Section 4.5: Race, Ethnicity, and Gender

Fundamentals of Sociology - Adam McKee and Scott Bransford

In Sociology, words like “race,” “ethnicity,” and “gender” have special meanings that help us understand how people relate to each other. Let’s dive into what these terms mean in our field.

Table of Contents

Race: In sociology, race isn’t about our genes; it’s about how society sees and treats people based on physical features like skin color, hair, or eye shape. For example, the way people react to different skin colors is what sociologists mean by race (Morning, 2009).

Ethnicity: This is about the cultural background you come from. It includes things like the language you speak, the holidays you celebrate, and the food you love. It’s like a quilt of different traditions and practices that groups of people share (Phinney, 1996).

Minority Group: Now, this term is a bit tricky. It doesn’t just mean a smaller group of people. In sociology, a “minority group” refers to people who have less power or are treated differently, no matter their size or where they come from (Schaefer, 2016). It’s about who has more say or influence in society.

For instance, think about older adults in the U.S. Even though there are many of them, they’re often seen as a “minority group” because they sometimes face unfair treatment or don’t have as much influence. Shockingly, studies show that some older adults are even mistreated by people who are supposed to care for them (Pillemer & Moore, 1989).

Reflect 🔍

As you think about these terms, consider how you see these concepts in your own life. Can you identify examples of how race, ethnicity, or the idea of a minority group play out in your school or community?

Race: A Changing Idea

Long ago, people thought about race in many ways, like where someone’s ancestors came from or what they looked like. They used terms tied to places (like Mongolia) or skin color (like black or white). But as we learned more, we realized that these old ideas weren’t accurate (Smedley & Smedley, 2005).

Big groups of smart people, like the American Association of Anthropologists and others, now agree that race isn’t something we can pinpoint in our biology. Instead, it’s something societies make up over time. This means that old-school ideas about race, which were often used to treat people unfairly, are out of date. Now, we understand race as a social construct, which is a fancy way of saying we as a society decide what it means (Omi & Winant, 1994).

More Than Skin Deep

Take skin color, for example. The differences in our skin are just nature’s way of dealing with the sun’s rays in different parts of the world. Yet, society often tries to use these small differences to make big judgments about people, which isn’t cool or correct (Norton et al., 2006).

What’s in a Name?

The labels we use for race have changed a lot over time. For instance, what we called “negroid” in the 19th century became “negro” in the 1960s and then “African American” later on. Each change tries to respect people’s identities better, but it’s tricky. Sometimes, these terms can be too broad or not quite fit everyone they’re meant to (Smedley & Smedley, 2005).

Consider Charlize Theron, the famous actress from South Africa who’s now also a U.S. citizen. She’s blonde and blue-eyed but technically could be called “African American.” Does that label really fit her? This shows just how complex and challenging it can be to define race and identity.

Reflect 🔍

Think about the terms used to describe race in your community. How have they changed over time, and what do those changes say about how we view each other?

Ethnicity: A Complex Puzzle

Let’s dive into “ethnicity,” a crucial term that helps us understand how people come together through shared culture. Think of it as a colorful tapestry made of shared language, religion, and traditions (Phinney, 1996).

Understanding ethnicity is tricky. Its meaning changes as society and culture evolve. Identifying with an ethnicity can be complex and sometimes confusing, just like race (Cornell & Hartmann, 2007).

Diverse Yet Unique

Take, for example, groups like the Irish, Italian Americans, Russians, Jewish, and Serbians. They might all be considered “white,” but each group has its own special blend of culture, beliefs, and traditions that set them apart.

On the flip side, consider “British” as an ethnic label. It includes people of many races like black, white, and Asian, all sharing some aspects of British culture. This shows how an ethnic group can be a melting pot of different races, all under one cultural roof.

Ethnicity in Society

Even with its complexities, ethnicity is super important. It’s used in big ways, like when governments collect information or make laws about fairness and equality (Jones, 1997). It also shapes our everyday life, influencing how we see others and understand ourselves.

