Sartre on Contingency: Antiblack Racism and Embodiment

Introduction: Racial disparities in obesity and cardiovascular disease can partly be attributed discrimination. Racial discrimination (RD) and weight discrimination (WD) have been linked to higher psychological distress, lower sleep quality, less physical activity, and unhealthy diet, which can negatively impact weight. Better understanding the processes by which discrimination influences weight-loss factors would help create strategies for mitigating obesity disparities. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of 745 primary care patients with a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2 (43.1% Female, M age =51 years) who were enrolled in a weight-loss trial. To investigate the direct and indirect (via psychological distress) pathways by which RD and WD may be associated with sleep quality, physical activity, and diet, and to explore gender as a moderator, we used Ordinary Least Square regression with bootstrapping. Validated surveys included EOD, PROMIS-29, LDBQ, REAP-S, IPAQ-SF. Results: We found that RD and WD were indirectly associated with lower sleep quality via psychological distress (WD: indirect=2.11, CI[1.218;3.092]; RD: indirect=0.93, CI[0.057;0.134]). Further, we found that for men, RD and WD were indirectly associated with less physical activity via psychological distress (WD: moderated mediation=491.67, CI[75.565;1040.877]; RD: moderated mediation=22.60, CI[0.080;51.828]). Finally, we found that RD and WD were directly associated with unhealthy diet (WD: direct=0.195, CI[0.076;0.314]; RD: direct=0.007; CI[0.001;0.012]). Conclusions: Weight-loss factors were associated with both racial and weight discrimination through different pathways depending on gender and type of outcome. Lower sleep quality was associated with discrimination via psychological distress for both gender groups. Lower physical activity was also linked to discrimination via psychological distress, however for men only. Associations between unhealthy diet and discrimination were direct and could not be explained by increases in psychological distress. Although more research is needed, our findings suggest that interventions to address discrimination and its psychological impacts could mitigate obesity disparities and improve cardiovascular health.

Testing hypotheses from the emerging Identity Pathology (IP) framework, we assessed race-gender differences in the effects of reporting experiences of racial and gender discrimination simultaneously compared with racial or gender discrimination alone, or no discrimination, on future cardiovascular health (CVH). Data were from a sample of 3758 black or white adults in CARDIA, a community-based cohort recruited in Birmingham, AL; Chicago, IL; Minneapolis, MN, and Oakland, CA in 1985–6 (year 0). Racial and gender discrimination were assessed using the Experiences of Discrimination scale. CVH was evaluated using a 12-point composite outcome modified from the Life's Simple 7, with higher scores indicating better health. Multivariable linear regressions were used to evaluate the associations between different perceptions of discrimination and CVH scores two decades later by race and gender simultaneously. Reporting racial and gender discrimination in ≥2 settings were 48% of black women, 42% of black men, 10% of white women, and 5% of white men. Year 30 CVH scores (mean, SD) were 7.9(1.4), 8.1(1.6), 8.8(1.6), and 8.7(1.3), respectively. Compared with those of their race-gender groups reporting no discrimination, white women reporting only gender-based discrimination saw an adjusted score difference of +0.3 (95% CI: 0.0,0.6), whereas white men reporting only racial discrimination had on average a 0.4 (95% CI: 0.1,0.8) higher score, and scores among white men reporting both racial and gender discrimination were on average 0.6 (95% CI: 1.1,-0.1) lower than those of their group reporting no discrimination. Consistent with predictions of the IP model, the associations of reported racial and gender discrimination with future CVH were different for different racially-defined gender groups. More research is needed to understand why reported racial and gender discrimination might better predict deterioration in CVH for whites than blacks, and what additional factors associated with gender and race contribute variability to CVH among these groups.

