variety is the sp.ice oflife. 8. Race is in our DNA.

what other scholars-depending on their disciplinary training-might call models, schemas, discourses, or scripts. As a literary scholar (Moya) and a social psychologist (Markus), we have chosen the term "conver- sation" as a disciplinary compromise. We also hope it might appeal to students who are not yet committed to a particular disciplinary way of describing the world we live in.

Each of the eight conversations identified with a characteristic phrase in Table i.l uses a set of assumptions, words, images, and narratives to interpret the co~fusion and uncertainty generated by events involving race and ethnicity. No one of these conversations is, by itself, either accu- rate or complete; rather, each is a partial way of understanding the racial and ethnic dynamics that gave rise to the conversation in the first place. Even so, the conversations as a whole are crucially important. People from across the political spectrum rely on some version of one or more of these readily available and malleable conversations to help them man- age the pervasive tensions surrounding race and ethnicity. Which con- versation someone uses to help make sense of an event will depend on that person's social circle, identity, and past experiences. For that reason, analyzing the conversations is an important step in understanding and changing the way our society creates and reacts to human difference.

Importantly, all eight conversations contain powerful hidden assump- tions about the importance, nature, and meaning of race and ethnicity in the United States. However, they do not all have the same status in U.S. society. Some cross the color line, while others are more common among certain ethnic or racial groups. Some conversations are relatively new, while others have been around for as long as the concept of race has existed. Some conversations overlap, while others flatly contradict each other. The more common conversations tend to be especially robust and to come in different versions.

.1.JUtUt; .l\.Ul .. C 1'1\UL.'\ l\'1. J...., l\'1Vl/\ 1\1\ilJ 11/\/ ... .l'..J.... 1\V.'.:l.t:. .J.\.1/\.1\.r...U.'.J

1. We're beyond race.

This conversation is pervasive among middle-class Americans and it of- ten comes up in discussions of affirmative action for college admission or employment. It is the conversation that says, "Sure, there are lots of differences, but racial and ethnic differences are merely superficial. At the end of the day,' wherever you go, people are just people."(Ll'ke some of the others, this conversation comes in several versions, the first of

I) which might be called "I'm color-blind." This version, shows up in the way a teacher in a multi-ethnic high school talks about her students. She explains, "We have a lot of different kinds, but I don't see color. None of us really do, we just see all our students as the same. That's what is so

Z)

2)

wonderful about [this school]" (Olsen 1997, 180). fA second version of the We're beyond race conversation says, effectively,

"race doesn't matter any more." This version first surfaced in the mid- 1990s with the claim that the twenty-first century will be "post-me~" or "post-ethnic" (Hollinger 1995). It reappeared among the support- ers of Barack Obama during his presidential campaign: after Obama's win in the South Carolina democratic primary-a win that came in the wake of racially charged accusations between him and his primary rival, Hillary Clinton-supporters at his victory party began ch~nting, "Race doesn't matter" (USA Today 2008). The idea that race no longer mat- ters has proved popular in both academic and corporate circles and has prompted a spate of conferences and books proclaiming the dawn of a "post-race America."

IFinally, a third version of the We're beyond race conversation shows up in discussions and political activity around mixed-race identity, es- pecially activity involving the U.S. census. Advocates of mixed-rac;:e identity imagine a world in which more and more "brown" and "beige" people are born of parents who claim different races. They envision that race as we currently know it will gradually disappear and something else, something post-racial, will take its place. In an ironic response to ·this notion, novelist Denzy Senna-herself the daughter of an African American father and a white mother-has suggested that we are enter- ing a new "Mulatto Millennium" (Senna 1998).

2. Racial diversity is killing us.

This multidimensional conversation comes in several versions, some of which are less mean-spirited than others. The mildest version says, "If you want to come here, fine, but you have to check your ethnic coat at

0 uuiug l\.acr:; 11...U lllll"UUUCUUU

the border." This perspective accepts cultural or linguistic difference but only as long as that difference is quickly abandoned in favor of what adherents of this position understand to be the "American way."

A harsher articulation of the Racial diversity is killing us conversation is the "Seal the border now!" version. It is common among people who imagine themselves as the racial or ethnic "gold standard" of the United States and who would like to prevent people who differ from that stan- dard from immigrating into the country-or, in the unfortunate event that they are already here, would send them home.IA'historical example can be found in the American Colonization Society, a U.S.-led move- ment that began in 1816 and advocated the "colonization," or repatria- tion back to Africa, of freed black slaves. That effort, which resulted in thousands of freed black Americans going to Africa, was responsible.for the 1847 founding of the country of Liberia in Africa.