Reflect 🔍

Think about your own experiences with ethnicity. How does it shape the way you connect with others? Have you ever discovered surprising connections or differences with people based on shared or different ethnic backgrounds?

Exploring Minority Groups

Let’s explore “minority groups,” a term that’s about more than just numbers. It’s about who has power in society and who doesn’t. Louis Wirth defined it as a group singled out and treated differently because of their physical or cultural traits, feeling the weight of discrimination (Wirth, 1945).

Minority vs. Majority

In sociology, “minority” or “subordinate group” means a group with less power, not necessarily fewer people. On the other hand, “dominant” or “majority” refers to the group with the most power (Healey, 2012). It’s all about who holds the reins in society.

Beyond Numbers

A surprising twist is that sometimes the bigger group can be the “minority” if they don’t have power. Think about apartheid in South Africa, where the numerically smaller white population controlled the larger black population.

Identifying a Minority Group

Charles Wagley and Marvin Harris point out five key traits of minority groups:

  1. They face unequal treatment and less control over their lives.
  2. They have distinct physical or cultural traits, like skin color or language.
  3. People don’t choose to be in these groups.
  4. They know they’re at a disadvantage.
  5. They often marry within their group (Wagley & Harris, 1958).

Groups like the LGBTQ+ community, certain religious followers, and people with disabilities are all examples of minority groups in various societies.

Scapegoat Theory

This theory suggests that the dominant group takes out its frustrations on a less powerful group. History is filled with such examples, like how Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany’s problems. In the U.S., new immigrants often face similar blame (Dollard et al., 1939).

Reflect 🔍

Think about the groups in your community or in the news. How do you see the dynamics of power and discrimination playing out? Can you identify the dominant and subordinate groups and understand their struggles?

Stereotypes: Oversimplified Generalizations

Let’s dive into stereotypes, an idea that’s often mixed up with prejudice and racism. We’ll learn what sets them apart and why they matter.

Stereotypes: Painting with a Broad Brush

Stereotypes are like using a huge brush to paint a whole group of people in one color, missing all the unique details that make each person different (Stangor, 2000). They can be about anything — race, age, gender — and while they’re sometimes positive, they’re often negative and harmful.

Positive vs. Negative Stereotypes

Sometimes, people might say good things about their own group, like “We’re tough and don’t complain about pain.” But more often, stereotypes are negative and aimed at other groups. For example, one race might wrongly label another as lazy or not smart. The big problem here is that these stereotypes ignore the individual differences in each person.

Where Do Stereotypes Come From?

Stereotypes don’t just pop out of nowhere. They often get passed down and reused. For instance, in the U.S., some negative stereotypes originally thrown at Irish and Eastern European immigrants are now used against other groups (Omi & Winant, 2014). It’s like a cycle of misunderstanding and mislabeling.

The Danger of Simplifying People

Stereotypes are a quick and dirty way for people to make sense of the world, but they’re super flawed. They reduce complex, unique individuals to a single, often not-so-nice, trait. We need to look past these oversimplifications and appreciate everyone’s unique story and qualities.

Reflect 🔍

Think about the stereotypes you’ve heard. How do they shape the way you see others? Are there ways you can challenge these stereotypes to understand people as individuals better?

The Many Facets of Prejudice and Racism

Now, let’s navigate through the complexities of prejudice and racism. These concepts are layered and nuanced, and we’ll break them down with real-world examples and research.

Prejudice: Prejudgment Without Basis

Prejudice is like painting a scene before you’ve even seen it. It’s having ideas and feelings about a group that aren’t based on personal experience but rather on what’s been heard or taught (Allport, 1954). The 1970 documentary “Eye of the Storm” shows how quickly prejudice can form and affect behavior when a group (blue-eyed children) is arbitrarily labeled as better.

Racism: A Potent Form of Prejudice

Racism takes prejudice to the next level, focusing specifically on racial differences. It’s about believing one race is better or worse than another and often involves harmful actions by the majority against the minority (Bonilla-Silva, 2013). A grim example is the Ku Klux Klan, whose hateful ideology and actions have targeted racial minorities for over a century.

