Ok. That was my initial understanding. But I wasn't sure without the reference group (0) for the analysis (logistic). The data was transferred out of Excel with separate good and poor health variables.
STATA users: Help. I have two variables (1) good health and (2) poor health. I want to combine these two variables into one variable: good health ==1 and poor health==2.
The socially constructed category "White" is about race too. But remnants of Eugenics still permeate the bowels of the social sciences, which affords you the opportunity to render that fact invisible.
If you truly understood why racial categories were invented in the first place, then you would realize that a person racialized as White saying "it's not always about race" is indicative of how they experience racism.
It took me a while to realize this but the "Moving to Opportunity" project is rooted in racial essentialism. That's why I have a hard time grappling with those studies.
If a scholar gives an hour presentation about inequality by focusing on people racialized as Black, then you ask a question about people not racialized as Black, that's a form of antiBlackness.
My research is not about social categories; rather, my work focuses on the processes and mechanisms that make social category salient in the first place. There's a difference.
Great population health postdoc opportunity at the University of Minnesota. 🛟sociology demography 😷policysky polisky health policy PhDsky academicsky 📉
A few years ago I moved away from saying "White people" or "Black people," etc to saying "people racialized as ..." because race categories are settlers' tools. We cannot adequately address racial inequality by using the very tools settlers created to justify inequality.