{G;ntemporary examples of the "Seal the border now!" version of this conversation are common. One example can be found in the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, a self-appointed (and predominantly white) vigi- lante militia that currently patrols the U.S.-Mexican border with the intention of ending undocumented immigration from Mexico and Cen- tral America.\Another can be found in the work of Samuel Huntington, professor of government at Harvard University. Huntington advocates the maintenance of the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant values and tradi- tions that he believes are the bedrock of this country. Expressing worry that the large wave of immigrants from Mexico and Central America is changing the country in fundamental and negative ways, Hunting- ton contends that "Mexican immigration poses challenges to our policies and to our identity in a way nothing else has in the past" (2005). {Finally, some politicians use the "Seal the border now I" version of the

Racial diversity is killing us conversation to stir up racial distrust and cre- ate political divisions. Such an effort was evident in an August 16, 2006, appearance by Congressman Ted Poe of Texas on the program Your World on Fox News. In his interview with the show's host, Neil Cavuto, Congressman Poe worked to forge a connection between Mexican and Central American immigration and Islamic terrorism:

CAVUTO: Could I ask you this, Congressman, do you believe that if there is another terror attack here it will somehow have originated from those who came into this country illegally?

CONGRESSMAN POE: Yes, that is a, a tremendous possibility because we know the southern border, of Texas especially, is open, and in-

9

')

J...JU1U1:; .1'.d\..L

dividuals, we have heard that individuals of Al-Qaeda persuasion have gone to Mexico, have assimilated into the population, have learned the language, have learned the culture, and then they have moved across into the United States pretending and posing to be immigrant Mexican workers, which they're not. (Cavuto 2006)

3. Everyone's a little hit racist.

tThe strongest version of this third conversation is very familiar and might be called "You're a racist." In part because many people believe that we are now "post-race," calling someone a racist usually involves a serious assault on his or her character. Indeed, being the target of such a remark can undermine a person's claim to being a decent and moral hu- man being and can seriously damage his or her reputation. For that rea- son, the "You're a racist" version is one of the most charged and feared discussions about race that anyone can engage in.

Because there is no shared understanding of what race is, and therefore what it means to be a racist, people use the "You' re a racist" version of this conversation across a wide range of situations. Sometimes a person is ac- cused of being racist when he or she denies another person fair and equal treatment because that person is from a different racial or ethnic group. At other times, a person who merely refers to his or her race or ethnicity, or to another person's, is charged with being a racist. For example, after Presi- dent Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, se:veral conservative commentators were quick to condemn what they la- beled as Sotomayor's racism. The source of their ire was that Sotomayor, in public speeches and especially when talking to law students, had often spoken about growing up as a Puerto Rican Latina in the United States. Because she mentioned race and ethnicity as factors that contributed to her ability to make good judgments, people-including former Repub- lican House Speaker Newt Gringrich and the conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh-called Sotomayor a racist and demanded that she withdraw her name from consideration. The stakes regarding whether Sotomayor was, in fact, a racist were very high, even though there was not (and is not) one agreed-upon standard regarding what counts as racism. The controversy was quelled only after Sotomayor testified at her Senate confirmation hearings that she did "not believe that any ethnic, racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judgment." fl\ second version of the Eveiyone's a little bit racist conversation pro-

vides a way of sidestepping or calming the heated exchanges that follow

::;

..l./Vt115 .l.'Ld\..\... Jl.H .J.UUUUUt..U.UU

most explicit accusations of racism. Like the "You're a racist" version of the conversation, this. one recognizes the existence of racial and ethnic differences. However, it differs in that it spreads around the blame for racism by claiming that we just have to acknowledge that people will pay attention, to race and that they will make judgments based on it. Moreover, since judging people according to racial and ethnic stereo- types is just an inconvenient truth of life, we should not be so worked up about it-whether we are the target or the perpetrator of the racist action or word.lln" the movie Crash (2005), for example, a mix of people in contemporary Los Angeles-the white cop, the Arab storeowner, the black cop, and the Asian human trafficker-all make unfair and seem- ingly unavoidable racist judgments about each other. The title refers both to the automobile crash in_ the movie's opening scene and also to the movie's guiding motif.-the idea that urban America is so racially and ethnically diverse that people cannot help bumping up against and "crashing" into each other.

Most of us have participated in the Everyone's a little bit racist conver- sation if, after a racially insensitive remark, we have ever said to some- one "Don't be so sensitive!" or had someone say that to us.ffhis attitude shows up in the signature song of the award-winning Avenue Q (Lopez and Marx 2003), a Broadway production inspired by the muppets of the popular and long-running children's television show Sesame Street. At a key moment in the plot, three lead characters (all of whom are twenty- somethings trying to make their way in a diverse New York City) cheer- fully admit that since "everyone's a little bit racist," telling ethnic jokes and stereotyping are perfectly acceptable. The chorus sings:

Everyone's a little bit racist today. So, eve1yone's a little bit racist. Okay! Ethnic Jokes might be uncouth, But you laugh because they're based on truth. Don't take them as personal attacks. Everyone enjoys them - so relax/

4. That's just identity politics.

The That's just identity politics conversation is common among people who think that race and ethnicity are irrelevant to, or a distraction from, the more important universal human concerns we all should be paying attention to. According to this view, race and ethnicity are superficial

lJUlllg 1'a1.;c 1'1\UL/\ !Vi. L, 1\'1U l /\ /\i"o lJ I lt\/_.,.J.:.1_... "'-J,11~ iu1u,i-..v.t

and do not mark important and consequential differences in people's history, contexts, or perspectives. The That's just identity politics conver- sation is a favorite of those who think that drawing attention to one's race or ethnicity is a strategy used by weak people to gain unfair sympa- thy or advantage. They attach the word "identity" to the term "politics" to convey the idea that someone who advocates something on the basis of racial or ethnic identity is acting illegitimately.~metimes this con-

