I am Hispanic girl who grew up in mostly white neighborhoods and attended classes with mostly white students. When I came to college I was again surrounded by white people and it was easy enough for me to make convenient friends with people on my freshman dorm floor – all white girls.

Anywhere I go with a majority of white people (party, bar, movie, dinner), the thought “wow I’m the only brown person here” crosses my mind about 50% of the time. I think this is because I don’t know everyone in the same way that I knew everyone in high school. When the party is going well and everyone is having a good time – my mind doesn’t jump to analyzing how many minorities are in the room.

However, there are times when something I know about the party or the people going will make me a lot more susceptible to thinking about race and therefore distancing myself from the white people at the party. These situations include: when I know there are rude/borderline racist white guys (that I’ve met) going OR when there are annoying white girls (that I’ve met) going, when more than 2 people are wearing camouflage apparel, when it’s a themed party (CEOs and corporate hoes, tennis/golf themed, 90s/country/hipster themed.. I just feel like that is all white oriented fun, there’s just something about those themes..), and when I went to frat parties. When I walk into venues like those and I’m the only minority… I feel like the white crowd mostly thinks “Oh! We didn’t expect you, but yeah I guess you’re welcome.” At the themed parties, I’ve also encountered people who didn’t expect me to know much about 90s pop music, what hipsters like, etc. One girl I met asked me how I knew the lyrics to 1000 Miles by Vanessa Carlton … and I just said, “ I was born in the US ... I listen to the radio? What do you mean?” When I enter parties and bars like that I instantly know that there is no way I’ll really make a friend or find someone who is interested in me or who would flirt with me. What’s worse is that I have no one to share my discomfort with if I’m the only minority there. Unless I have a close white friend (who I’ve discussed race issues with), I usually try to leave the place… within 30 minutes.

However, when I go to a bar/party with a more mixed crowd, or a majority brown/black people, I feel relieved. When I walk in there is no question about whether or not I belong there. I feel like people are just nicer in general and introduce themselves. Also there is just a party of me that feels like I have more of a chance meeting and flirting with a guy than I do at all-white parties. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but it’s the way I feel when surrounded by different groups of people.

I obviously can’t speak on behalf of all girls, but here is what is going through my mind after attending the lecture and reflecting on my experiences and those of my friends. I agree with Sam and Lori that women may not always prioritize having an orgasm because women just “follow along” with the male centered version of sex. I am generally the same way and never really thought twice about it. If I have at least some fun during sex… then I feel like it was worth it. And “fun” could be fun that its with a new person, with a really attractive guy, or exciting in some other way. When its fun, I feel like it kind of retrospectively ruins the whole experience if I tell “the truth” and tell the guy that I didn’t reach orgasm. Once those words come out of my mouth I feel like the guy just gets really preoccupied and kind of worried that I didn’t have fun. Then I feel like I’m explaining that I can still have fun while not reaching orgasm, but at the end of the day I feel like the guys I’ve been with just kind of take it personally. I’ve said it before and it just turns into a really awkward conversation and I can see that the guy just isn’t relaxed and isn’t content anymore. So in that situation, I don’t tell the truth because it ruins overshadows all the fun we did have.

But, if the sex was bad and not fun and just boring, I still usually don’t tell because I’m afraid I’ll hurt his feelings. So, if I care about him, I’ll just try to talk about how it can be “even” better next time... or just instruct him more next time. BUT, if I don’t care about the guys feelings, like if he was just using me, or being an asshole, egotistical, or some other way obnoxious, then I tell him the truth. I feel like that kind of guy needs to come back down to Earth and realize that he is not God’s gift to women.

My friends and I have also talked about whether or not to prioritize or tell the guy the truth. One of my friends is in a friends-with-benefits situation right now. She says that the guy is mostly not always generous in the time spent pleasing her, but she is usually just glad she is having sex somewhat regularly. The other night she actually texted me that her sex was really unsatisfying (I guess it was significantly more focused on his pleasure) but still didn’t tell him. She mentioned it was kind of a hassle and waste of her time to bring it up and talk with him about it, as if, nothing was going to change or it could end their friends-with-benefits agreement because of the awkwardness it would bring to light.

I guess the reasons that I can come up with are: I don’t want to want to address it and explain that the sex was still fun but that orgasm fun, don’t want to hurt his feelings, and don’t want to waste anyone’s time. Thos explanations are pretty aligned with that male-centered idea of sex and maybe I’ll reconsider my action and tell the truth more often… but probably mention it to people I only have sex in long term and loving relationships.

