Race-based Science Project Banned

February 21, 2001 9:18 AM

Race-based Science Project Banned Forgetting for a moment how flimsy the premise of science projects at the 5th grade age can be, I think this is a great project. Does anyone find this offensive? Should children be allowed to discuss race and racism in broad daylight and among their peers?
posted by amanda (49 comments total)

It was--this will surprise you--Ben Franklin who noted that there were too many immigrants coming into our new nation and that we had to be careful because between American Indians and blacks (slaves) and others there was going to be a population boom (pre-Malthus!) and that people generally preferred to be around those that most resembled themselves.
But then political correctness goes back in time in our country too. Americans, unable to refer to people working around the house for them as "servants," instead referred to them as "help."
posted by Postroad at 9:35 AM on February 21, 2001

Just so that you know, SDB covered this topic over here with some rather insightful commentary (as usual).

Carry on...
posted by Avogadro at 9:39 AM on February 21, 2001

Anytime legitimate science is censored for political reasons, it is extremely offensive. There is no excuse for this, and in a just world, everyone involved in banning this kid's science project would be summarily dismissed.
posted by aaron at 9:42 AM on February 21, 2001

Sorry... didn't see that one buried in the "reality" show thread.

An AP story on this incident over at Salon.
posted by amanda at 9:43 AM on February 21, 2001

The Salon story gives a lot more detail and I'm changing my opionion on the flimsiness of this experiment. Here's an excerpt:

--
[She] dressed up a white Barbie and black Barbie in two different colored dresses. She asked 15 adults at her father's workplace which doll was prettier.

She then switched the dresses and asked 15 more adults. The doll wearing the lavender dress -- regardless of the doll's skin color -- was deemed prettiest by both groups.

When she asked fifth-graders at Mesa Elementary, all 15 in one class picked the white doll. In the second class, after the dresses were switched, nine of the 15 students picked the white doll.

Her conclusion: "I discovered that most grown-ups liked the lavender dress on the black or white Barbie. On the other hand, kids mostly liked the white Barbie. Only six kids liked the black Barbie."
--

This could make the point that racism can possibly be a sort of innate trait that can be unlearned.

posted by amanda at 9:46 AM on February 21, 2001

actually, i found the experiment quite intruiging.

i think it highlights much of the quiet racism in western countries.
posted by will at 9:49 AM on February 21, 2001

Why "western"? I could see this type of experiment applying in a number of cultures around the globe.

It sounds like this little girl didn't have access to a large number of black (or any other race besides caucasian) children in her school. I wonder what would have happened if she had been able to poll non-caucasians.
posted by amanda at 9:57 AM on February 21, 2001

Why "western"? : because it happened in the west.
posted by will at 10:04 AM on February 21, 2001

Sounds like the experiment was flawed since the variables weren't isolated. But she's a kid. All the school is teaching kids here is to avoid sensitive issues, even if it requires censorship. Not good. Sorry about the poor grammar, but my mind is still trying to chew on the Ben Franklin stuff.
posted by gimli at 10:04 AM on February 21, 2001

Yes, the experiment happened in the west but I don't think that is necessarily the conclusion that can be drawn. The conclusion is not (since there was no other control group) that Western racist thinking is "x" and European racist thinking is "y". There is more conclusion in saying that white (probably) adults have a different reaction than white children and then the question is, does their reaction have racist overtones.

And as for the Ben Franklin stuff... uh... yeah. Okay. Sure.
posted by amanda at 10:09 AM on February 21, 2001

Dolls in school for fifth graders? Sure it is a "science project" but these dolls are dangerous. The school board should have a zero tolerance policy towards students bringing such dangerous items into a public place where tax payers money goes to educate them. I for one will write to my Senators, collect signatures in hopes the schools will ban these offensive item. Oh the humanity.
posted by brent at 10:10 AM on February 21, 2001

Even worse, playing with dolls will probably turn this girl into a queer. Or something.
posted by sonofsamiam at 10:15 AM on February 21, 2001

That's a whole 'nother experiment, Sonof.
posted by amanda at 10:21 AM on February 21, 2001

I caught wind of this on unknown news yesterday. I found it interesting that there was such a discrepancy between the responses from the children and the responses from adults.

