Black Men with White Women - An Alternative Theory

Why is it that most Black/White interracial relationships are between Black men and White women, rather than Black women and White men? Popular theories:

Black men just "date out" more in general.

Black men want White women because they're easy going and submissive.

Black women don't find White men attractive.

Black women look at White men and think of slave owners.

White men don't find Black women attractive.

White men are intimidated by Black women.

While there isn't one simple explanation, there is a more basic political dynamic that gets overlooked: Sexism, not just racism, changes dating dynamics. 

When a Black man encounters racism in his White girlfriend or wife, he might find himself excusing her behavior by reminding himself that he still holds a large political advantage over her: men are still valued over women, regardless of "race". She can be as racist as she pleases toward a Black man, and he - like any man from any ethnic group - can retaliate with some expression of sexism toward her, possibly to include physical dominance or violence. ...

"You might be White but I'm in charge because I'm a man," might be the sexist attitude he uses to dismiss or excuse her racism or race privilege, and justify staying with her. Some men will reason that a woman's comments or opinions aren't that important anyway; nothing to take too seriously. She's just talking out of her ass again.

Not so with WM/BW pairings. Black women will have to deal with two political banes: White men with their White privilege and racist tendencies, plus their male privilege and sexism. And that may be one of the main reasons a lot of Black women choose to stick with Black men. 

The Palestinian AND American Occupations

If you are an American citizen but not a Native American, you are currently occupying land that still belongs to American Natives, many of whom continue to languish on reservations, not unlike Palestinians in Palestine. 

Note that what I mean by Native American is a person who is Native to America, not those who have a case of Native American Princess syndrome.

Here are some flawed arguments you (as an American) may invoke to justify your distain for an occupied Palestine, while hypocritically excusing your own status as an occupier of Native American land: 

"The European occupation of North America began a long time ago, unlike Palestine." 

Occupation of someone else's land is still occupation. Native Americans and Palestinians have suffered greatly as a result of both occupations.

"Desperate times required desperate action."

Many people who aren't native to Palestine will argue England needed to "give" European Jews Palestinian territory as a refuge from religious persecution. A parallel argument exists for English occupation of America. The main difference is that part of the pro-Palestinian occupation argument is that (stolen) land was needed to guard against potential threats of completed genocide of Jews in the future. In both cases, developed land with long-established dwellers was stolen and Native people have been devastated as a result. 

"What is done is done."

( ... Or, "I'm not responsible for what happened long ago.")

As a non-indigenous US citizen, even if you aren't related to the folks who stole America; even if your people were originally kidnapped and forced onto American shores, today you are still occupying land belonging to indigenous tribes. You are still an occupier, as the Israelis are occupiers. 

What Should Be Done? 

I'm sitting here at my desk as a biracial, Ashkenazi Jewish American occupier of Native American land, asking What should I do about this? The easy answer is, or should be, leave. And that leads to another question: Why haven't I left? The selfish answer is: Because this feels too much like home. I've grown attached to the land and the sense of security it affords me. My identity is attached to both the experience of it and my personal history on it. 

More Questions

Other questions come to mind, based on my "security and comfort bias": Will my leaving at this point make any real difference? That question quickly leads to the what is done is done argument above. It hints at a belief that increased temporal distance from an egregious constellation of events renders those events (and their effects) irrelevant. A similar question arises: Is returning land to American Natives even a reasonable expectation at this point?

Since I'm unwilling to leave, what can I do as an occupier, to help reduce the damage in my wake, or to personally work toward reparations? Is donating time and money to tribes enough? Do I ask people from one or more NA nation to have prolonged talks about this issue (still, as an occupier)? Would those discussions unfairly place the burden of solving problems I/we have created or continue to create on them? Would the request be condescending, or just open wounds that have yet to be closed? Would not engaging be better ... or be worse? Seems individual responses would vary, like in any situation.  

The Importance of Acknowledging Occupation

Even though many of us hypocritically point our fingers singularly at the wrongness of Israeli occupation, facts are facts: both the American and Israeli occupations were and still are wrong. 

The price Israeli Jews are paying to enjoy their stolen "gift" is ongoing violent engagement, and a need to be in a constant state of high alert. White Jews in Europe have been segregated against, forced into ghettos and worse, but they have recently forced Palestinians into a segregated ghetto on their own land. It's tragic that anyone's life should end in violence and there's never an excuse for terrorist acts, but occupiers must also remember there are consequences - sometimes very unpredictable consequences - for taking over someone else's land, displacing a group of people, and causing them to suffer. 