This is an interesting question. I agree with the comments above (men may need alcohol to muster up the courage to approach a woman and risk being rejected), but I think there are other factors that come into play.

I think here at Penn State it is hard to really interact with members of other racial/ethnic categories because there are just so few of them. A white man can run into tens of white women before crossing paths with a minority woman. My black female professor actually counted the number of white people before she saw a black person when she first moved to Penn State (it was 60 white people to 1 black man). I also think that sober situation (in class, at a club meeting, in residence halls) aren’t really conducive to flirting with people in general. Furthermore, just from personal experience, many of the residence hall or club “friend” groups are either mostly white or mostly minority, there is just usually segregation happening and it can be hard for some to cross those boundaries.

As a minority woman, I have experienced this “white-drunk-guy”-approach, and its been positive and negative. I think that some guys feel like they need some liquid courage to talk to a girl, and that some white guys may feel they need it to talk to minority women particularly. However, I think alcohol also reveals some inappropriate stereotypes and assumptions that white men may think and usually cover up to be “politically correct”. I don’t know what all men are thinking, but some guys make it ridiculously obvious when they’re really drunk and struggling to lead themselves to their bed, let alone another woman. I’ve heard lots of overly sexual and inappropriate things said about me and my minority friends - assuming things about how we “must” act as sexual partners, girlfriends, side girls, and wives. I’ve heard much more (what I think are offensive) things from white men who are drunk than from white men sober – obviously. I’m also wondering if these same guys (before they get black-out-drunk) are the same guys who are hitting on minority girls only when they’re drunk.

Sadly, my minority friends and I often take this into account when white guys hit on us (“what is he really looking for?”, “Is he only interested in me because I’m Hispanic?”) and for some of us its really rare that we get hit on by white guys, which makes me think they must not be really attracted to us as a whole group. At the end of the day I think this is really a question that can only be examined at an individuals level. All white guys are different in the stereotypes they believe in or in their previous experience dating etc. We can’t really generalize the whole group even though it seems like group behavior.

I think this student brought up a great question. Although I don’t think the selection of names in job position callbacks is nationalism (I think its racism), but I think it’s an unfairness that has its roots in fear of the unfamiliar – which is nationalism as portrayed by American media. I don’t think the racism surrounding the call back rate of Black, Hispanic, or other minority groups stems from the belief that these individuals won’t do a good job or won’t contribute to the work atmosphere, but I think that fear of not knowing how to act around minorities or foreigners may play a role.

This whole class is based on the similarities and differences between different racial, ethnic, religious, or political groups. This class aims to build the sense that we aren’t all that different. At some point I wonder if we’ve all had to question how to act around people who are different from us, and hopefully through this class, we can now feel more at ease knowing the similarities that connect us together. But think, if we hadn’t been in this class, or had never met people of other racial, ethnic, religious, or political affiliation. This could be the perspective of many of the people in charge of hiring employees. Fear of the unknown is almost expected if people aren’t exposed to a variety of people.

Also, in terms of nationalism, after September 11th, America united as one and there were many displays of nationalism (wearing flag pins etc), but eventually this nationalism gave birth to discrimination against Muslims and Middle-Eastern looking people. The media sensationalized the War on Terrorism and the search for Osama Bin Laden. Over time, when all transportation agencies heightened security, we only saw all of the Middle-Eastern extremists who were caught by security. Eventually, years after September 11th, documentaries started to reveal how 9/11 was impacting citizens and foreigners that have darker hair and skin tones. Unfortunately, America still has a discrimination problem concerning Iraqis, Iranians, Pakistanis, etc.

Although some employers maybe outwardly racist and only call people with White sounding names because of a belief that he/she will work hard, I don’t think all employers think about that. I think fear of not knowing how to act around or get along with people who are different (surface skin color, mannerisms etc), and the fear of the unfamiliar is common. Overall, people make decisions that benefit them and secure their safety. By hiring someone, an employer knows that he/she has to be in close and daily contact with the new employee. People who aren’t exposed to other race or cultures and who only get their information from media portrayals of these groups can be an explanation of this phenomenon.

I have heard a lot of arguments based on the assumption that affirmative action allows or even pressures employers to hire unqualified or less qualified applicants just because of their underrepresented status. I’m not sure if all employers follow Penn State’s definition of affirmative action (Sam stated Penn State just encourages employers to look at applications again to make sure that there isn’t a qualified candidate who was not chosen for the position because of their minority status). If employers follow this even handed approach, then there should be doubts about the new hire’s qualifications.