Institutional Racism: Systemic Discrimination

Racism isn’t just individual; it’s built into society’s systems. Institutional racism shows up in unfair practices and policies, like the disproportionate targeting and incarceration of black men, often due to racial profiling (Alexander, 2012).

Colorism: Bias Within a Race

Colorism is a tricky form of prejudice where people within the same race are judged differently based on their skin tone (Hunter, 2007). It’s like a hierarchy of shades within a racial group. For instance, a darker-skinned African American might face more discrimination than a lighter-skinned person. This bias can even shape how people are warned or taught about dealing with other racial groups (Landor et al., 2013).

Reflect 🔍

Consider how prejudice and racism might show up around you. Have you witnessed or experienced these biases? How do they shape the way people interact and see each other?

The Many Layers of Discrimination

Let’s unpack discrimination, a layered issue with real-world impacts. We’ll explore how it manifests, using examples and expert insights to clarify its complexities.

Discrimination: Action Beyond Prejudice

While prejudice is about biased thoughts, discrimination involves acting on those biases against a group (Allport, 1954). It can be based on age, religion, health, or most often, race. Laws try to curb race-based discrimination, but it’s a persistent issue.

Historical and Modern Forms

Discrimination has a long, ugly history. In the past, overt racism was common, like businesses refusing to hire Irish people or the segregation enforced by Jim Crow laws (Woodward, 2002). Today, discrimination might not always be as obvious, but it’s still around, from biased hiring to racial profiling.

A Societal Issue

Even if we could eliminate all racist thoughts, discrimination would linger because it’s woven into society’s systems (Durkheim, 1982). Think about how a news report might reinforce stereotypes by mentioning a suspect’s race, or how real estate agents might steer clients to certain neighborhoods based on race (Galster, 1990).

Intersection of Prejudice and Discrimination

People interact with prejudice and discrimination differently. Some are open-minded and accepting, while others might act on biases they don’t even realize they have, like unintentionally discriminating at work. Some harbor negative thoughts but don’t act on them, and unfortunately, some actively discriminate and spread hate.

Beyond Individuals: Institutional Discrimination

Discrimination isn’t just personal; it’s embedded in institutions. For example, the military’s old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was a form of institutional discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals (Herek, 2010). Institutions can also uphold privileges for dominant groups, like ‘white privilege,’ where being part of the majority affords unseen benefits (McIntosh, 1989).

Reflect 🔍

Think about your surroundings. Can you spot instances of discrimination, whether overt or subtle? How do they shape the experiences of those around you, and how might you challenge these unfair practices?

A Case Study on Racial Tensions

Let’s delve into the complex racial tensions in the United States through the lens of the tragic incident in Ferguson, Missouri. This event sheds light on the interplay between prejudice, discrimination, and institutional racism, revealing the deep-rooted socio-racial issues in American society.

Ferguson: A Flashpoint of Racial Tensions

The shooting of Michael Brown, a young African-American man, by a white police officer, wasn’t seen as an isolated incident by the local community. Instead, it was perceived as a consequence of racial profiling, where individuals are targeted based on race (Meehan & Ponder, 2002). This event sparked widespread outrage and discussions about the broader implications of race relations in America.

Disparities in Law Enforcement

The incident brought to light the glaring racial disparities in Ferguson’s law enforcement. With a predominantly black population, it was startling to see that the local police force was overwhelmingly white. This raised questions about the representation and fairness in the institutions meant to serve the community (Alexander, 2010).

Nationwide Inequality and Historical Context

The discussions around Ferguson expanded to address nationwide racial inequalities. Practices like redlining have historically contributed to racial imbalances in communities, limiting opportunities for certain racial groups (Massey & Denton, 1993). The ‘sedimentation of racial inequality’ was highlighted as a cumulative effect of both overt and subtle racism over generations, impacting the ability of black people to build wealth and access resources (Conley, 1999).

Statistics Reflecting Racial Disparity

The data from Ferguson painted a stark picture: black residents faced disproportionate stops, searches, and arrests. This, coupled with issues like de facto segregation in schools, a significant racial wealth gap, and higher unemployment rates for black individuals, underscored the deep-seated racial issues not just in Ferguson but across the nation (Pager & Shepherd, 2008).