Sometimes those who are oppressed become the oppressors, usually out of some combination of fear and greed. That goes for non-NA Americans and it goes for Israelis too. 

Blacks in the Media - Part I

On August 14, an article called "When the Media Treats White Suspects and Killers Better than Black Victims" was posted on Huffington Post, under "Huff Post Black Voices". In addition to the Whites listed in that article, here's a relatively recent example of a glorified White suspect: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (and to a lesser extent, his brother, Tamerlan).

Since White Americans dominate the media, it's no surprise brothers Tsarnaev, who murdered three Bostonians and maimed hundreds of others on April 15, 2013, were labeled the "Boston bombers", rather than terrorists, or "Boston terrorists". Rolling Stone "graced" the front cover of one of its issues with a whimsical photo of Dzhokhar, symbolically conflating a sociopath with a rock star icon. Inside, Janet Reitman reports on both brothers, but mainly Dzhokhar.

The title of the article is "Jahar's World", suggesting readers will be transported to a fascinating museum of arts and culture. 

The editors' intro statement includes this:


"The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens."

OK, but that "understanding" typically is absent from the media when non-White youth are the focus (and for doing far less damage).

Reitman states the following, four paragraphs in:


"People in Cambridge thought of 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev – "Jahar" to his friends – as a beautiful, tousle-haired boy with a gentle demeanor, soulful brown eyes and the kind of shy, laid-back manner that "made him that dude you could always just vibe with," one friend says ... a promising student. He was also 'just a normal American kid,' as his friends described him … "


We're told about the upstanding reputation of Cambridge (his community), and how talented he was; how "superchill" one friend thought he was, and how another friend thought he was "smooth as f**k". We're told all his friends "thought he had morals" and it was reported that he "never beat anyone up". Reitman informs us that Dzhokhar was thought of as a great boxer, and points to his alleged academic promise; Tamerlan was known as a "talented" boxer also. What is described, but downplayed, are Dzhokhar's repeated, anti-US, verbal outbursts in mosques, and the "jihadist screed" scrawled on the walls of the boat he hid in after detonating the bombs. 

 ... Ironically, two days following the bombings by the Tsarnaev brothers, CNN mistakenly reported that a "dark-skinned suspect" had been arrested. 

It's hard to imagine a "dark-skinned" American receiving Rolling Stone treatment, but when a White, male émigré deliberately snuffs out lives and blows off peoples' limbs in an American city after repeatedly proclaiming he hates America, that White terrorist apparently gets the next best think to a diamond-studded public microphone: 

That White terrorist is intimately referenced by his first name by a famous pop-culture mag that gives him a front cover spread and publishes his mini-biography, complete with glowing reviews from his friends.

Read Part II here.

Blacks in the Media - Part II

I referenced the following "Huff Post Black Voices" article in Part I : ("When the Media Treats White Suspects and Killers Better than Black Victims". The writer is Nick Wing, who appears to be White in his media pic. His list was comprehensive, but he showed an ironic bias when reporting his fourteen examples of contrasting White and Black news stories: 

He only referenced three of the fourteen Black victims by name, opting instead to leave generic descriptions, like "a man" or "the victim". Readers must follow links to associated news stories just to figure out who the victims were. In contrast, Wing included the full names of every White suspect. 


Racism is a sneaky beast that's often expressed subconsciously, regardless of someone's good intentions. White privilege grooms White people to become addicted to self-importance. I believe all Whites are prone to falling asleep to the mere presence of non-Whites, and by extension, to non-White needs and considerations.

A final note: While Huffington Post features thoughtful political and social content, I don't think articles about White racism in American media should be isolated within a "Black" section  of a politically liberal website (like "Huff Post Black Voices").

Segregating a website by ethnicity, and then placing features about White-instigated racism there, sets a tone: "You and your Black problems will be voiced over there, so the rest of us [who are too often the cause of those problems] don't have to hear about it." 

Native American Princess Syndrome

Native American Princess syndrome is an illness that requires healthy doses of honesty and empathy to recover from. 

Symptoms of Native American Princess syndrome

1. Believing that "one drop" of Native American ancestry makes you, a White person, a Native American. 

This is your attempt at being a "special flower" while still benefitting from looking White. 

