The one drop rule &amp; the one hate rule

Hollinger, David A.

doi:10.1162/0011526053124424

Cited by 35 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As applied to ethnoracial diversity, then, such cognitive processes result in simplistic and stereotypical attributions of cultural difference. In the context of multicultural diversity more broadly, cultural essentialism can be seen to simplistically accentuate the injuries of race (Hollinger, 2005), reduce complex cultural processes to reified within-group traits (Brightman, 1995), presume greater between-group than within-group differences (Lakes et al, 2006), and prioritize professional protection from racism over cross-cultural understanding (Harlem, 2002). Some have even proposed that this approach to cultural competence is itself a form of ''new racism'' (Pon, 2009; see also S. Sue et al, 2009, for additional instances of similar critiques).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking cultural competence: Insights from indigenous community treatment settings

Wendt

Gone

2011

Transcult Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multicultural professional psychologists routinely assert that psychotherapeutic interventions require culturally competent delivery for ethnoracial minority clients to protect the distinctive cultural orientations of these clients. Dominant disciplinary conceptualizations of cultural competence are "kind of person" models that emphasize specialized awareness, knowledge, and skills on the part of the practitioner. Even within psychology, this approach to cultural competence is controversial owing to professional misgivings concerning its culturally essentialist assumptions. Unfortunately, alternative "process-oriented" models of cultural competence emphasize such generic aspects of therapeutic interaction that they remain in danger of losing sight of culture altogether. Thus, for cultural competence to persist as a meaningful construct, an alternative approach that avoids both essentialism and generalism must be recovered. One means to capture this alternative is to shift focus away from culturally competent therapists toward culturally commensurate therapies. Indigenous communities in North America represent interesting sites for exploring this shift, owing to widespread political commitments to Aboriginal cultural reclamation in the context of postcoloniality. Two examples from indigenous communities illustrate a continuum of cultural commensurability that ranges from global psychotherapeutic approaches at one end to local healing traditions at the other. Location of culturally integrative efforts by indigenous communities along this continuum illustrates the possibility for local, agentic, and intentional deconstructions and reconstructions of mental health interventions in a culturally hybrid fashion.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking cultural competence: Insights from indigenous community treatment settings

Wendt

Gone

2011

Transcult Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, agents might ignore the internal diversity in mixed-race households and identify all of its members as if they were from the same race. This is the household equivalent of the noxious notion of hypodescent or the so-called one-drop rule (Hollinger 2005) in which the racialization of one household member transfers to all others of a different race for the purposes of evaluating neighborhood suitability (Haslanger 2005; Houston 2009). Our simulation analyzes both ontologies—the simple count of individuals and the household one-drop rule—to see whether they modify the effect of the main variables of interest (the preference structures of single- and mixed-race households and the proportion of households that are racially mixed) on segregation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, do they view them as if they are an all-minority household (a household scale “one-drop rule”; Hollinger 2005), or do they assess neighboring households’ populations based on the race of individuals within them (i.e., treating a Black–White couple as one Black neighbor and one White neighbor)? Such assessments will likely condition the effect of changes in the frequency of mixed-race households on residential segregation.…”

Section: What Drives Changes In Neighborhood Segregation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Agents of Change: Mixed-Race Households and the Dynamics of Neighborhood Segregation in the United States

Ellis

Holloway

Wright

et al. 2012

Annals of the Association of American Geographers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the effects of mixed-race household formation on trends in neighborhood-scale racial segregation. Census data show that these effects are nontrivial in relation to the magnitude of decadal changes in residential segregation. An agent-based model illustrates the potential long-run impacts of rising numbers of mixed-race households on measures of neighborhood-scale segregation. It reveals that high rates of mixed-race household formation will reduce residential segregation considerably. This occurs even when preferences for own-group neighbors are high enough to maintain racial separation in residential space in a Schelling-type model. We uncover a disturbing trend, however; levels of neighborhood-scale segregation of single-race households can remain persistently high even while a growing number of mixed-race households drives down the overall rate of residential segregation. Thus, the article’s main conclusion is that parsing neighborhood segregation levels by household type—single versus mixed race—is essential to interpret correctly trends in the spatial separation of racial groups, especially when the fraction of households that are mixed race is dynamic. More broadly, the article illustrates the importance of household-scale processes for urban outcomes and joins debates in geography about interscalar relationships.

show abstract

“…Further cementing the divide was the introduction of the label “people of color,” which gained momentum and popularity in the late 1980s (Hollinger, 2005). Such omnibus terms combine all non‐White groups on the basis of presumed racialized minority status, thus connoting that the individuals to which they refer share a similar subordinate status vis‐à‐vis Whites.…”

Section: Hypothetical New Models Of the Us Color Linementioning

confidence: 99%

Plus ça Change…? Multiraciality and the Dynamics of Race Relations in the United States

Bean

Lee

2009

Journal of Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issue of race has long cast a shadow on the founding mythology of the United States, but today some scholars argue race is declining in significance, as evidenced by the rise of interracial unions and the fact that the offspring of such unions can now officially acknowledge their mixed-race backgrounds. However, the sizeable growth of the Asian and Latino populations in the United States through immigration complicates the issue. Seemingly neither black nor white, the new immigrants are generating increased diversity and raising questions about whether today's color line replicates the old Black-White demarcation. The research results introduced in this article suggest the contemporary color line in the United States more reflects a Black/non-Black division than a White/nonWhite one.

show abstract

The one drop rule & the one hate rule

Cited by 35 publications

References 2 publications

Rethinking cultural competence: Insights from indigenous community treatment settings

Rethinking cultural competence: Insights from indigenous community treatment settings

Agents of Change: Mixed-Race Households and the Dynamics of Neighborhood Segregation in the United States

Plus ça Change…? Multiraciality and the Dynamics of Race Relations in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About