1) versation says "I'm tired of all this emphasis on race and ethnicity." At other times it surfaces as an accusation that an opponent is "playing the race card," or through sarcastic comments like "When is white history month?" The That's just identity politics conversation expresses a frus- tration that those who "have" race or ethnicity are getting some special privilege that will be unfairly denied to those who "don't have" race or ethnicity and who must therefore play by standard race-neutral rules. People who use this conversation often complain that if they object to the pervasiveness of race talk in the United States, they will be branded as "politically incorrect" and even as racist.

'Z,") {f\second version of this conversation common among white Ameri- / cans is the one that says, "Race isn't relevant to me." Many whites are

quite comfortable with the idea that race (especially) and ethnicity are things that Asians, Latina/as, and blacks have to contend with, but that white people do not. They regard themselves as a neutral or standard, without race or ethnicity, or as a member of the "human race." This line of thinking is apparent in the comment made by a student who, when asked by one of the authors of this essay to fill out a questionnaire about racial attitudes, left the questions blank and wrote across it, "I'm white." Moreover, when experimental social psychologists ask people to describe themselves on open-ended questionnaires, white people tend not to mention the racial or ethnic aspects of their identity (Tatum 2002). They are likely to describe themselves in terms of personality traits (i.e., "I am friendly; I am optimistic; I tend to be shy"). Nonwhite people, by contrast, will generally include their race or ethnicity in their self-descriptions.

J f'W-hile the That's just identity politics conversation is common among ') whites, people of color sometimes participate in it as well. African

American commentator Michel Martin invoked the "race isn't relevant" sentiment after Barack Obama's early win in the Iowa primary. She wrote: "Even if the Obama steamroller ends tomorrow, his success so far has proven that race is no longer the determinant of human potential in this country. A passion for excellence is-or can be" (Martin 2008).

12

47

v

J.JUI.Ug J.\.ilLt:; nu UlllUUULllUU

\Similarly, the African American comedian Bill Cosby's exhortation to African Americans to stop whining about racial disadvantage and dis- crimination and instead to work hard, show individual fortitude, and take personal responsibility for their own success or failure, is also a vari- ant of this co.µversation. His statements can be seen as a way of expressing the core idea that an undue concern with racial identity is a distraction from the more important issues at hand.

5. Variety is the spice of life.

People who participate in this conversation appear to be more comfort- able than some others with talking about the positive importance of race and ethnicity. They mark an appreciation for other people and cultures by saying, "I love ethnic diversity-it's what makes the world interest- ing." In the course of this conversation, people usually talk about their favorite ethnic foods, the world music festivals they have gone to, or the good times they have had while traveling around the world. fA version of this conversation can be seen in the "It's a Small World

after All" ride popular with people of all ages at the Disney theme parks. In this attraction, passengers embark on a small boat and take a voyage around the world. As they float past the seven continents, passengers en- counter groups of dancing, singing dolls. Some dolls are dark-skinned, others light, and while the Hawaiian dolls wear grass skirts, the Eskimo dolls wear hooded, fur-lined parkas. Despite their surface differences, all dolls are basically the same, smiling and belting out these lyrics: ~'It's a world of hopes/It's a world of fear/There's so much that we share/That it's time we're aware/It's a small world after all."

This conversation is also central to the clothing retailer Benetton's advertising campaigns, which consist of striking color photographs accompanied by the tag line "The United Colors of Benetton." A typi- cal Benetton image shows a group of young, highly attractive, smiling people in casual Benetton clothing arrayed in a line or other close for- mation as if they were members of a sports team. Because they are all similar in age, attractiveness, attitude, and dress, the only obvious visual differences among them are skin and eye color, and hair color and tex- turefBoth the Disney attraction and the Benetton ads convey the same basic message: we may look different, and those differences are intrigu- ing, but they are only skin deep. By embracing each other and sharing similar human feelings, we can easily transcend the superficial (and ap- pealing) differences between us.

i)

JJUllll:\ .<\.Ul.C l>J\UL/\ 1\'1. L, i\'1Ul/\ /\l"d.J 11/\/ ... l:.L. l\.U.'.>l:. l\'11\l\.1'-U-.l

The last version of the Variety is the spice of life conversation also un- derstands differences as basically positive. However, it sees differences as consequential rather than merely superficial. Many school and work- place settings emphasize the value of what is often called "multicul- turalism." This often translates into having meatballs, pierogis, tacos,

sam~sas, ,~nd sushi ·at t,~e end-of-t~e-yea~, ~icnic, and sa~ "Happy Holidays rather than Merry Christmas m December. n example comes from the General Telephone and Electronics (GTE) Corpora- tion. GTE ran a recruitment advertisement featuring a beautiful quilt with patches of different colors and textures accompanied by the follow- ing message: "A community is made up of dreams, ideas and hard work. It is a blend of the ideals of men and women from diverse backgrounds, like woven threads in a colorful tapestry .... Each new idea inspires us to work and grow within this diverse fabric called community."