You're mindlessly subscribing to a kind of Native American One Drop Rule for Whites, except you secretly believe the small % of alleged or real NA "blood" you have is a social advantage, rather than a curse (like African ancestry, for example).

2. Claiming to be a descendent of a "Native American Princess". 

There is no such thing. That's a Europeanized (White-washed) myth.

3. Fetishizing NA culture.

You, as a man or woman who is overwhelmingly White, do not have to have all three symptoms to be stricken with NAP syndrome. For example, you may not be afflicted with the ignorance or deception that is #3, but may still suffer from #1 or #2, or both. It's a disease that spreads quickly, causing Whites who overhear you to pretend they too are NA. But you can stop this embarrassing social contagion before it spreads any further. Arm yourself with facts and face reality.

Symptom #1  (Whites IDing as "Native American" only)

Native Americans are largely invisible in today's Eurocentric America. NAs have relatively limited political power, thanks to atrocities visited on them by yesterday's Whites. 

The fact that most are isolated on reservations, make them easy targets for Whites, who continuously appropriate their culture/s and identities, including false or unverified claims of a Native ancestral ethnic heritage. NAs aren't typically present to correct a White person who says, "Yeah, I'm Native American. I have a great-great-great-grandmother who was a Cherokee Princess." 

While this syndrome owes its title to ignorant references to non-existent Princesses, it befalls both men and women. 

While White people have the right to ID themselves as (only) Native American, it's basically inaccurate, and it's often quietly recognized by others as disingenuous. Quite a few Native Americans find it insulting.

Curiously, the NA One Drop Rule doesn't seem to apply to people who actually do have a considerable amount of NA ancestry. People who look European but claim that one of their parents is fully Native, for example, risk social distancing from other Whites. The claimed percentage of NA ancestry needs to be kept significantly low, since Whites don't want to jeopardize their White privilege. Also, the burden of proof is eased when an alleged or real NA relative is a distant one.

Symptom #2  (Embracing fictional relatives who were "Native American Princesses")

When people claim to have relatives who were "Native American Princesses", they reveal a shallow understanding of and interest in Natives and NA culture. There were no Native American princesses.

Again, due to a relative lack of NA presence in White American society, some people feel emboldened to re-invent NA people, often imagining all tribes as docile and peaceful, or all as "noble warriors"; and most or all NAs are imagined to be wise and spiritually advanced. 

Some Whites are so entranced by their fantasy "Indians", they take it further and find a way to try and claim that mythology as their own. The honest approach is to openly acknowledge one's overwhelming Whiteness and White privilege; to admit one's White privilege was attained through a legacy of White savagery, enslavement and genocide. But people with NAP syndrome want to fall asleep to those facts and re-invent themselves as political naifs.

Symptom # 3   (Fetishism)

The fetishism aspect of NAP syndrome includes objectification of NA people and any objects related to their tribes. Few NA fetishists seem to have visited a reservation. Few have been in the company of people who are fully NA, and if so, very briefly: maybe a trip to a tourist spot, like Sedona, AZ. Most keep company with other Whites and have no NA friends, despite their NA fixation. When a fetishist claims to have donated to a NA charity, s/he typically can't name the agency/s. A couple probing questions usually reveal basic ignorance about NA tribes.

Clarifying Questions

If you want to rile people with NAP syndrome, ask them: Are you aware of your White privilege? Do you know how you attained your White privilege? Do you understand that Natives and others continue to suffer for that White privilege?

When they deny that NAs suffer for their White privilege (if they admit to White privilege), just remind them they live their lives on stolen land. When they say, "It's not just Whites who live on that land!", remind them again who stole the land, imported slaves to work on the land (for them), and still dominates the land.

Reasons the NAP-afflicted don't claim African ancestry 

Blacks, despite enduring hundreds of years of White oppression in the US, have more or less integrated into White-dominated American society, compared with Native Americans. The complex history between Blacks and Whites, including ongoing tension and competition, makes them frenemies. There's little incentive for frenemies to romanticize each other's cultures or claim one another's ancestry. 

Plus, as stated above, most Whites don't want to lose White privilege by claiming Black ancestry. 

