This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bash, H. H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

If I'm So White, Why Ain't I Right? Some Methodological Misgivings on Taking Identity Ascriptions at Face-Value1

University of Missouri - St. Louis, guesst{at}msx.umsl.edu

Sociologists enjoy, but don't always observe, a verbal distinction between the sociological and the social. Lexically-disadvantaged others simply pursue the psychological analysis of the psychological or the historical assessment of the historical. Yet, a clear separation of conceptual approach from its subject target is crucial. Discipline-specific conceptual reconstructions must supersede prevailing social constructions of reality, if scientific explanation is to transcend common sense. This issue is explored through a critique of the sociology of "race" relations and its more recent focus on "Whiteness" studies, both of them social constructions which, like Trojan Horses, intrude social biases that blunt the analytic edge of sociological probes into vital facets of power disparities.

Key Words: race • whiteness • reification • social v. sociological • minority v. subordinate group • discriminatory v. differential treatment.

Critical Sociology, Vol. 32, No. 4, 675-697 (2006)
DOI: 10.1163/156916306779155144


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?