The Ferguson case is a poignant reminder of the ongoing challenges and complexities surrounding race in America. Understanding these layers is crucial as we strive for a more equitable and just society. As we continue to explore sociology, we’ll further examine these issues and their impact on communities nationwide.

Reflect 🔍

Consider the incident in Ferguson and its broader implications. How do you see the effects of historical and institutional racism in your community or in the news? What steps can be taken to address these deep-rooted issues?

A Dive into Theoretical Perspectives on Race

Let’s explore the complex world of race and ethnicity through three primary sociological theories: functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism. As we delve into each, consider which perspective—or combination of perspectives—best helps you understand racism, prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination.

Functionalism: Finding Order in Disparity

Functionalism sees society as a complex system where each part serves a purpose. But how does it justify negative aspects like racism?

Positive and Negative Functions:
Functionalists note that racial disparities might serve functions for some. For instance, Nash (1962) suggested that racism benefits the dominant group by justifying an unequal society. Think about historical justifications for slavery. However, there are significant dysfunctions too, like ignoring the potential of the oppressed group and wasting resources on maintaining segregation (Rose, 1951).

Conflict Theory: A Struggle for Power

Conflict theory views society as a battleground over resources and power, with race and ethnicity at the forefront of many struggles.

Continuous Conflict:
American history, through this lens, is a series of conflicts between the ruling white class and minorities. Consider the Jim Crow laws or the underappreciation of black talents like Vivien Thomas. Efforts to disenfranchise minorities through gerrymandering and voter suppression highlight this ongoing struggle.

Patricia Hill Collins builds on Kimberlé Crenshaw’s intersection theory, reminding us that race intersects with class, gender, and other factors, creating a complex experience of advantages and disadvantages.

Symbolic Interactionism: The Meaning of Race

Symbolic interactionism focuses on the meanings and symbols attached to race and ethnicity, shaping our perceptions and interactions.

Symbols and Interactions:
Herbert Blumer argues that racism stems from the meanings we attach to race, formed through interactions within the dominant group. An individual’s racist beliefs might be shaped by media portrayals and a lack of personal interaction with other groups. This theory also probes how we define our own race and that of others, emphasizing the social construction of race.

Each theory offers a unique lens to view the complex issues of race and ethnicity. As we continue our sociological journey, we’ll keep exploring these theories and their implications for understanding and addressing racial tensions and inequalities.

Reflect 🔍

Which theory do you connect with the most, and why? Do you think understanding race and racism requires a blend of these perspectives?

Understanding Sex and Gender

Welcome to the nuanced world of sex and gender.  These terms might seem interchangeable on forms like job applications or school registrations, but in sociology, they represent distinct concepts (West & Zimmerman, 1987).

Sex: Biological Attributes

‘Sex’ refers to the biological and physical differences between males and females. This includes primary sex characteristics related to the reproductive system and secondary traits like body shape and facial hair. These characteristics are relatively consistent across different societies.

Gender: Societal Roles and Behaviors

In contrast, ‘gender’ encompasses the roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women. Unlike the biological aspects of sex, gender is a social construct that varies greatly across different cultures and over time.

When Sex and Gender Don’t Align

It’s crucial to understand that an individual’s sex doesn’t always dictate their gender identity. For example, a person may be biologically male but identify and live as a woman. This variance shows that sex and gender are distinct and that gender involves a complex interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors.

Cultural Variations in Gender

Gender norms vary widely across cultures. For instance, while wearing a dress is often associated with femininity in the U.S., men in many parts of the world wear skirt-like garments as part of their traditional, masculine attire. This highlights how societal context shapes our perception of what is considered masculine or feminine.

Beyond the Binary

Not all cultures view gender in a strictly binary (male/female) manner. Many societies recognize and respect gender as a spectrum with more fluid identities. Historically, some Native American tribes honored ‘Two-Spirit’ individuals who combined roles and traits typically associated with both men and women. This term is preferable to ‘berdache,’ which is outdated and considered pejorative.