Why some AAs claim to have NA ancestry when they don't

In my opinion, one reason some Blacks will talk openly about their real or alleged Native ancestry, but not White ancestry, is that they aren't as eager to implicate themselves as the possible "product of rape" due to a real or hypothetical distant White relative who was quite likely a slave master. Still, appropriation of another group's people and culture is still appropriation. Whether White or Black, sticking to the truth, the known facts, is preferable. 

Biracial Privilege: the List

When someone experiences political privilege, typically it's at the inconvenience or expense of someone else ... 

 ... and that's the main reason I feel racial privilege needs to be acknowledged, even when that privilege is limited.

On a Black forum I frequent, there's ongoing debate as to whether or not biracial people (about equally Black and White) and those who are mostly White, experience racial privilege, relative to people who are mostly or fully Black. Because I believe biracials do, I promised to generate a list of some BR/White privileges I've either experienced, or witnessed other BRs receive. First, here are a few factors I suspect help determine the degree of privilege:

• phenotype  (ethnic appearance)
• lightness/darkness of skin
• white acculturation  (to what degree someone is familiar with or participating in White culture) 
• dress style  (Euro-associated, Afro-associated, Asia-associated, etc. ... and/or some combination) 
• racial demographics  (specifically: level and duration of exposure to Whites)
• local politics  (conservative, liberal, moderate, etc.) 

In my opinion, the Whiter or more ambiguous your BR phenotype, the lighter your skin tone, and the more White or biracial-acculturated you are, the more likely you are to experience quite a few of the following privileges. ...

Overt racism

You've never had a "negro wake up call" (to your conscious awareness):


For example: Was never called an n - - - - r, or other slur for Blacks; never had someone let you know "your type isn't wanted around here." ... No one has locked a car door or clutched her purse as you walked by. 

Whites and non-Blacks typically give you a warm social reception. They readily smile and initiate discussions and don't usually seem nervous or standoffish to you, as a group.

Achievements, accolades and media exposure

As of 2010, BRs still only represent 2.7% of the American population, according to the USCB, but are disproportionately over-represented in American academia, politics, and other vocations and industries, especially relative to Blacks. 

In reality, there are likely more than 2.7% of us. While dual ancestry could have been claimed on the 2010 census, (waning) acceptance and practice of the "One Drop Rule" may have led some BRs to only identify as "Black". But even if there are twice as many BRs in the US compared to the latest USCB report, BRs still appear to over-represent Black people in the areas described above. In that way, BRs may have some privilege as a group, based on model minority status, relative to Blacks.

BRs are also disproportionately over-represented in media. BRs - most often ambi-BRs - tend to suffer less negative stereotyping in the media, relative to Blacks. This may translate into social privilege in the form of a warmer, or at least more neutral, reception by many non-Blacks. 

As a BR, you see people like you playing a variety or roles in movies and on TV, that are meant for Blacks, BRs, Latinos, Italians, Greeks, Whites and others. 

That over-representation is a privilege. Some groups are less psychologically visible as Americans, because they must go out of their way to find images of themselves in American media, or in public venues. BR presence is especially dominant in "Black" magazines and advertising.  

Social Situations


You will more likely have immediate social acceptance from White and non-White Americans. 


For example: If you're a White-appearing or ambi-BR, Non-Blacks may say things like, "You're so handsome ... I need to introduce you to my daughter," while looking you directly in the eyes and wrapping an arm around your shoulder.

A less dramatic example: Older, conservative-looking White strangers act in familial ways, like offering to fix your shirt collar, or flip a tag back into your shirt). They tend to ask before touching your hair.

Positive stereotypes are often ascribed to you. 


Any stereotype can be problematic. Positive stereotypes create pressure to live up to high expectations, and any stereotype paints a group with too broad a brush. But those positive assumptions can result in unearned, relative privilege, because those who are positively stereotyped are often given the benefit of the doubt in many situations, where others aren't. While BRs sometimes get negatively stereotyped as "confused" or  (less frequently) "tragic",  there are several very positive stereotypes that likely offset the negative ones. ...

For example: Statements commonly made about BRs are, "You have the best of both worlds" (whatever in the Hell that means), "You guys are always so great looking","You represent a better future", etc. Silly BR stereotypes will often be more positive or neutral than negative.


You can often express negative feelings openly without fear of being reduced to a negative stereotype.




For example: Assuming you look ambi-BR or White, you've likely never really thought twice about possible racist backlash for spontaneously expressing your anger, outrage or disgust toward a White person in a position of authority over you, or in front of a larger White audience. You're pretty sure you've been viewed as an individual expressing a problem you wanted fixed, rather than as a (Black) trouble maker to be tolerated, dismissed or punished.