The present study examined school-based racial and gender discrimination experiences among African American adolescents in Grade 8 (n = 204 girls; n = 209 boys). A primary goal was exploring gender variation in frequency of both types of discrimination and associations of discrimination with academic and psychological functioning among girls and boys. Girls and boys did not vary in reported racial discrimination frequency, but boys reported more gender discrimination experiences. Multiple regression analyses within gender groups indicated that among girls and boys, racial discrimination and gender discrimination predicted higher depressive symptoms and school importance and racial discrimination predicted self-esteem. Racial and gender discrimination were also negatively associated with grade point average among boys but were not significantly associated in girls' analyses. Significant gender discrimination X racial discrimination interactions resulted in the girls' models predicting psychological outcomes and in boys' models predicting academic achievement. Taken together, findings suggest the importance of considering gender- and race-related experiences in understanding academic and psychological adjustment among African American adolescents.

Although racial sexual exclusivity among Black gay, bisexual, and other sexual minority men (SMM) is frequently framed as a cause of HIV inequities, little research has examined how these sexual relationships may be driven by and protective against racism. This study examined associations between general racial discrimination, Black sexual exclusivity, sexual racial discrimination, and depressive symptoms among Black SMM. We conducted analyses on cross-sectional self-report data from 312 cisgender Black SMM in the U.S. Deep South who participated in the MARI study. Measures included general racial and sexual identity discrimination, race/ethnicity of sexual partners, sexual racial discrimination, and depressive symptoms. We estimated a moderated-mediation model with associations from discrimination to Black sexual exclusivity, moderated by discrimination target, from Black sexual exclusivity to sexual racial discrimination, and from sexual racial discrimination to depressive symptoms. We tested an indirect effect from racial discrimination to depressive symptoms to examine whether Black sexual exclusivity functioned as an intervening variable in the associations between racial discrimination and depressive symptoms. Results indicated that participants who experienced racial discrimination were more likely to exclusively have sex with Black men. Men with higher Black sexual exclusivity were less likely to experience sexual racial discrimination and, in turn, reported lower depressive symptoms. The indirect pathway from racial discrimination to depressive symptoms through Black sexual exclusivity and sexual racial discrimination was significant. Our results suggest that one of the drivers of sexual exclusivity among Black SMM may be that it helps to protect against the caustic psychological effects of racial discrimination.

In the analysis of data from a college sample, the validity of the Theory of racial and ethnic prejudice is questioned, and thus, through this, the psychologistic approach to the study of social attitudes. A rigorously sociologistic approach is shown to be a better predictor of variations in the data than the thesis, even for the covariations between F-scale scores and scores on two different prejudice scales. importance of differential learning for understanding variations in racial prejudice is stressed. EW issues in the field of social psychology, or in sociology, are more vexing than the relative importance of social and psychic factors in the formation of attitudes. issue, it is true, seldom arises wlheln the problem deals with variable attitudes among separate and distinct cultures. On the other hand, when the problem deals with variations among individuals from the same culture the issue almost invariably intrudes itself. field of study then becomes an arena of battle between psychic drive and cultural norm, personality need and social expectation. Here and there one may see a clear victor emerging, but the more frequent vista of thrust and counter-thrust has inspired the conclusion that there can be no single victor. Rather, it is inferred, there should be no battle at all, and any differences of opinion should and could be settled by conversations betweein colleagues. It is not the purpose of this paper to elaborate the compromise position. Rather than viewing the conflict as an out-worn luxury, this paper enters the field as a combatant. It is our argument that the conflict is too deep and fundamental to admit of any compromises which leave untouched the essential claims of each position. Because the conflict is so fundamental, we must either choose one alternative and reject the other or we must reject both. We cannot incorporate into one conception two positions which are mutually contradictory. thesis will be developed by the analysis of a specific problem. In this framework data from a questionnaire designed explicitly for this purpose will be the basis of a re-examination of the Authoritarian explanation of individual variations in racial and ethnic prejudices. More explicitly, it is the specific thesis of this paper that a considerably more efficient explanation of racial and ethnic prejudice can be designed than the authoritarian explanation, either in its original 1950 versionl or in its later more tempered form.2 Of necessity, the bulk of the paper will be devoted to the data bearing on the specific question of racial and ethnic prejudice. Besides its justification in its own right, the concentration on prejudice will be the vehicle for pointing up the more general issue. WHICH THEORY OF PREJUDICE? Since its publication in 1950, has been reviewed, rewarded, and reviled. A decade later the consensus 1 T. W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford, (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950.) 2 Gordon W. Allport, Natture of Prejudice (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1954) : Arnold Rose, Relations vs. Prejudice: Pertinent Theory for the Study of Social Change, Social Problems, IV (October 1956), 173-176; Thomas F. Pettigrew, Personality and Sociocultural Factors in Intergroup Attitudes: A Cross-National Comparison, Co,jflict Resoluttion, II (March 1958), 29-42; George E. Simpson and J. Milton Yinger, Racial and Cultural Minorities (New York: Harper and Brothers, Revised Edition, 1958) ; James G. Martin and Frank R. Westie, The Tolerant Personality, American Sociological Review, 24 (August 1959), pp. 521-528; Thomas F. Pettigrew, Regional Differences in Anti-Negro Prejudice, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59 (July 1959), pp. 28-36; and Harry C. Triandis and Leigh Minturn Triandis, Race, Social Class, Religion, and Nationality as Determinants of Social Distance, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61 (July 1960), pp. 110-118. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.91 on Wed, 21 Sep 2016 05:32:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms RACIAL PREJUDICE AND PERSONALITY SCALES 45 among social psychologists appears to be that some measure of its thesis can be accepted even though some of the more extreme versions of the original have been rejected. Subsequent research may have stressed cultural and social variations,3 or suggested other psychological or quasi-psychological factors as alternatives to authoritarianism,4 but the value of personality factors as an explanation of preju-

