next »

[voxprincipalis]

After 88 posts, there is finally a topic to be addressed here.

Think how much antagonism and unfriendliness could have been spared had you chosen to make your point clearly at the beginning, instead of flooding the fora with unsolicited statistics en masse with no connections or argument.

VP

[thinkuniversity]

I think the problem is, you posted the information directly into the thread. You would have been better received if you had posted links with clear questions that didn't have to be sorted out from all the other information. Seeing all the data pretty well overwhelmed me.

Thanks for the heads up. Point well taken.

So, now what do you think now of this topic?

[zharkov]

I think the problem is, you posted the information directly into the thread. You would have been better received if you had posted links with clear questions that didn't have to be sorted out from all the other information. Seeing all the data pretty well overwhelmed me.

Thanks for the heads up. Point well taken.

So, now what do you think now of this topic?

It seems to me that you're sidestepping the point the both larryc and I have made about these categories being social constructs.  Whether the Census bureau or Telemundo or KissyFace College use Hispanic (or even white) as a category doesn't make it science.  It's all a matter of convenience, which may work for some purposes, like Telemundo's market research.

[thinkuniversity]

It seems to me that you're sidestepping the point the both larryc and I have made about these categories being social constructs.  Whether the Census bureau or Telemundo or KissyFace College use Hispanic (or even white) as a category doesn't make it science.  It's all a matter of convenience, which may work for some purposes, like Telemundo's market research.

You know I think you are so correct, that it is all a matter of convenience.

With this convenience the common public will make incorrect statements when looking at the demographics of the US.

Such as newspapers print AP articles or their won writers write articles stating things like Hispanics/Latinos have displaced blacks/African Americans as the nation's largest minority. 

By using Hispanic/Latino in this convenience practice it leads one to think that Hispanic/Latino is a race/ethnicity and it's neither.

Universities by using this convenience data category disregards their actual student body demographic make up. They overlook the number of students who come from Amerindian backgrounds, whose first language may be Spanish or Portuguese. They also overlook the number of students who may be white, whose first language may be Spanish or Portuguese. They may overlook those students who are black, whose first language may be Spanish or Portuguese and they may overlook those who are Asian, whose first language may be Spanish or Portuguese.

This matter of convenience seems to only apply with people from Latin America and disregards that many Latin America countries have the same races and ethnicities that the U.S. has. Why is it that because these people speak another European language there is a need to make the demographics of Americans whose origin is from Latin American countries a matter of convenience?

I guess the big question is since when has language in the Americas defined one's race and ethnicity? Seeing people in the United States, who don't have Latin American origin, have never had a problem before knowing what race/ethnicity a person is when they came from Europe, the same way many Europeans came to Latin America. Or how Africans came to the US the same way Africans came to Latin America.

Again, I agree with you that it is done as a matter of convenience.

[cosmic]

When's the last time you all met a "sociologist" who quotes the CIA Handbook, and in what parallel universe did that meeting take place?

[zharkov]

It seems to me that you're sidestepping the point the both larryc and I have made about these categories being social constructs.  Whether the Census bureau or Telemundo or KissyFace College use Hispanic (or even white) as a category doesn't make it science.  It's all a matter of convenience, which may work for some purposes, like Telemundo's market research.

You know I think you are so correct, that it is all a matter of convenience.

With this convenience the common public will make incorrect statements when looking at the demographics of the US.
....

It doesn't seem you reall get the idea of social constructs, which are neither correct not incorrect.  Or, if you don't believe these categories are (merely) social constructs, but are somethings else, then please just say so, and we can just agree to disagree.

[thinkuniversity]

When's the last time you all met a "sociologist" who quotes the CIA Handbook, and in what parallel universe did that meeting take place?

You mean the CIA Factbook.

Check it out yourself and see what they say for Hispanic under:
People
Ethnic groups

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html

[helpful]

Thanks ThinkUniversity for your response. However, I still don;'t understand why you focus on hispanic/latinos and not some other group like African Americans or "whites" or whatever. Is there some particular reason you focus on hispanic/latinos?

I agree with the others that if you posted this response earlier it would have made it easier to have a dialogue with you. Posting a bunch of quotes from other sources doesn't enable a dialogue when we don;'t know why you are posting such volumes of data.

[thinkuniversity]

Thanks ThinkUniversity for your response. However, I still don;'t understand why you focus on hispanic/latinos and not some other group like African Americans or "whites" or whatever. Is there some particular reason you focus on hispanic/latinos?

I agree with the others that if you posted this response earlier it would have made it easier to have a dialogue with you. Posting a bunch of quotes from other sources doesn't enable a dialogue when we don;'t know why you are posting such volumes of data.

Thanks for your post. I enjoyed reading it and your question to me too.