6. It's a black thing-you wouldn't understand.

Just as some conversations might be more common among whites, this conversation is more frequent among people of color. Those who have this conversation are proclaiming a certain pride in their racial or ethnic identity while also claiming an exclusive relationship to a wide range of experiences and cultural products typically associated with their ra- cial group. Although sometimes these experiences or cultural products are seen as hip and valuable-such as a sensibility for jazz or hip-hop improvisation-they are just as often meant to .refer to more painful experiences such as what it is like to be a victim of racist stereotyping. The main idea behind this conversation is that, as a result of one's racial identity, one's life is different in significant ways-ways that cannot be adequately understood by outsiders whose experiences have been very different from one's own. It follows from this idea that outsiders have no authority to interpret the meaning of one's racialized life, even if they mean well. Rather, they should sit back, listen, and learn instead of try- ing to contribute what could only be false knowledge to the conversation about what it means to be a person of color.

The slogan It's a black thing-you wouldn't understand is a sound bite for a whole set of attitudes and beliefs about how race works in U.S. American society. This particular saying was popularized in the late twentieth century on T-shirts worn by young black people, often but not exclusively, on college campuses. It was intended as a rebuke to those people who might assume, too quickly, that they could understand

'.)

r4 Doing Race: An Introduction

what it was like to be black or that they could be easily accepted into a black community.IQ~ one level, this slogan and the conversation behind it might be viewed as an attempt by some blacks to discourage poseurs (i.e., nonblacks who dress hip-hop style or use African Ameri- can English).fc°)n another level, it might be understood as an aggressive insistence on the significance of race for shaping experience and knowl- edge. It is a refusal to entertain and accept the sentiment expressed by the "It's a small world after all" conversation and is a pointed rejection of the liberal assumption that all human experience is universal and thus can be shared, via reasonable discussion, with others (La Vaque- Manty 2002).

7. I'm and I'm proud.

Like the previous one, this conversation is common among racial mi- norities, and comes in many ethnic variants: I'm black and I'm proud, Asian pride, yo soy Chicana/a, and so on. Although this conversation persists into the present, it first came into full flower in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s. Ethnic civil rights activists-primarily young people involved in the Black Power movement, the American Indian movement, the Asian American movement, and the Chicano movement-strongly rejected the idea that being nonwhite meant that they were less intelligent, less moral, or less worthy than those with exclusively European ancestry (Louie and Omatsu 2001; Munoz 1989; Smith and Warrior 1997; Ture and Hamilton [1967] 1992). These ac- tivists further turned their backs on the assimilationist and accommo- datioriist behaviors of their forebears by demanding recognition of and respect for their particular racial identities. They took denigrated racial identities that had been imposed upon them by others and then claimed them as positive sources of belongingness, pride, and motivation.

When those who are associated with the dominant racial group par- ticipate in this conversation, it often has a different set of meanings and consequences from the ones it has when racial minorities employ the conversation to counter marginalization and denigration.War example, white supremacists, including those who belong to fringe groups such as the Aryan Nations, White Nationalists, Skinheads, Ku Klux Klan, or the American Nazi Party, use it to make an explicit claim for European racial superiority. People who belong to White Pride groups bemoan what they see as the possible disappearance of the white race due to mis- cegenation and a low white birthrate and call alternately for kicking all

.1..1u111g 1'.aL1.: 1-'/\LJL,:\ lVJ. L. 1V1Uli\. ;\i .. 1..1 lti\IJl.t.. 1''-.ldo. ,.,,,,~, .... ..__.,,

nonwhites out of the United States or for returning to Europe where they can create a homogenous white nation.

8. Race is in our DNA.

The final conversation on our list is both one of the oldest and one of the most current. It is the conversation that says race cannot be ignored because it is an essential part of a person and that race can be found in a person's blood, genome, or culture. The idea that race is in the blood has been the basis of many different discriminatory policies, ranging from laws in the United States to prevent people associated with different races from marrying each other, to the genocidal murder of millions of European Jews during World War II. Following German Chancellor Adolf Hitler's defeat in World War II, this conversation appeared to go into decline as people tried to avoid the topic of race or had the We're be- yond race conversation. It turns out, however, that the Race is in our DNA conversation had only gone into hiding.

Recent developments in biology and medicine have sparked this con- versation anew.War example, DNA testing that gives people informa- tion about their genetic heritage has become increasingly available to the average consumer. Internet ads claim that with a simple cheek swab and $199, you can learn about your past and "who you really are." These new DNA testing techniques are exciting and have the potential to reveal very significant information about people's individual ancestry and the history of human migrations across the globe. However, these techniques also reinforce the centuries-old notion that race is a biological entity inside people's blood or bodies and that it marks something significant about their characters or behaviors (Koenig, Lee, and Richardson 2008). fO'ne important variant of the Race is in our DNA conversation says,

"It's their culture; it can't be helped." Although this version focuses on culture rather than biology, it similarly regards people as essentially un- changing and determined by the circumstances of their birth or early upbringing. This version of the Race is in our DNA conversation draws on a narrow and outdated understanding of culture as being so deeply rooted in a person, and so stable and predictable in its effects, that even important changes in a person's social environment are unlikely to make a difference in his or her values and behavior.