You've done inappropriate things like raise your voice at your boss or yell at a White cop, and you weren't treated harshly or arrested as a result. There may have been a neutral reaction, as if the person decided you're just having a bad day. They don't tend to reprimand you or give you that citation you deserved for going twice the speed limit.

No one's given you cause to believe you've been stereotyped as the "aggressive Black man" or the "angry Black woman", etc. You don't worry about coming across as a stereotype and you don't selectively watch what you say around Whites.

You're unaware of racial tension between you and White people.


For example: In-store security people barely notice you. You're not uncomfortable or self-conscious of your ethnicity while in White public spaces, or when there are cops nearby. When you're a tourist in a heavily White area, you know from experience that all it takes is looking slightly lost, and people will immediately volunteer to give you directions. (Yes, even in "unfriendly" cities like Los Angeles, NYC and Newark; and regardless of your gender.)

You've never been questioned about your intentions when shopping or momentarily sitting/standing outside a business establishment. You don't wait longer than non-Blacks to be seated at restaurants. You aren't praised for being "articulate". You aren't expected to speak for all Black people in discussions. If you are a women: from experience, you know that when your car breaks down, a good samaritan of any "color" will likely show up very soon, if not right away, to help you.

When it's just you and a bunch of your White friends or acquaintances ...

You don't notice White strangers staring or giving dirty looks when it's just you among your White friends or acquaintances. (Geography needs to be kept in mind here. The more racially diverse the region, the less likely you are to get open reactions.)

Racial shape-shifting 


If you are racially ambiguous, certain groups may immediately treat you "as one of theirs", leading to warm, "familiar" social exchanges and easier business interactions.

Dating/marriage


You will attract people from diverse ethnic groups with relative ease (though racial barriers to marriage may or may not exist).


Of course the degree of ethnic diversity in your environment is a pretty big factor.

You have been openly hit on by hard-core racists (like neo-Nazis or other "White pride" enthusiasts), in front of their racist White friends. I'm not suggesting it's a privilege to be hit on by these knuckle heads. I'm saying their reaction to you is a strong indicator you're accessing White privilege in every day life, possibly without knowing it.


People don't seem to care who you date or marry.


If you've dated (or date) Whites and/or non-Blacks, no one bothered to point it out. No one acted like it was unusual. You didn't get incredulous or dirty looks from anyone. Once again, geography needs to be kept in mind. A more racially diverse region typically means less open reactions.

Business/employment


If your have lighter skin than Blacks, as most BRs do, you will have an easier time finding employment than Blacks.  

There are some recent studies that appear to reveal a "colorism" bias when it comes to who gets hired. But the mistake many scholars make when studying colorism, is not treating the subject of colorism as another form of racism (multi-racial favoritism): There's a high correlation between lighter skin and European or partial-European ancestry, regardless of the “non-White” group/s being studied.

Dr. Matthew S. Harrison's study findings about colorism in the work place (The Hidden Prejudice in Selection: A Research Investigation on Skin Color Bias (Harrison & Thomas, 2008), are described by * Philip Lee Williams (Franklin College of Arts and Sciences), whose report includes statements she said Dr. Harrison presented at the 66th annual meeting of the Academy of Management in Atlanta, Georgia:

"'The findings in this study are, tragically, not too surprising,' said Harrison. 'We found that a light-skinned black male [likely a biracial man] can have only a bachelor’s degree and typical work experience and still be preferred over a dark-skinned black male with an MBA and past managerial positions, simply because expectations of the light-skinned black male are much higher, and he doesn’t appear as ‘menacing’ as the darker-skinned male applicant.' ... '

“Given the increasing number of biracial and multiracial Americans [highlighted for emphasis], more research similar to this study should be performed so that Americans can become more aware of the prevalence of color bias in our society ... ' ” 

There's a 2006 study by Dr. Joni Hersch, called “Skin Color Discrimination and Immigrant Pay”. 

Dr. Hersch reports: "I present strong evidence of a wage penalty to darker skin color among new legal immigrants to the United States. Immigrants with the lightest skin color earn on average 17 percent higher wages than comparable immigrants with the darkest skin color. ”

According to a New York Times writer (“Study of Immigrants Links Lighter Skin and Higher Income” (2007),  Dr. Hersch said of her study results, “On average, being one shade lighter has about the same effect as having an additional year of education.” 