Well, I'm focused on Hispanic/Latino only because currently in the US, no corrections have been made publicly for all media outlets, researchers and universities, public school systems etc. to stop list Hispanic/Latino as if it were a race or ethnicity. Some how it has to get out for universities, the media etc. to use the category Hispanic/Latino correctly as a place of origin only (not a race and not a ethnicity).

I think that the Amerindian/mestizo population of Latin origin in the US are overlooked because they are lumped together with whites, blacks and Asians from Latin America. This is really the fastest growing poplulation in the US and the nation's 2nd largest minority by race/ethnicity after blacks/African Americans.

[twisted_scripture]

When's the last time you all met a "sociologist" who quotes the CIA Handbook, and in what parallel universe did that meeting take place?

You mean the CIA Factbook.

“CIA Factbook”

....

The phrase just sits there

[zharkov]

When's the last time you all met a "sociologist" who quotes the CIA Handbook, and in what parallel universe did that meeting take place?

You mean the CIA Factbook.

“CIA Factbook”

....

The phrase just sits there

Here's a question to the OP:  Why do you believe that the CIA's and US Census Bureau's taxonomies are the "correct" ones?  What makes race and ethnic categories "correct" or "incorrect" ?   Calling something a "factbook" doesn't mean the one has to believe all it contains is correct information.

Another question: Why do you believe that private institutions, like colleges, should be obligated to follow the government's categorization scheme?

[thinkuniversity]

Here's a question to the OP:  Why do you believe that the CIA's and US Census Bureau's taxonomies are the "correct" ones?  What makes race and ethnic categories "correct" or "incorrect" ?   Calling something a "factbook" doesn't mean the one has to believe all it contains is correct information.

Another question: Why do you believe that private institutions, like colleges, should be obligated to follow the government's categorization scheme?

Well, to answer your question The US Census Bureau and the CIA Factbook's demographics are in accordance with guidelines from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The OMB is the White House.

Office of Management and Budget
www.omb.gov


It is only because of the OMB that the category Hispanic/Latino was added to the US Census forms. It is also because of the OMB, universities/colleges, public school systems and any other organization/agency must maintain demographic data. That is if any federal dollars are allocated to them. But, the OMB also states clearly that race and Hispanic origin are treated as two separate and distinct concepts.

So, in other words even tough these organizations collect the race/ethnic demographics of its students. They also must collect data of place of origin for students, regardless of race, who come from Latin American countries or the US territory Puerto Rico.

After this collection of demographic data is done these institutions or agencies must compile their data in a presentable format. But, they are not to compare race/ethnicity with Hispanic/Latino origin.

But, as we see this is always done and Hispanic/Latino is then always compared to black/African American, white, Asian, American Indian/Native Alaskan which Hispanic/Latino includes these populations too. So, when were see there are more Hispanics/Latinos than there are black/African American and American Indian/Native Alaskan. That's a false comparison. Because you are comparing a race/ethnicity category with a place of origin category (that has nothing to do with race/ethnicity).


Why do you believe that private institutions, like colleges, should be obligated to follow the government's categorization scheme?

Federal dollars are allocated to them and the US Department of Education requires these universities to collect the data as a directive from the OMB.

[supernumerary]

Here's a question to the OP:  Why do you believe that the CIA's and US Census Bureau's taxonomies are the "correct" ones?  What makes race and ethnic categories "correct" or "incorrect" ?   Calling something a "factbook" doesn't mean the one has to believe all it contains is correct information.

Another question: Why do you believe that private institutions, like colleges, should be obligated to follow the government's categorization scheme?

Well, to answer your question The US Census Bureau and the CIA Factbook's demographics are in accordance with guidelines from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The OMB is the White House.

How is that an answer to the questions asked? Someone please enlighten me.

[crazybatlady]

Well, surely you understand, super.

See, if the CIA says that the FBI's son of an uncle of the White House wrote that being purple was no longer allowed, then the OMB of the PFP would have to change the category to Anglo-Saxon. 

But that category doesn't include violet people, as you well know.  So here's a billion links and cut-and-pasted tidbits from sources to prove my point, which is that green is really turquoise with a touch of lemon but you wouldn't know that because I only said "tree."

[voxprincipalis]

Well, surely you understand, super.

See, if the CIA says that the FBI's son of an uncle of the White House wrote that being purple was no longer allowed, then the OMB of the PFP would have to change the category to Anglo-Saxon. 

But that category doesn't include violet people, as you well know.  So here's a billion links and cut-and-pasted tidbits from sources to prove my point, which is that green is really turquoise with a touch of lemon but you wouldn't know that because I only said "tree."

Wow, you got all that out of "tree"?

I think I need to read more Derrida.

VP