Which girls, which boys? The intersectional risk for depression by race and ethnicity, and gender in the U.S.

2018 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 51-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratima A. Patil ◽  
Michelle V. Porche ◽  
Nellie A. Shippen ◽  
Nina T. Dallenbach ◽  
Lisa R. Fortuna
2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 643-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eryn Nicole O’Neal ◽  
Laura O. Beckman

Using an intersectional framework, this article discusses the barriers to social services that Latina victims of intimate partner violence encounter, a drastically underdeveloped area of theorizing. We argue that placing Latinas at the center of analysis will facilitate empirical knowledge, which is necessary because mainstream inquiry has historically ignored their interests. First, we discuss cultural barriers through the lenses of gender, race, and ethnicity. Second, we describe socioeconomic barriers in conjunction with gender, race, and ethnicity. Third, we examine legal barriers along with the representation of gender, race, and ethnicity. Finally, we suggest directions for research and recommendations for service providers.


2012 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 378-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Verity G. McInnis

The experiences of army officers’ wives stationed in British India and the U.S. West during the period 1830–1875 offer a critical dimension to understandings of imperialism. This comparative analysis argues that these women designed a distinct identity that blueprinted, directed, and legitimized the ambitions of empire. In feminizing the Army’s ranking system, officers’ wives appropriated and wielded male authority. Military homes—a space where class, race, ethnicity, and gender intersected—functioned as operational sites of empire, and, in managing household servants, officers’ wives both designed and endorsed the principles of benevolent imperialism. Whether adjudicating local disputes, emasculating soldier-servants of lower rank, or enacting the social norms of the metropole, these women confidently executed their duty as imperial agents.


2015 ◽  
Vol 117 (7) ◽  
pp. 1-42
Author(s):  
Anthony A. Peguero ◽  
Jennifer M. Bondy

Background/Context Students’ perceptions of justice, fairness, and order within their schools are arguably key building blocks of socialization to participation within a democratic society. The ideals of justice, fairness, and order within their schools are particularly imperative because the educational system is founded on a belief of democracy and meritocracy. It is also known that students’ perceptions of school justice can vary by race, ethnicity, and gender. What remains uncertain is how the fastest growing segment of the United States, students in immigrant families, perceive the school justice, fairness, and order within their school. Purpose The aim of this study is to explore if straight-line assimilation, segmented assimilation, and immigrant optimism hypotheses explain the relationships between schools, justice, and immigration, as well as the potential role of gender, race, and ethnicity in immigrant youth perceptions of justice, fairness, and order. Participants/Subjects This study utilizes the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS), a nationally representative sample of high school sophomores. Research Design This study's research design includes statistical analysis of secondary data. Findings/Results Findings do suggest that the students’ perceptions of justice, fairness, and order are indeed moderated by immigrant generation, race, ethnicity, and gender. Conclusions/Recommendations Educators and educational researchers who are seeking to better understand the schooling experiences of immigrant youth might benefit from questioning assimilation and Americanization as processes that inevitably promote educational progress. Given that immigrant youth are and have historically been marginalized within U.S. schools, it appears that socialization, Americanization, gender, and immigrant generational status are germane to creating democratic education for all students. Attentiveness to democratic school justice, order, and fairness is, therefore, imperative.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachariah Hamidi ◽  
Steven J Durning ◽  
Dario Torre ◽  
Robert Liotta ◽  
Ting Dong

Abstract Introduction The admission interview is regarded as one of the most significant moments in the process of applying to medical school, but there is limited empirical evidence that supports this claim. Previous analyses have offered what is largely anecdotal evidence of the interview’s importance while also suggesting that there is ample opportunity for ethnic and gender bias to impact interview scores. We also asked what medical schools can learn from comparing the attributes of matriculants and those applicants who rejected offers of acceptance. Materials and Methods This study investigated the association between interview performance and admission committee decisions for applicants applying to the School of Medicine of the USU. The study cohort included all candidates who were invited for an on-site interview at the USU in 2014, 2015, and 2016 (n = 1825). Results Seventeen percent of the variance of the outcome variables—admission committee decisions to accept, place on the alternate list, or reject an applicant—can be explained by considering interview scores alone. Applicant age, race, ethnicity, and gender did not significantly impact interview overall ratings. Matriculants to the USU had similar interview ratings and distribution of gender, race, and ethnicity when compared to those applicants who rejected offers of acceptance. Matriculants were more likely to have previous military experience. Conclusion Our analysis provides some justification for the importance of the interview in the admission process. Applicant demographics (age, race, gender, and ethnicity) were not associated with interview scores. Differences between matriculants to the USU and those who rejected offers of acceptance are small, indicating that the USU continues to build a class body that excels in both cognitive and noncognitive domains.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Connie L. McNeely