Understanding the distinction between sex and gender is vital for appreciating the rich tapestry of human diversity. As we delve deeper into sociology, we’ll continue exploring how these concepts shape individual identities and societal structures.

Reflect 🔍

Think about how your society views gender. Are there specific expectations or norms for men and women? How do people navigate and express their gender identity within these cultural constructs?

Exploring Sexual Orientation

Let’s explore the intricate dimension of human experience known as sexual orientation, which defines whom we’re attracted to physically, emotionally, and sexually.

Understanding Sexual Orientation

Sexual orientation encompasses a spectrum of categories, including heterosexuality (attraction to the opposite sex), homosexuality (attraction to the same sex), bisexuality (attraction to both sexes), asexuality (lack of sexual attraction), pansexuality (attraction regardless of gender), and queer (a broad term for diverse sexual orientations and gender identities) (Herek, 2000).

Societal Norms and Realizations

In many societies, especially in the U.S., there’s a predominant assumption of heteronormativity, considering heterosexuality as the default. This bias often leads to LGBTQ+ individuals facing more scrutiny about their orientation compared to heterosexuals. People typically become aware of their sexual orientation between middle childhood and early adolescence, even without sexual activity, through emotional and physical attractions (Bailey et al., 2016).

Sexuality as a Continuum

Alfred Kinsey’s groundbreaking research challenged the strict binary view of sexuality, proposing a continuum from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual (Kinsey, 1948). Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick expanded on this by introducing the term “homosocial,” highlighting how societal norms influence nonsexual same-sex relationships (Sedgwick, 1985).

The Mystery of Origin

The exact causes of one’s sexual orientation remain unclear, with studies suggesting a mix of genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural factors. However, no single determinant has been universally accepted (Mustanski et al., 2017).

Societal Challenges and Discrimination

Unfortunately, non-heterosexual individuals often face various forms of discrimination and stereotyping, a phenomenon known as heterosexism. This can manifest in schools, workplaces, and even legal systems, like the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which, until recently, restricted marriage to opposite-sex couples in the U.S. (Herek, 2004).

Understanding sexual orientation is crucial in appreciating the diversity of human experiences. As we continue to study sociology, we’ll delve deeper into how these orientations impact individuals’ lives and societal structures.

Reflect 🔍

Consider your own understanding of sexual orientation. How do societal norms and legal structures in your community support or challenge various orientations? What steps can be taken to foster a more inclusive society?

Gender Roles: A Sociological Perspective

Now we’ll dissect how society shapes our ideas of how men and women should behave and appear.

Gender Roles: Society’s Blueprint

Gender roles are like society’s script for how men and women should act, dress, and interact based on shared norms and expectations (Eagly, 1987). These roles start influencing us from birth, as seen in the gender-specific colors and toys often assigned to infants.

Learning Gender Through Play

Play is crucial for children to internalize gender roles. Boys are often given toys that encourage aggression and solitary play, while girls receive toys that foster nurturing and social skills. This early socialization influences children’s preferences and behaviors (Cherney & London, 2006).

Gender Identity and Flexibility

While U.S. society has rigid gender roles, there’s some room for flexibility. Men and women can adopt behaviors traditionally associated with the opposite gender without changing their gender identity, their inner sense of being male, female, or something else.

Transgender and Transsexual Identities

Transgender individuals don’t identify with the gender assigned at birth. Some may choose to alter their bodies to align with their gender identity, becoming transsexuals. However, not all transgender people seek such changes. It’s estimated that 2 to 5% of the U.S. population is transgender (Transgender Law and Policy Institute, 2007).

Cross-Dressing vs. Transgenderism

Cross-dressing, or wearing clothes traditionally associated with a different gender, is often about self-expression and doesn’t necessarily indicate transgenderism. It’s a separate phenomenon from one’s core gender identity.

The Origins of Transgenderism

The reasons behind transgenderism are complex and varied, with theories suggesting a mix of biological, psychological, and social factors. However, no single explanation is universally accepted (Ainsworth & de Vries, 2018).