As far as why the project was yanked, I'd just chalk it up to the fact that people are uncomfortable confronting the issues surrounding race. It seems that folks would rather hide the ugly truth about our attitudes towards race, and simply pretend that we have overcome them.


posted by snakey at 10:22 AM on February 21, 2001

Let's be clear on what a science fair is about. No-one is expecting a Ph.D thesis out of a second grader. The point isn't what data she collected, but the fact that she tried. The purpose of a science fair is to get kids excited about science.

The approach she used was extremely good for an 8 year old. In fact, it was very well considered, which suggests that her father kibitzed a bit -- but that's OK. What she learned was how to do a reasonable experiment, and in particular the extreme importance of including controls.

Unfortunately, what she also learned is that doing research about controversial things can get you shot. Instead of becoming excited about science, she's probaly now very sour about it. And that's why what was done to her was wrong.

This all happened in Boulder CO, and a newspaper there has now published an editorial about it. (Via GeekPress)
posted by Steven Den Beste at 10:43 AM on February 21, 2001

Your average human (present company included, of course :) is pretty unprepared to handle an honest conversation about race. I would be extremely concerned about how well Joe and Jane Q. Elementary School Teacher could lead a class discussion with 30 ten-year-olds. As crucial as the subject is, in the wrong hands a lot of damage could be done. I would support adding it to the curriculum along with a qualified instructor, but then I'd want to be in charge of the curriculum -- and how long do you think that would last?

None of this is to say that the school handled this girl's science fair project well. I'd say this constitutes "a lot of damage" as well.
posted by sudama at 10:46 AM on February 21, 2001

All this experiment proves is that adults are smarter than kids. The adults were able to realize the point of this experiment and, out of political correctness, many of them decided to choose the black doll. Kids aren't as perceptive and as a result gave a more honest answer.

I'm white. If I were shown an attractive black woman and an attractive white woman and asked who was prettier, I bet I would choose the white woman every time unless the black woman was Janet Jackson. Is that racist? I doubt it. I would think most people tend to be more attracted to people of their own race.

Now, if this girl asked the kids which doll would be a harder worker or smarter and they all picked the white doll, then we might have a race issue.

I realize the whole point of this discussion isn't to validate the science, but to discuss the ignorance of the school committee. "If we hide the issues, maybe they'll go away."

When I was in high school back in the 1980's, we had a man with AIDS come speak to the school. Many adults complained and some would not even let their kids go to school that day out of fear they would be harmed. Much better to keep your kids ignorant than to teach them something.

posted by bondcliff at 10:57 AM on February 21, 2001

All this experiment proves is that adults are smarter than kids. The adults were able to realize the point of this experiment and, out of political correctness, many of them decided to choose the black doll. Kids aren't as perceptive and as a result gave a more honest answer.

Wow. Could you be more cynical?

If you read the article, it sounded split about 50% between adults who chose the black barbie and those who chose the white one. The ones who chose the black one were lying about their preference? Is that what you're saying?

Wow.
posted by amanda at 11:32 AM on February 21, 2001

The ones who chose the black one were lying about their preference? Is that what you're saying?


They weren't lying. It was probably just jungle fever.
posted by snakey at 11:36 AM on February 21, 2001

Here's another account which states that the father is going to the ACLU. Which, I think, is lame. He should let the issue stand on its own merits.


posted by amanda at 11:39 AM on February 21, 2001

All this experiment proves is that adults are smarter than kids. [...] Kids aren't as perceptive and as a result gave a more honest answer.

Since when did smartness become the opposite of honesty? What is this? Political Correctness World?

(Rhetorical question, sadly)
posted by dagny at 11:43 AM on February 21, 2001

Bondcliff's probably right about that. It is an exceedingly odd result.

The Implicit Association Test is likely to be better science, and demonstrates... well, take it yourself and find out.

I'm white. If I were shown an attractive black woman and an attractive white woman and asked who was prettier, I bet I would choose the white woman every time unless the black woman was Janet Jackson. Is that racist? I doubt it. I would think most people tend to be more attracted to people of their own race.

In a hypothetical society in which skin color meant as much and as little as shoe size, I doubt you would find most white people more attracted to white people. Are tall people attracted to tall people? Fat people to fat people?