Let the racism tell you who your friends are: The effects of racism on social connections and life-satisfaction for Multiracial people

Chronic pain among Asian American children and associations with racial and ethnic discrimination: A nationally representative study.

Investigating racial and ethnic discrimination in medical education is crucial for addressing disparities and fostering an inclusive environment. To assess how racial and ethnic discrimination in medical school is associated with personal and professional identity formation (PPIF) by race and ethnicity. This retrospective cross-sectional study used deidentified data on 37 610 medical students who matriculated in 2014 or 2015 and took the Association of American Medical Colleges Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) between 2016 and 2020. Statistical analysis was performed from September 1 to November 20, 2023. Experiences of racial and ethnic discrimination were assessed through responses to 3 GQ questions about denial of opportunities, offensive remarks or names, and lower evaluations or grades due to race or ethnicity. Personal and professional development were measured as 2 separate outcomes using 2 GQ statements rated on a 5-point Likert scale (where 1 indicated strongly disagree and 5 indicated strongly agree): "My medical school has done a good job fostering and nurturing my development as a person" and "My medical school has done a good job fostering and nurturing my development as a physician." Variables of personal and professional development were both dichotomized. Of 37 610 medical students, 18 200 (48.4%) were female, and 19 410 (51.6%) were male; 2458 (6.5%) were African American or Black, 7801 (20.7%) were Asian, 2430 (6.5%) were Hispanic, 21 380 (56.9%) were White, 2404 (6.4%) were multiracial, and 1137 (3%) were other race or ethnicity. Most respondents attested that their medical school fostered their personal (27 272 [72.5%]) and professional (34 560 [91.9%]) development. African American or Black students reported the lowest rates of personal (1603 of 2458 [65.2%]) and professional (2182 of 2458 [88.8%]) development, and experienced lower likelihoods of personal (adjusted risk ratio [ARR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.86-0.93]) and professional (ARR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.94-0.97]) development than White students. Racial discrimination was inversely associated with development, with the highest PPIF rates among those never experiencing discrimination (personal, 25 089 of 33 508 [74.9%]; and professional, 31 257 of 33 508 [93.3%]). Those experiencing isolated discrimination (personal: ARR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.80-0.87]; professional: ARR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.91-0.95]) and recurrent discrimination (personal: ARR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.60-0.66]; professional: ARR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.80-0.84]) had relatively lower likelihoods of PPIF. African American or Black students experienced the highest rate of recurrent discrimination (543 of 2458 [22.1%]). No significant PPIF risk differences were found for other racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine without discrimination compared with White students without discrimination, but all groups with recurrent discrimination had relatively lower PPIF risk. In this cross-sectional study of US medical students, racial and ethnic discrimination was associated with lower PPIF across all racial and ethnic groups compared with White students without such experiences. African American or Black students disproportionately faced this discrimination. Systemic changes in medical education are needed to combat discrimination and ensure equity in holistic student development.