You don't worry about your "race" keeping you from getting any type of employment. 


You don't find yourself wondering if someone didn't call back because of your "race". Generally you get reasonably prompt call backs. Potential employers seem surprised or uncomfortable upon first meeting. ( Naturally the assumption here is you have basic people skills and aren't a lousy interviewee who's inappropriately dressed or has hygiene issues.) 


If you've been 30 min.s late (or later) to an initial interview at a major corporation, you were still greeted pleasantly. They agreed to interview you anyway and may have still offered you the job.

Legal matters


You assume your (partial) Blackness won't count against you in legal matters.


You just drive, you don't "drive while Black" ... 

 ... unless you're in Arizona, where you might get pulled over for "driving while Mexican" (that's obviously more likely if you're ambi-BR).


You might receive shorter prison sentences and serve less time.


To balance out Dr. Harrison's study findings about colorism with men in the work place,  I turn to one of Dr. Lance Hannon's studies about colorism and women: "The impact of light skin on prison time for black female offenders" (Hannon & DeFina, 2011).

Here's a statement from the “summary” section of the study, as viewed at the site linked above: 

"Controlling for several factors, the results indicated that black women deemed to have a lighter skin tone received more lenient prison sentences and served less time behind bars.”

* Online sources I located mirrored claims put forth in The Raw Story, that “light-skinned Black” women appear to get sentenced to about 12% less time behind bars than their darker-skinned counterparts, and appear to serve 11% less time." 


It will be easier for you to buy a house in most neighborhoods & easier to get a rental acceptance from landlords. 


You're fairly confident you could buy a house in most suburban, White neighborhoods, and be warmly received by all or most of your White neighbors ... or you're pretty confident they'd be very warm and responsive if you approached them first. Based on most Whites' reactions to you in general, you guess they'd likely introduce you to their family, maybe invite you in for tea.


You've rarely had to wait to procure a reasonably priced lease from a White landlord, for a very good looking property, in a middle to upper-class neighborhood.


Miscellaneous


You've never thought much about your skin tone. 

You don't secretly or openly compare your skin tone with Nicki Minaj, Solange Knowles, Sanaa Nathan or anyone else. Being unable to relate with that tendency in some people to compare their skin tone to others' is a sign of privilege, often BR privilege ... because while not all BRs have light skin, many of us do, and quite a few of us don't stop to acknowledge the resulting social and political advantages light skin yields.

Beauty products and Band-aids match your skin. 


After all these years, it's still hard for Blacks and those with dark skin, to walk into most local drug stores and purchase Band-aids that match dark skin. I imagine the same is true for a lot of beauty products too. Many BRs aren't inconvenienced in this way.  


You're not looked to as the spokesperson for your race in race discussions.


When you're in the company of acquaintances and the topic of race comes up, you don't get treated like you're expected to speak for all Black people.  People don't look at you when they talk about Black people, expecting you to speak up on behalf of all Blacks everywhere. People don't shuck and jive, trying to "speak Black" in your presence.

Do biracials who have more of a Black phenotype experience any racial privilege?



Regardless of how you look as a BR ...

 ... Unlike someone Black, you will always carry an awareness that you are, in fact, about half-White. This is true even if you choose to ID as Black only. In addition, most BRs - whose mothers tend to be White - have contact with their White parent, plus some or all White relatives and often a White community. What affect does that have on someone BR?:

That intimate access to Whites is a privilege in a White-dominated society, because that access primes BRs for easier, more confident race relations with Whites (think Barack Obama). White acculturation yields relative comfortability with Whites that can impact success in the areas of business and academia, even though some level of racial prejudice is likely endured along the way. 

But again, regardless of how much or little privilege is experienced, the important thing to remember, is that privilege by definition means someone else is at a disadvantage. Recognizing and admitting to relative privilege is a vital step for BRs whose goal it is to cause less pain and help heal race relations with Blacks. 



* Though Dr. Williams' claim of color bias per his study are confirmed, Philip Lee Williams' description of Dr. Harrison's study findings need verification from this author, who hasn't yet gained accessed his full study. 


* Since I can't access Dr. Hannon's full study online without paying, I can't confirm unverified, quantified results claimed by other sites (like raw.com).