Of course, it's impossible to say. It's also impossible to deny the influence of racism in partner preference in a society which outlawed miscegenation until just a few decades ago, and punished it brutally for a long long time.
posted by sudama at 11:43 AM on February 21, 2001

The real sin is that kids learn to prefer parametric tests at such a young age. How sad. WWDPGD?
posted by rschram at 11:47 AM on February 21, 2001

Yes, I could be more cynical. You should meet my brother...

Yes, in a sense I am saying they're lying. To me, it seems like the thought process went something like this "Hmmm... this girl is obviously doing an experiment about race. I don't want to seem like a bigot, so I'll choose the black doll..."

When people know what the wrong answer is, they generally choose the right one.

I'd happily date a black woman. I'd marry one if she was "right" for me (and if I wasn't already married...) But who am I generally more attracted to? White women. Why? I'm not sure.

Is that racist? Possibly it is, in the backwards-ass overly politically correct world we live in.


posted by bondcliff at 11:53 AM on February 21, 2001

Well, by your theory that we are attracted to people who are like us then why doesn't everyone start out being attracted to same-sex, same-race, same-build, same-height?

Attraction is highly subjective, I'll agree. I think I'd have to see that lavender dress and its counterpart to agree any further.
posted by amanda at 12:02 PM on February 21, 2001

In a hypothetical society in which skin color meant as much and as little as shoe size, I doubt you would find most white people more attracted to white people.

I agree; although being racist in attraction itself doesn't strike me as being a large problem.

Then again, I doubt we'd have any race problems if we reproduced across races until everyone was more or less the same race. Think of it as a kinder, gentler alternative to wiping out all but one race.
posted by gleemax at 12:03 PM on February 21, 2001

hey sudama thanks for that link, pretty illuminating! You all should try that test, it's interesting...
posted by cell divide at 12:06 PM on February 21, 2001

Well, by your theory that we are attracted to people who are like us then why doesn't everyone start out being attracted to same-sex, same-race, same-build, same-height?

I have no numbers on this, but I think partners are usually the same (or similar) race. One possible reason for this, culture, isn't as superficial as race, build, and height. Maybe Joe isn't attracted to Jane because Jane's hairstyle, while normal in her culture, is something Joe sees as downright weird.

Okay, that's a lame example, but I think there's more of a reason than skin color. (Keeping in mind that attractiveness is superficial, is it wrong to be more attracted to white people if you're white? If it is, is it still wrong when you're black? The more I think about this, the more I believe that "attractiveness" doesn't really matter, which gives me hope afterall. :P)
posted by gleemax at 12:11 PM on February 21, 2001

>The adults were able to realize the point of this experiment and, out of political correctness, many of them decided to choose the black doll. Kids aren't as perceptive and as a result gave a more honest answer.<

I think you've got that wrong. what seems more likely to me is that the adults chose the dress they believed the little girls was likely to think prettier.

without seeing the dresses, it's impossible to say, but if one were a frilly evening gown, and the other a plain dress, the adults may have skewed toward what they thought the girl was looking for.

on the other hand, since it was a science experiment, perhaps they rigorously told the truth.

the point is, that for whatever reason the adults overwhelmingly chose "prettiness" according to that dress, and the children chose according to the doll's color.

rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 12:19 PM on February 21, 2001

The idea of racism in attraction is a little hard to swallow, and I'm not sold on the idea just yet. The implication appers to be that you are doing society, or at least the civil rights movement, some big favor by dating outside your ethnic background.
posted by xtrmntr at 12:41 PM on February 21, 2001

I recall Lenny Bruce, long dead, once remarked that given the choice between a black woman who was Lena Horne and a white woman was Kate Smith, hands down he would pick Lena.
posted by Postroad at 12:43 PM on February 21, 2001

The purpose of a science fair is to get kids excited about science.

nothing gets kids more excited than being told that they're deviants.
posted by palegirl at 12:47 PM on February 21, 2001

Have any of you ever been to Boulder? Ever lived there? I think it's important to understand a little bit about what Boulder is like in order to make the most sense of this story.

ObBackground: I grew up in Aurora, CO, about 40 minutes from Boulder. I visited there many times over the decades, and lived there for a year when I attended the University of Colorado in 1992-1993.