Racial and ethnic discrimination in health care have been associated with suboptimal use of health care. However, limited research has examined how facets of health care utilization influence, and are influenced by, discrimination. This study aimed to determine if type of insurance coverage and location of usual source of care used were associated with perceptions of racial or ethnic discrimination in health care. Additionally, this study examined if perceived racial or ethnic discrimination influenced delaying or forgoing prescriptions or medical care. Data from the 2015-2016 California Health Interview Survey were used. Logistic regression models estimated odds of perceiving racial or ethnic discrimination from insurance type and location of usual source of care. Logistic regression models estimated odds of delaying or forgoing medical care or prescriptions. Responses for 39,171 adults aged 18 and over were used. Key health care utilization variables were as follows: current insurance coverage, location of usual source of care, delaying or forgoing medical care, and delaying or forgoing prescriptions. We examined if these effects differed by race. Ever experiencing racial or ethnic discrimination in the health care setting functioned as a dependent and independent variable in analyses. When insurance type and location of care were included in the same model, only the former was associated with perceived discrimination. Specifically, those with Medicaid had 66% higher odds of perceiving discrimination, relative to those with employer-sponsored coverage (AOR = 1.66; 95% CI 1.11, 2.47). Race did not moderate the impact of discrimination. Perceived discrimination was associated with higher odds of delaying or forgoing both prescriptions (AOR = 1.97; 95% CI 1.26, 3.09) and medical care (AOR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.31, 2.59). Health care providers have an opportunity to improve the experiences of their patients, particularly those with publiclysponsored coverage.

We examined whether racial discrimination is associated with increased body mass index (BMI) and obesity among Asian Americans. Further, we explored whether this association strengthens with increasing time in the United States. We analyzed data from the 2002 to 2003 National Latino and Asian American Study (n=1956). Regression models tested whether reports of racial discrimination were associated with BMI and obesity, after accounting for weight discrimination, age, gender, marital status, ethnicity, generation, employment, health status, and social desirability bias (the tendency to seek approval by providing the most socially desirable response to a question). We found that (1) racial discrimination was associated with increased BMI and obesity after we controlled for weight discrimination, social desirability bias, and other factors and (2) the association between racial discrimination and BMI strengthened with increasing time in the United States. Racial discrimination may be an important factor related to weight gain among ethnic minorities.

The united nations recently issued a compilation of national legislation against racial discrimination. The publication, which has a 1991 imprint, bears the title: Second Decade to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination: Global Compilation of National Legislation against Racial Discrimination. This volume covers 205 pages and carries the symbol: HR/PUB/90/8.The Charter of the United Nations, which was signed in June 1945 at San Francisco, entrusts the UN with promoting and ensuring respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms “for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.” The General Assembly, in one of its first resolutions, declared in 1946 “that it is in the higher interests of humanity to put an immediate end to religious and so-called racial persecution and discrimination.” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the General Assembly December 10, 1948, is the most fundamental human rights instrument adopted by the United Nations. Since that time there have been numerous conventions and declarations aimed specifically at eliminating racial discrimination. These include the Declaration and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted November 20, 1963 and December 21, 1965, respectively, and the Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, adopted November 30, 1973.