Nobel Prize winner James Watson, who helped discover the double helix structure of DNA, is one of the latest and best-known contributors to the Race is in our DNA conversation. Watson noted in a 2007 speech

'_)

I (J Uomg Kacc: An lnlroducl1011

that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours-whereas all the testing says not really." He added that while many of us have a natural desire to believe that all human beings should be equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true." Watson was strongly criticized and he apologized for his remarks. Nevertheless, the fact that a highly respected and accomplished scientist would make this kind of statement shows that confusion about what race is and what it means is still frighteningly widespread (Dean 2007).

Taken together, these eight conversations show some of the most com- mon ways of thinking and feeling about race and ethnicity in the United States today. Clearly, U.S. Americans both appreciate and fear our racial and ethnic difference. On the one hand, we are proud of our diversity: as a nation of immigrants, we want to incorporate racial and ethnic dif- ferences into our lives. We celebrate our differences (Variety is the spice of life), proclaim them (I'm __ and I'm proud), argue for their reality (Race is in our DNA), and believe that they matter in our lives (It's a black thing-you wouldn't understand). On the other hand, we are worried about the changes to the country and to our lives that'racial and ethnic differences bring with them: we are panicked by differences (Racial di- versity is killing us), try to minimize their significance (Everyone's a little bit racist), ignore their relevance to our own lives (That's just identity poli- tics), and proudly claim that differences no longer matter (We're beyond race). However we feel about race and ethnicity, they are clearly central to who "we" are as U.S. Americans.

At the heart of all the conversations are questions about ethnically and racially associated human differences: what they are, where they come from, and what we should do with them. An even thornier question in- volves who the "we" is who gets to decide which differences count. When people are deemed to be racially or ethnically different, who are they different from? Which group gets to represent the "norm," and which groups are forced to represent the "difference?" Answering these ques- tions in away that does not involve racial or ethnic discrimination, ethnic cleansing, or even genocide requires us to have a better understanding of race and ethnicity than any of the eight conversations discussed above can provide. In the service of moving toward a better understanding, we offer new and comprehensive definitions of race and ethnicity as doings, that is, as systems of social relations involving everyday interactions, as well as the institutional policies and practices of society.

LJ01ug L\.acc l't\ULt\ 1\1. L, lVlUll\ /\l'-U 11/\J .. 1'..L l\V."11.'.. lv.tt\J\.J:">..U.J

RACE AND ETHNICITY AS DOINGS

Consider the graphic representations in Figures i. l and i.2. In Figure i. l, race and ethnicity are shown as essential characteristics that reside within people and that distinguish them from other people who have different essential characteris.tics. In the case of race, especially, these characteris- tics are understood to be negative, and often biological and/or genetic. The individual people shown are designated as "dots," "squares," "tri- angles," or "stars" because they have "dot," "square," "triangle," "star," or "triangle/star" (i.e., mixed-race) qualities inside of them. They are grouped with others who apparently share these innate characteristics (e.g., skin color, hair texture, intelligence, athletic ability, mathematical propensity). So "white" people are grouped with other people who have "white" characteristics, while "Asian" people are grouped with other people who have "Asian" characteristics, and "mixed race" people have a mix of racial and ethnic characteristics. This is the way almost all of us are used to thinking about race and ethnicity; we imagine that people fit

FIGURE 1.1 RACE AND ETHNICITY AS ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS

LI

76 Doing Race: An Introduction

are using more nonwhite models in their ads, people of color are shown in only a limited number of roles-as entertainers and as models-and not as lawyers, doctors, or other business professionals (Wilson, Gutier- rez, and Chao 2003).

If we all lived in racially diverse environments, the images and ste- reotypes presented by movies, cartoons, and advertisers would not be consequential. But because many of us live in racially and ethnically ho- mogenous contexts where we do not encounter people and behavior that disavow these stereotypes, the media can do race and be a powerful force in perpetuating racial inequality.

The foregoing examples give just a hint of how varied the processes are that are involved in doing race. Of course, the specifics vary widely by culture, context, and historical period. In fact, the social processes in- volved in arranging the world and living life as if people associated with some racial or ethnic groups were inherently more valuable than others appear across history, and not just in the United States but throughout the world. Moreover, as we have seen, these processes sometimes operate quite independently of the term "race" in other parts of the world. These processes are not always easy to see or to analyze, prob~bly because do- ing so disturbs many of our taken-for-granted assumptions about our worlds and ourselves. Yet thinking about race and ethnicity as doings- as sets of ideas and practices developed and perpetuated by many people over time-is an important step toward more knowledgeable, enlight- ened, and trusting conversations.