Boulder is somewhat different from your average community. We used to call it "granola", and jokingly refer to "tree-huggers" there, etc, to give you an idea. It's a very liberal-minded place, and as part of this, the community passed very powerful anti-growth measures, a *long* time ago. Like in the 70s, I think. They were very forward-thinking, wanting to preserve their way of life.

People in Boulder tend to be rather educated, and more importantly these days, *rich* (like Jonbenet Ramsey's family, f'rinstance). Why? Well, the anti-growth measures over the decades have resulted in a city that's too damned expensive to live in, unless you got in very, very early. People who work in the "service sector" in Boulder cannot afford to live there anymore, by and large.

So the reason why this school is 93% white has a *lot* to do with economics.

And I would totally agree with bondcliff when he wrote:

To me, it seems like the thought process went something like this "Hmmm... this girl is obviously doing an experiment about race. I don't want to seem like a bigot, so I'll choose the black doll..."

Boulder is a place where many people are very conscious about diversity and whatnot, and it's very plausible that many of them would have thought along these lines. Many Boulderites are very proud of the city's image as a place where the people are enlightened, and therefore aren't racist. This was probably pretty likely to affect the adults' responses.

The kids are a bit less savvy, I'd imagine, or too young to learn that there's something (supposedly) shameful about preferring a doll that looks more like themselves.

As for people universally preferring those like them, I'd say that it may be the case quite often, but it's certainly not true all the time. F'rinstance, I'm (lamentably) a rather hairy chick, but I tend to prefer non-hairy guys. Don't ask me why, I just find them more attractive.

Racism is real and a very damaging thing, but I don't think attractiveness preferences are something particularly useful to focus on.

I think looking at the lack of economic opportunities that limit the ability of non-white people to live in a given area, and fomenting change on this front, is more likely to result in a positive effect on peoples' lives. But your mileage may vary.
posted by beth at 12:48 PM on February 21, 2001

Kate Smith from Charlie's Angels?
posted by thirteen at 1:03 PM on February 21, 2001

I think some of us are missing the point. If white men find white women more attractive, it's not because they prefer their own race, it's because the media portrays beauty as WHITE. As much as I hate to admit it ;-), Bondcliff may be on to something. If a young child brought me two dolls, I'd probably pick the black one, to emphasize to the child that there are alternatives to the mass marketed image of beauty. But when I think "Beautiful Woman", I automatically think of a white woman.

I'd go so far as to say that most Americans, black AND white, would think of "the most beautiful woman in the world" as a white woman. Is it racial bias? yes! But it's not necessarily about black people or white people in general, but about the biases about beauty that flood us from the media.
posted by jpoulos at 2:08 PM on February 21, 2001

That's Kate Jackson from Charlie's Angels, thirteen. Kate Smith was a singer/actress who was very big in the 30s, 40s and 50s. Actually, she was very big all the time, if you know what I mean, which is the joke in the Lenny Bruce line.
posted by jpoulos at 2:12 PM on February 21, 2001

Dear 13: Kate Smith pre-Charlie's Angels. Kate sang "God Bless America-"-and she was tops at it. When she died (she was very large (aka fat) there was a contested will so her body sort of hung about for some time till the church and some other party resolved inheritance issues and plopped her into the ground. Lenny Bruce was of course referring to going to bed with one of the two woman (black or white ) and not marriage.
Much has changed today, through all sorts of intermarriage, between blacks, whites, orientals, hispanics and among different religous backgrounds and national backgrounds. Thjis may change things down the road for us all.
posted by Postroad at 2:38 PM on February 21, 2001

From the soc.culture.asian.american FAQ:

9. What's the difference between "Oriental" and "Asian"?

"Oriental" is a term which has negative connotations for many Asian Americans because it reflects European and American colonialistic attitudes of the past and present. It is also a term that has always been used to exotify people and products. i.e. Exotic oriental teas/women/attitudes/customs/foods/etc. A general rule of thumb is "Oriental is for rugs, not people." Besides, no one uses the term "Occidental" to describe white folks. Additionally, "oriental" is a term which describes location in respect to Europe (and to England specifically). "Asian" is in respect to nothing.

posted by sudama at 3:01 PM on February 21, 2001

I have no numbers on this, but I think partners are usually the same (or similar) race.