From ‘Gender Identity Disorder’ to ‘Gender Dysphoria’

The DSM-5 now uses ‘Gender Dysphoria’ to describe the distress some individuals feel due to a mismatch between their experienced gender and the gender others assign them. This change aims to reduce stigma while providing a basis for care (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Societal Challenges for Transgender Individuals

Transgender people often face discrimination and violence. Education and advocacy are critical in promoting understanding and reducing stigma (Grant et al., 2011).

Sociological Theories and Gender

Various sociological perspectives offer insights into gender roles:

  • Structural Functionalism: Views gender roles as a product of social functions, established in pre-industrial times.
  • Conflict Theory: Sees society as a battle for dominance, with men historically as the dominant group.
  • Feminist Theory: Focuses on gender inequalities and how societal structures maintain them.
  • Symbolic Interactionism: Suggests gender is something we perform based on societal scripts (West & Zimmerman, 1987).

Reflect 🔍

Consider the gender roles in your own life. How have they shaped your experiences, and how do you see people “doing gender” around you?


The Evolution of Race

Over time, our understanding of race has drastically changed. It used to be about who your family was or where you came from, but now it’s often about what you look like on the outside. Big organizations that study people and society have said that the old ways of grouping people by race – things like where they live or their skin color – weren’t accurate and were often used to treat people unfairly. This idea, called the social construction of race, tells us that race isn’t something we can clearly define biologically and that a lot of the old categories were made up for bad reasons. We can see this in how the names we use for races change over time and how complicated it can be for someone to figure out their racial identity.

Ethnicity and Minority Groups

Ethnicity, however, is all about the culture you share with others, like traditions, language, or religion. This concept has changed as societies and cultures have evolved. Ethnic groups can include people from many different races, showing us just how complex our identities can be. Minority groups aren’t necessarily about being outnumbered; they’re about how some groups are treated differently and often unfairly. Power plays a big part in this, with some groups holding more power over others.

Stereotypes are another issue. They’re like shortcuts our brains take by assuming everyone in a group is the same, but these assumptions are often wrong and ignore each person’s unique qualities. These stereotypes can be harmful and are used against many different groups, so it’s important to challenge them to create a more inclusive world.

Prejudice and Discrimination: Sociological Views

Prejudice is when someone has set ideas about a group before they even meet them, and discrimination is when people act on those ideas. Sociologists look at these issues in different ways. Functionalism says that racism and discrimination might actually benefit the group in power by keeping society unequal. Conflict theory talks about the fights between those in power and those who aren’t, showing us how unfairness is built into our systems and how people fight to change that. Symbolic interactionism focuses on how we use race and ethnicity as symbols that shape who we are and how we see others, and how these symbols affect the prejudices and stereotypes we have.

Understanding Sex and Gender

In sociology, sex and gender are two very different things. Sex is about biological differences, like what your body is like on the inside. Gender, however, is about the roles and behaviors that society says are for men or women. Sometimes, a person’s gender doesn’t match their biological sex, and that’s okay. Gender roles, which are the expectations of how men and women should act, are learned as we grow up.

Sexual Orientation and Sociological Perspectives

Sexual orientation is about who you’re attracted to. This can include being attracted to the opposite sex (heterosexuality), the same sex (homosexuality), both (bisexuality), and more. Understanding gender and sexuality is complex and requires looking at different sociological perspectives. Functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism all offer different ways to understand these aspects of our society.

Word Count: 5000

Key Terms

Race, ethnicity, prejudice, racism, discrimination, stereotypes, social construction, socialization, intersectionality, minority group, dominant group, institutional racism, colorism, homophobia, heteronormativity, sexual orientation, gender, gender roles, transgender, cisgender, gender identity, gender expression, sexism, homosociality, power dynamics.