Changing the Conversations

The tendency to create distinctions and organize societies based on as- sumed commonalities in history, language, region, religion, customs, physical appearance, and ancestry group appears to be a human univer- sal. For this reason, framing new and better conversations about race and ethnicity will be central to any attempt to change their meanings in our society. An important first step is reviewing the eight conversations we identified in Section I in light of what we have learned so far. This will allow us to steer the conversations and the actions they guide in more productive and accurate directions. Informed and useful conversations will have to confront the best ways to recognize, include, and incorporate our differences without using them to do race-that is, using them as a basis for unequally distributing opportunity and life chances.

9

Doing Race PAULA M. L. MOYA AND HAZEL ROSE MARKUS

rfhe Race is in our DNA conversation is one of the oldest and, not sur- prisingly, the most resistant to change. The concept of race has assumed from the beginning that a person's race can be found in his or her body. The contemporary form of this conversation focuses on the human ge- nome, but it borrows its logic from many old, troublesome, and hard- to-shake discourses and schemas. For example, in Spain the labelsangre pura ("pure blood") was used to distinguish those born into the Catholic religion from the Jewish and Muslim conversos, and in Spanish Amer- ican countries like Mexico to distinguish the criollo (a person born in Spanish America of Spanish parents) from the mestizo (a person born in Spanish America who has one Indian parent and one Spanish parent). One of the reasons for the lasting appeal of the idea of race as biological is that it promises clear and simple answers to deep-seated questions we all have about who are we and where our place in the world might be. The possibility that we might be able to look inside our bodies (to our DNA, in the current version) to discover precisely who we really are is very at- tractive to many people.

It is not surprising, then, that trying to discover one's ancestral histories-finding one's "roots in a test tube"-is an increasingly popu- lar activity (Gates 2007). And this may be an especially popular activ- ity for people whose histories and identities have been interrupted and denied. Yet the results of DNA tests need to be ihterpreted carefolly. People with a wide variety of racial and ethnic associations can be shown through current DNA testing to have ancestors who came from the con- tinent of Africa, for example. Yet not all of them would identify, nor would others identify them, as black or African American. Speaking practically, finding out the geographic origins of some of your direct forebears may have little effect on where you might be placed in terms of today's racial categories-white, African American, Native American, Asian American, or Latina/a. DNA testing, even as it becomes more comprehensive and complex, cannot tell us "who one really is." This is because while humans are biological beings, being a person is simultane- ously a human social achievement (Bruner 1990). A person's identity is more than his or her geographical origin; it is an ongoing synthesis of personal, political, historical, and social factors.

The version of the Race is in our DNA conversation that says, "It's their culture, it can't be helped," is also deeply flawed. First, culture is not something located inside people as one of their internal attributes. Instead culture is located outside the person in the ideas, practices, and in- stitutions that people use to make sense of their lives and to guide their

77

7l5

11

3)

Doing Race: An Introduction

actions (Adams and Markus 2004). Culture conveys what is and is not good, valuable, and worth doing. Second, culture is dynamic. Cultural ideas and practices are attached to all the important social distinctions in our lives-race and ethnicity, but also social class, gender, religion, birth cohort, region of the country, and so on. These cultural ideas and prac- tices shape behavior, but they are constantly changing-and as they do, so will people and their actions. Ideas and practices about race (who is valued and who is not) are important elements of culture, and changing them will change behavior.

In the end, the problem with the Race is in our DNA conversation, in both its biological and cultural versions, is that it is wrong. Race is not in our DNA; in fact, it is not a thing located inside people at all. Rather, race is a doing; it is a dynamic system of historically derived ideas and practices involving the whole of society and every individual in it. We do race every day in every domain of our lives, sometimes knowingly and intentionally, and sometimes not. A large body of multidisciplinary research on race and ethnicity (much of which is either discussed or ref- erenced in this essay and in this volume) provides compelling evidence that race and ethnicity are central to how people in the United States and throughout the world think and behave. And although the election of an American president who is black is a powerful event that has begun to change some understandings and practices of race in the twenty-first century, it will not by itself dismantle the historically rooted and perva- sive system of interactions and institutions that have produced and still maintain racial inequalities. fFor this reason, however optimistic and well-meaning the We're be-

yond race conversation may be, it is also wrong. It is wrong not because we cannot approach the post-race ideal, but because we are not there yet. At best, this conversation reflects a lack of experience and exposure; at worst, it shows an effort-most often by those whose race accords them the advantaged position in the racial hierarchy-to deny racial dispari- ties (Crenshaw et al. 1996). Fueled by a very American desire for change and self-improvement, and by re-committing to the ideal of individual equality, this conversation could be made more productive. We can do this by changing it from a declarative into a question: "What remains to be done to move beyond race?"

\Another unproductive and inaccurate, but common, conversation is the one that says That's just identity politics. This is the conversation that allows students to sidestep courses on race and ethnicity and en- courages employees to use their time more effectively by avoiding

Doing Race PAULA M. L. MOYA AND HAZEL ROSE MARKUS

seminars on diversity and inclusion. Because virtually all of our societal institutions are structured by the ideas and practices of race, we must re- member that none of us can escape its reach. Anyone who goes to school, gets a loan, applies for a job, watches television news, engages in sports, or visits the doctor (just to name a few mundane activities) is participat- ing actively in a society that has been organized according to race. It is inescapable, then, that we will be affected either positively or nega- tively by the meanings and representations associated with our own and others' racial groups. People associated with a stigmatized racial group, not surprisingly, are likely to be negatively affected by those meanings. They may have a hard time getting into a college preparatory class in high school or finding a good job-even if they have good grades and a promising resume-because of the stereotypes about intelligence and work ethic that are associated with their group (Steele 2010).