I don't know about that. I've known more than one white male with a strong preference for Asian women. My best friend is a white male who favors Latinas. I myself am the child of a caucasian man and an asian woman. My Korean uncle has a spanish wife. Two married couples I'm close to are caucasian/Nepalese and caucasian/hispanic. Being a military brat, I've known many many families with mixed heritages.

I've grown up around the military where there is a lot of forced mingling of cultures. Perhaps that's a key point - exposure. Instances of interracial relationships in a community can directly correspond to the amount of cultural diversity in said community.

That is NOT to say I've not seen instances of racism in the military community. More often, though, prejudicial lines were drawn between enlisted men and officers. That leads to another set of problems, as minorities were more common amongst enlisted men than among officers.

I don't know how much this has to do with the original post, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
posted by phichens at 3:04 PM on February 21, 2001

Oh, and let me add that I strongly agree with jpoulos's post about general media portrayals of white as idealized beauty.
posted by phichens at 3:07 PM on February 21, 2001

I'm white, grew up in a 98% white community (though my parents, who came from Chicago, made sure I knew that Martin Luther King Jr. should be a hero). I probably prefer redheads first, pageboy brunette pixies second, black women third, and Asian women after that. Then we get around to white blondes ...

See, the learning experience for this girl wasn't necessarily the experiment "proving" that kids were racist and adults weren't. The learning experience comes when you look at what you got and start asking, "Why did the adults answer differently than the children? How can I control against that? Was this a good experiment to get the answer I sought? What modifications or alternatives would be better?" Granted, that's a bit much for a fifth-grader. But generally most people are short on critical thinking skills, which is a shame.

There was a very serious experiment done along these lines that I read about recently, where subjects were asked to rate ... trustworthiness? something like that, and controlled against superego interference by requiring lightning-fast button-pushing. Show a white face, show the word GOOD in block letters, push a button, something like that. Anybody else see it?
posted by dhartung at 4:17 PM on February 21, 2001

Dan, are you thinking of the Implicit Association Test I linked earlier? It's an awful lot like what you described.
posted by sudama at 4:22 PM on February 21, 2001

dan, the test that sudama linked to is pretty much that same thing. Basically it will display "good" words and "bad" words (war, death, for the latter, laughter, peace, for the former) as well as black or white faces, and you have to hit the right key to first send all black faces and good words to one corner, and the white faces and bad words to the other corner. Then good and bad are switched, and it basically measures the difference in your response time.
posted by cell divide at 4:22 PM on February 21, 2001

I only skimmed it, but this looks like an interesting examination of dominant cultural standards of beauty. Thanks to caught in between for the link.
posted by sudama at 7:20 PM on February 21, 2001

I've come to realize that institutions of any kind are prone to attract complacency (sp?). I consider my University of Washington one of the many bastions of ignorance. The faculty and students don't think critically, or challenge any presumptions, they just reinforce one-another's ideas/ideals. I'm in a quasi-art, quasi-business field generally labeled as "design," and self labelled as "Visual Communications" and it's a never-ending struggle to make the 9+ hours a week we waste sharing opinions on design work anything other than an utter and absolute waste of time. Funny thing is at work--customer service for a network of over 100,000 clients--it's the same thing. Useability studies that skew data, no guiding vision, pathetic productivity, misguided notions of meaning and truth. Why should a government funded institution of lower learning be any exception when all we recognize and worship are the people and things that only perform as expected? (Examples of thing ppl worship/idolize if you need them: smart ppl, beautiful ppl, youth, nature, money, etc.) Fact of the matter is we have as many discriminations problems TODAY as we did 40 or so years ago. It may just not be as apparent because it's politically correct to pass up a white male to meet your quota (just as one of many possible examples). I'm rambling. Time to shut-up.
posted by greyscale at 7:31 PM on February 21, 2001

I actually prefer asian women myself, but all of my past girlfriends (3, only 2 serious) are white.
posted by gleemax at 7:32 PM on February 21, 2001

thanks, gleemax.

Personally, I prefer computer women of all shapes and descriptions. I'm just as comfortable at blacktail.com as I am at penthouse.com-- and don't think I don't love the hentai as well! I think I'm a really great guy like that.
posted by chaz at 10:20 PM on February 21, 2001

There's an interesting (though too restrained) column in the Washington Post today re: cultural standards of beauty.
posted by sudama at 7:55 AM on February 23, 2001