References and Further Reading 

  • Alexander, M. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.
  • Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
  • Bailey, J. M., Vasey, P. L., Diamond, L. M., Breedlove, S. M., Vilain, E., & Epprecht, M. (2016). Sexual orientation, controversy, and science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(2), 45-101.
  • Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. Yale University Press.
  • Blumer, H. (1958). Race Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position. The Pacific Sociological Review, 1(1), 3-7.
  • Bonilla-Silva, E. (2013). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  • Collins, P. H. (2000). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Routledge.
  • Conley, D. (1999). Being black, living in the red: Race, wealth, and social policy in America. University of California Press.
  • Cornell, S., & Hartmann, D. (2007). Ethnicity and race: Making identities in a changing world. Pine Forge Press.
  • Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), Article 8.
  • Dollard, J., Miller, N. E., Doob, L. W., Mowrer, O. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression. Yale University Press.
  • Engels, F. (1884/1972). The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. Pathfinder Press.
  • Grant, J. M., Mottet, L. A., & Tanis, J. (2011). National Transgender Discrimination Survey Report on Health and Health Care. National LGBTQ Task Force.
  • Healey, J. F. (2012). Diversity and society: Race, ethnicity, and gender. Sage Publications.
  • Herek, G. M. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(1), 19-22.
  • Herek, G. M. (2004). Beyond “homophobia”: Thinking about sexual prejudice and stigma in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 1(2), 6-24.
  • Jones, N. A. (1997). The American Indian population of the United States and Canada: A demographic profile. Journal of American Indian Education, 36(2), 1-32.
  • Kinsey, A. C. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. W.B. Saunders.
  • Landor, A., Simons, L. G., Simons, R. L., Brody, G. H., & Gibbons, F. X. (2013). Exploring the impact of skin tone on family dynamics and race-related outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(5), 817–826.
  • Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993). American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Harvard University Press.
  • Meehan, A. J., & Ponder, M. C. (2002). Race and place: The ecology of racial profiling African American motorists. Justice Quarterly, 19(3), 399-430.
  • Morning, A. (2009). Toward a sociology of racial conceptualization for the 21st century. Social Forces, 87 (3), 1167-1192.
  • Mustanski, B., Kuper, L., & Greene, G. J. (2014). Development of sexual orientation and identity. In D. L. Tolman & L. M. Diamond (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology, Vol. 1: Person-based approaches (pp. 597–628). American Psychological Association.
  • Norton, H. L., Kittles, R. A., Parra, E., McKeigue, P., Mao, X., Cheng, K., … & Shriver, M. D. (2006). Genetic evidence for the convergent evolution of light skin in Europeans and East Asians. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 24(3), 710-722.
  • Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States. Routledge.
  • Phinney, J. S. (1996). Understanding ethnic diversity: The role of ethnic identity. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(2), 143-152.
  • Pillemer, K., & Moore, D. W. (1989). Abuse of patients in nursing homes: Findings from a survey of staff. The Gerontologist, 29(3), 314-320.
  • Schaefer, R. T. (2016). Racial and ethnic groups (14th ed.). Pearson.
  • Sedgwick, E. K. (1985). Between men: English literature and male homosocial desire. Columbia University Press.
  • Smedley, A., & Smedley, B. D. (2005). Race as biology is fiction, racism as a social problem is real: Anthropological and historical perspectives on the social construction of race. American Psychologist, 60(1), 16-26.
  • Stangor, C. (2000). Stereotypes and prejudice: Essential readings. Psychology Press.
  • Wagley, C., & Harris, M. (1958). Minorities in the New World: Six Case Studies. Columbia University Press.
  • Wirth, L. (1945). The problem of minority groups. In R. Linton (Ed.), The science of man in the world crisis (pp. 347-372). Columbia University Press.
Modification History

File Created:  05/07/2023

Last Modified:  01/03/2024

[Back | Contents | Next]

This work is licensed under an Open Educational Resource-Quality Master Source (OER-QMS) License.

Open Education Resource--Quality Master Source License

Print for Personal Use

You are welcome to print a copy of pages from this Open Educational Resource (OER) book for your personal use. Please note that mass distribution, commercial use, or the creation of altered versions of the content for distribution are strictly prohibited. This permission is intended to support your individual learning needs while maintaining the integrity of the material.

Print This Text Section Print This Text Section

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.