People associated with the dominant racial group, on the other hand, are likely to be positively affected or privileged by the meanings and rep- resentations associated with their group (Johnson 2005). Middle-class whites, at least, are more likely to be tracked into college preparatory classes, hired for highly sought-after positions in favor of other equally or more-qualified applicants, given more aggressive treatment for com- mon medical conditions, passed over during racial profiling for criminal or terrorist activity, and untroubled by the ever-present prospect of be- ing seen through the lens of a stereotype. Anyone who says that race is not a factor in his or her life is either dishonest or clueless. Like many of the conversations, this one talks about race without acknowledging that in a society and in a world organized by race, everyone is necessarily associated with a racial group. Whether or not they claim the race as rel- evant to them, many others, particularly those who do not share it, will perceive them as having a race and will respond to them accordingly. Moreover, this conversation does not take account of the many research findings that clearly reveal that those with the most power and authority in the racial hierarchy ~ are the ones mos!J,flik~ly to claim they are

"j'

unaffected by race (Plaut 2002). ' rs~veral of the other conversations are not wholly wrong as much as

they are incomplete. The Racial diversity is le_illing us conversation is a case in point. Rather than being wholly wrong, it is credible in at least one important way. Because the doing of race over centuries has created great enmity between people associated with different ethnic groups, the consequences of interethnic conflict are often deadly. The Armenian genocide in Turkey, the Jewish Holocaust in Germany, and the ongoing

79

80

SJ

Doing Race: An Introduction

warfare against tribal peoples by the Janjaweed in Darfur are all painful examples discussed in essays in this volume that underscore how inter- ethnic conflict can indeed kill individuals and societies (Naimark, this volume; Rodrigue, this volume). The problem with the Racial diversity is killing us conversation is that it locates both the blame and the solution in the wrong place. It sees the problem in the difference itself rather than in why and how we create, maintain, and respond to socially cre- ated differences. In other words, this conversation conceives of race as a thing-a thing that resides inside "other" people and makes them evil, unfit, or problematic. The logical end point of this conversation is to get rid of the people whose values, beliefs, and practices are different from one's own through assimilation, exclusion, or genocide.

If the Racial diversity is killing us. conversation were to change in a direction that understood race as a systematic social process, it might serve as the beginning of a discussion about how to meaningfully take account of difference-especially the way difference is used to devalue and construct others as inferior or less than human. So, yes, racial diver- sity is killing us and it will continue to do so until we (1) stop doing race and (2) come to terms with the often difficult notion that within the one world, there are multiple viable understandings of what is good, true, beautiful, and efficient (Moya 2002; Shweder 2003). Our global society is not "just a small world after all." It is true that we all have hopes and fears, but the hopes and fears one person has are often quite different from, or even at odds with, those that another person has. We live in a vast, unruly, and complicated matrix of a world, replete with conflict and disagreement. ·

tThe Everyone's a little bit racist conversation is related to the Racial diversity is killing us conversation, although it incorporates the impor- tant realization that doing race is a common process and that no one is exempt. We are born into a racist world, so the conversation goes, and are greatly influenced by the images, values, and narratives in our en- vironments, the majority of which are racially biased to the core. Be- yond this understanding, however, the conversation does not take the discussion very far and in fact allows people to let themselves off the hook. Acknowledging the fact that Everyone's a little bit racist is a revela- tion appropriate to the beginning of a conversation focused on how to raise awareness of individual and societal biases and how to transform the practices that perpetuate racial inequality. This conversation might include asking why we are a little bit racist, what the effect of that racism

Doing Race PAULA M. L. MOYA AND HAZEL ROSE MARKUS

might be, and what we might be able to do about it. The song discussed in Section I that gives this conversation its name suggests that people just "relax" and not get upset about how others view difference. Whether people can relax, however, depends on what is at stake and what con- sequences follow from the observation of racial and ethnic differences. Unless this conver'sation is expanded beyond its first observation, it is a cop-out that ignores how social, economic, and political power, along with the privilege and peace of mind such power confers, work to ad- vantage some people unfairly at the expense of others. fAnother partially correct conversation that might be productively ex-

panded is It's a black thing-you wouldn't understand. People of color do have different experiences-experiences that give them a different per- spective on the world. One of these experiences, for example, includes spending a lot of time and effort explaining to people associated with the dominant group why race matters. It is often really difficult for people who do not share one's racialized minority identity to understand this (Moya and Hames-Garcia 2000). But it is probably defensiveness or hu- bris (not to mention an interethnic conversation killer) to say that some- one who is not black can never understand. It may not be easy, and it may not be total, but humans are able to communicate across difference. It is, moreover, our only hope. Instead of turning off potential allies, we might try to make the point that simply listening to music, Wearing clothes, and reading books by writers with an ethnicity other than one's own does not necessarily lead to understanding. We might also try to convey the truth that understanding others takes a lot of interaction, study, empathy, and a well-developed capacity to listen, appreciate, and accept others unlike oneself .