The purpose of our study was to examine college environment, defined as whether law students entered law school from a historically Black college or university or a traditionally White institution, as a moderator of the relationship between gender discrimination and assertiveness. Using a national sample of 402 incoming Black women law students and multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with covariates, the authors also tested whether college environment moderated the relationship between racial discrimination and assertiveness. CFA models with covariates were used to further investigate whether racial discrimination and gender discrimination interact to influence assertiveness. Results indicated that college environment did not moderate the relationship between gender discrimination and assertiveness. College environment also did not moderate the relationship between racial discrimination and assertiveness. Additional results revealed a significant interaction between racial and gender discrimination, whereby racial discrimination was positively related to assertiveness among students who experienced gender discrimination. Findings suggest that irrespective of college environment, racism and sexism intersect to enhance assertiveness and may increase students’ academic success. However, law school administrators should ultimately seek to reduce incidents of racism and sexism because students’ assertive responses could make them vulnerable to mental health risks and to further acts of discrimination.

One reason Aristotle is distinguished as a philosopher is that he thought the philosopher investigated the causes of things. This paper raises the question: What are the causes of racial prejudice and racial discrimination. All ethical beings know that racial prejudice and racial discrimination are morally wrong, deplorable and should be completely eradicated. Deanna Jacobsen Koepke refers to Holt’s definitions in distinguishing racism from prejudice: “Racism is defined as hostility toward a group of people based on alleged inferiorities. Racism is a system of power and privilege that is at the foundation of society’s structures rather than prejudice, which is a hostile attitude toward a person based on trait he or she is assumed to have due to group membership.” This concept squarely places racism as the culprit to be extinguished. In this article, it is to be argued that to define racism as the target is only to observe the manifest phenomenon. The argument of the article is that racial prejudice and discrimination rest upon four pillars: political, economic, social and cultural. For simplicity of explanation, the social and cultural pillars shall be considered under the category of the political pillar, although the distinction between these pillars shall be noted. This article argues that these four pillars themselves, rest upon a foundation. The foundation is the deep psychological fear of the current, existing dominant economic group that the current existing dominated minority group will eventually usurp the power of the dominant economic group. The manifest form that this type of fear assumes is racial prejudice and discrimination. In its most extreme forms it then manifests as hate speech, hate action, hate brutality and hate murder.2 These manifestations provide the fuel that maintains the power imbalance and provides a camouflage for the four pillars that lie beneath the racist exterior. In this article, the political and economic pillars that underlie color racism will be examined first. The underlying deep psychological foundation shall be treated separately. In the end, the argument of this article is that color racism cannot be fully extinguished until its role as providing a mask for the underlying four pillars that consistently support inequality between different groups or classes are uprooted and the deep psychological fear that underlies them is eliminated.3 The masked function of color racism is its enormous power in perpetuating inequality; hence, the title of this paper, Unmasking Color Racism.

Objectives: To characterize the availability, content, and psychometric properties of self-reported measures that assess race/ethnicity-related discrimination or psychosocial stress and have potential relevance to studies of health disparities in children and adolescents.Design: Using PRISMA extension guidelines for scoping reviews, we searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Scopus databases from 1946 to April 20, 2020, using the search terms “stress,” “child,” “adolescents,” “discrimination,” and “psychometrics.” We limited the search to articles in English, with children and adolescents, in the United States. For each measure, we extracted information about the content, reliability, and construct validity.Results: The 12 measures that met inclusion criteria assessed discrimination or stress from racial discrimination in African American children and adolescents (n=8), acculturative stress in Hispanic/Latino children (n=1), or bicultural stress in Mexican American adolescents (n=2), and one measure assessed both discrimination-related and acculturative stress in Hispanic/Latino children. The majority (n=7) articles were published between 2001 and 2010. All discrimination measures evaluated individual experiences of discrimination and one also evaluated stressfulness of discrimination and coping. The acculturative stress measures assessed general stress and immigration-related discrimination, and the bicultural stress measures evaluated many different aspects of biculturalism.Conclusions: Despite the recent increased interest in the racial discrimination and stress as a contributor to racial or ethnic health disparities affecting U.S. children and adolescents, the small number of eligible measures identified and incomplete coverage of various types of racial and ethnic discrimination within and across population groups indicates a currently inadequate capacity to conduct child health disparity studies on this issue.

Mitigating the impacts of racism on Indigenous wellbeing through human rights, legislative and health policy reform.