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce development, identified as a critical consideration for meeting current and future societal needs and challenges, depends on the capacity to draw upon a talented pool of individuals possessing requisite knowledge and training. In the United States, as elsewhere, related questions have arisen about who constitutes that pool and the conditions under which it has been determined. Noting the currency and controversies surrounding persistent inequalities and inequities in STEM educational attainment and workforce participation, the research presented here offers an elaborated framework and dedicated analysis of related processes, with the goal of extending understanding and delineating implications for identifying strategic points for intervention. In ideological and political terms, efforts to combat related educational and workforce disparities reflect a “morality politics” diffused in social identities and behaviors and embedded in structural claims with broad and pragmatic implications for STEM educational access and workforce opportunity. With particular attention to race and ethnicity (and gender), this analysis revisits and unpacks related assumptions and addresses challenges attached to the distribution of benefits and burdens in the face of both ideological and practical expediencies in determining profiles of STEM participation and inclusion.


1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Avalos

One of the most significant features of the U.S. economy in the 20th Century is the persistent earnings gap between men and women. The gap in earnings between Anglo men and women of color has also been an enduring featue of the U.S. labor market. Since 1949, the earnings gap between Latino women and Anglo men has remained virtually the same (53%–55%), even though Latinos have steadily increased their labor force participation at a faster rate than any other female group. While this form of gender inequality has received considerable attention, only a few studies have focused on the earnings of Latino women. This exploratory study tests the ability of a human capital model to explain earnings inequalities between Latino women (Mexican-American, Puerto Rican, and Cuban) and Anglo men. Using regression decomposition analyses, we also examine how the factors of race/ethnicity and gender affect the earnings differences between men and women. Our findings indicate that the human capital model accounts for less than 25% of the earnings difference between our male and female groups. When we control for the net effect of ethnicity holding gender constant, we find that the human capital model accounts for 83% of the earnings difference between Anglo women and racial/ethnic women, suggesting that gender is an important predictor in explaining the earnings gap. Given these results, we offer other possible explanations (e.g., economic restructuring) for the persistence of the inequality of earnings between Latino women and Anglo men. We conclude with some policy suggestions for alleviating this labor market problem.


2020 ◽  
Vol 89 ◽  
pp. 169-191
Author(s):  
Amanda Behm ◽  
Christienna Fryar ◽  
Emma Hunter ◽  
Elisabeth Leake ◽  
Su Lin Lewis ◽  
...  

Abstract On the back of the Royal Historical Society’s 2018 report on race and ethnicity, as well as ongoing discussions about ‘decolonizing the syllabus’, this is a conversation piece titled, ‘Decolonizing History: Enquiry and Practice’. While ‘decolonization’ has been a key framework for historical research, it has assumed increasingly varied and nebulous meanings in teaching, where calls for ‘decolonizing’ are largely divorced from the actual end of empire. How does ‘decolonizing history’ relate to the study of decolonization? And can history, as a field of practice and study, be ‘decolonized’ without directly taking up histories of empire? Using the RHS report as a starting point, this conversation explores how we ‘decolonize history’. We argue that, rather than occurring through tokenism or the barest diversification of reading lists and course themes, decolonizing history requires rigorous critical study of empire, power and political contestation, alongside close reflection on constructed categories of social difference. Bringing together scholars from several UK universities whose teaching and research ranges across modern historical fields, this piece emphasizes how the study of empire and decolonization can bring a necessary global perspective to what tend to be framed as domestic debates on race, ethnicity, and gender.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison P. Harris ◽  
Maya Sen

How do we know whether judges of different backgrounds are biased? We review the substantial political science literature on judicial decision making, paying close attention to how judges' demographics and ideology can influence or structure their decision making. As the research demonstrates, characteristics such as race, ethnicity, and gender can sometimes predict judicial decision making in limited kinds of cases; however, the literature also suggests that these characteristics are far less important in shaping or predicting outcomes than is ideology (or partisanship), which in turn correlates closely with gender, race, and ethnicity. This leads us to conclude that assuming judges of different backgrounds are biased because they rule differently is questionable. Given that the application of the law rarely provides one objectively correct answer, it is no surprise that judges' decisions vary according to their personal backgrounds and, more importantly, according to their ideology.


Author(s):  
April Schweinhart ◽  
Janine Clayton

The United States (U.S.) is a leader and innovator in biomedicine, yet trails behind for many key health indicators, especially for women. This paper highlights key evidence indicating that not only is the state of women’s health in the U.S. lagging, but it is at risk for falling off the curve. Women’s health care remains fragmented; research in the field can be disconnected and difficult to integrate across disciplines—silos prevail. Structural obstacles contribute to this lack of cohesion, and innovative, interdisciplinary research approaches which integrate the multidimensional aspects of sex and gender, and race and ethnicity, with a life course perspective are sorely needed. Such synergistic, scientific strategies have the potential to reverse the trend towards shorter life expectancy and poorer health for women in the U.S. The National Institute for Health (NIH) seeks to raise the bar for the health of all women by tackling these issues through enhancing the relevance of biomedical research to the health of women and driving the sustained advancement of women in biomedical careers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document