. lThel'm andl'mproud conversation can be similarly positive or negative depending on who is participating in it and what they mean to imply by it. If the participants in this conversation are countering cen- turies of stigmatization, m,arginalization, and downward constitution by the larger society by ,revealing why the ideas and practices associated with their particular ethnic group are valuable, then this conversation c:an foster group solidarity and pride. To the extent that this conversa- tion appreciates difference without doing race-without denigrating or isolating others-it can be a useful opening out to other people. \'"Finally, the Variety is the spice of life conversation is also partially right

and has considerable positive potential. However, in its present form, it resembles the Eve1yone's a l#tle bit racist conversation by ignoring the

81

82 Doing Race: An Introduction

role of power in structuring how different groups of people interact with each other. Just as the word "spice" conveys a sense of something that is added to or overlaid on the basic ingredients, this conversation often skirts the fact that the differences associated with our various ethnic and racial identities can be quite substantial. They are usually much more than just spice to the main dish or a minor variation in flavor or style; instead, they are consequential for the kinds of lives that people are able to lead. Beyond differences in regions of origin, languages, and food, our various ethnic and racial associations can indicate very different histories and very different ideas of the right way to be.

Take, for example, the very basic question "Who am I?" Recall from Section II that in mainstream America, the most popular cultural model for a self says that people should be independent-that is, unique, separate from others, and in control of their environments. In other contexts, by contrast, a popular model for the self among people with East Asian, South Asian, or Latino heritage says that people should be interdependent-that is, similar to others, connected to others, and adjusting to others (Markus 2008). Yet American classrooms are set up for people with an indepen- dent model of the self. Being a good student accordin~ to this model means asserting oneself, questioning authority, thinking for oneself, and communicating one's own attitudes and beliefs. Being a good student from an interdependent perspective means respecting one's place in the hierarchy and honoring the teacher, who likely knows more than the students. Reflecting an interdependent model of self, students often will not answer a question with information that they assume the professor must already know or will wait for a more senior student to ask an im- portant question (Kim 2002; Rothstein-Fisch, Greenfield, and Turnbull 1999). A teacher with an independent mindset who is unaware that there are different models for how to be a good student is likely to think less well of those students who are not raising their hands and making their own ideas known. Moreover, even a teacher who is aware of these dif- ferences cannot know which model a student is likely to hold without getting to know their students and their individual histories.

Clearly, there is more than one good way to be a student or employee or person. When only one way of being a good student, employee, or per- son is valued and accommodated within a given society, though, people who have other ways of being can end up at a substantial disadvantage. They might be unfairly judged as being unintelligent, unmotivated, undeserving, and without merit. Creating a diverse democratic society that recognizes and legitimizes different ways of being resulting from

Doing Race PAULA M. L. MOYA AND HAZEL ROSE MARKUS

different life opportunities and experiences will require imagination, and flexibility, as well as changes in policies, practices, and institutions.

SIX SUGGESTIONS FOR DOING DIFFERENCE

DIFFERENTLY

The disparities among racial groups that can be found in every domain oflife are a sign that, as a society, we have not yet lived up to our coun- try's founders' vision of a free society that included the ideal of human equality. As discussed above, however, this vision was severely limited by their ideas and practices regarding race. As twenty-first-century U.S. Americans, we must now accept responsibility for the future of our coun- try. Can we build on the best part of the founders' vision to create a better society-one that rejects their mistaken assumptions about the nature of the individual and the individual's relationship to race? Answering this question will involve serious thinking about the kind of society we want. Building a freer and more equal society will not be easy. Change will not happen by appealing to ideals alone; it will require the effortful participation of all people to create and maintain it.

By recognizing that race and ethnicity are human-made and rein- forced processes, we are better situated to figure out what actions we can take both individually and institutionally to undo the most pernicious aspects of making sense of human difference. Moreover, we can begin to create practices and institutions that take advantage of the differences in perspective and understanding that our various racial and ethnic asso- ciations make possible. In Table i.4 we offer a few brief suggestions that may be useful for changing our behavior regarding race. What follows is an elaboration of each suggestion.

1. Recognize that people are not just autonomous individuals; rathe1; their thoughts, feelings, language, and actions are always made up of (and also make

up) the thoughts, feelings, language, and actions of others. The idea of the self-determining individual is a powerful one that emerged in the West over the centuries and now structures everyday life. In the United States, we grow up wanting to be unique, self-sufficient, and responsible for our- selves. We work hard to become independent of other people's influence and control. This view of the individual as autonomous and self-deter- mining, however, is an incomplete way of describing human behavior. Moreover, it is increasingly at odds with the scientific understanding of how people and societies function. People are individuals; but they are not only individuals. As shown in Figure i.2, people live in a matrix of

1)3