However, everyone arguing against affirmative action seems to think that affirmative action leads to employers hiring less qualified applicants. Let’s use scholarship programs as an example. There are scholarship programs made only for minorities, which, since people can’t change their minority status, are affirmative action programs (known as educational equity programs). These programs were made to allow minorities (which tend to be lower-income individuals) access to higher education, given that they apply and get into the university. These programs are evaluated for their effectiveness by looking at how many students they offer funding to, how well the students do academically, whether they graduate, and what the students do after their college experience, and maybe even whether the students earn enough money to donate some back to the university and the scholarship program. It is in the program’s best interest to only offer scholarships to students who they believe will succeed in school. Furthermore, students accepted into programs like this often lose their funding if they fall below a certain GPA (usually 3.2) or if they join fraternities and sororities. I think the existence of programs like this can give some people the peace of mind that only qualified students are receiving benefits. I think that students who maintain high GPAs and manage to keep their scholarship are deserving and well qualified.

Among education equity programs, there is some debate about how affirmative action programs that do accept unqualified applicants are actually perpetuating stereotypes and thus racism. For instance, Ivy League schools are often criticized for not accepting many minority and first generation college students. Whenever they do accept these underrepresented groups it makes headlines (remember the homeless girl who got into a Harvard? Google it.). Although this is just a personal observation (and the beliefs of my highly skeptical Latino parents), when white legacy kids get into Harvard and get Cs or drop out… no one seems to care. Those kids’ families paid tuition and donated to the university. Overall, the university actually earned money. However, if Ivy Leagues were to accept less qualified minority applicants (who may even qualify for free tuition if their parents’ make less than 60K annually), what would happen? The poor minority kid would feel awesome going to an Ivy League… but he/she would probably not succeed at such a competitive (and crazy, preppy, annoying) university. He/she would drop out and his/her classmates would see how “unqualified” minorities are and the university would lose money on their investment in that student. I hope these examples explain the situation better!

I believe that this is a hard issue to discuss because I’m not really one hundred percent sure of my reaction to Sam’s statement. For the purposes this discussion, I will write about how I agree with Sam, that women are not free because of the public’s general reaction when women discuss their menstrual cycle. In this argument I come from the perspective that menstruation is a natural biological process. One of the areas I study as a Biobehavioral Health major is sexual health. Sexual health encompasses verifying that an individual has a normal reproductive system, examining their sexual behaviors, and determining what health issues they may be at risk for. In a lot of my classes my professors try to talk candidly about the stages of sexual maturity, hormonal events, and risky sexual behavior for both men and women. For the most part, we approach these topics as a science, but some professors ask for students to share testimonials or case studies that can be found in the media or personal stories. When women in my classes have raised their hand to share a story about their sexual health, the men, and many times, other women in my classes cringe or otherwise show their discomfort and sometimes judgment of women.

I believe that women are told they are free because, as some have argued here, they are given to freedom to respond or not. It is a woman’s choice to share that information or not. It’s their choice to physically open their mouth and speak. However, this is not true freedom. When women mention their menstrual cycles, or many aspects of their sexual lives, they are putting themselves at risk for social ridicule and judgment. Discussing how this aspect of our lives is “private” seems like an excuse for women not to put themselves in a situation in which they are vulnerable to others’ differential treatment.

There are many assumptions made about women who are menstruating and those who are not (in reference to women who are on birth control and choose skip the placebo pills, and “skip” their periods). For instance: Women who are on their period are overly emotional, are unclean, are irritable, and are overall gross; Women who are skipping their periods using birth control are too sexual promiscuous, or value their “image” over biological nature. For these reasons, many women pressure themselves and others to keep quiet about their menstrual status, and therefore aren’t free.

The pattern of menstrual cycles is an important indicator of a woman’s nutritional and hormonal health and fertility. If the student’s in my major can’t even contribute valuable medical information to a science class, there is no way that they are free when talking with the general public. In a science class issues have the potential to be discussed without judgment, on facts, but menstruation is not treated in the same manner.

I think it is very important to monitor differences in social condition between different groups of people. In class, Sam pointed out the drastic differences in income and poverty rates for White, Black, Asian, and Hispanic individuals. In my research, I examine the determinants of health disparities that affect low-income, rural, and minority groups. Every research-based model describing positive and negative health outcomes encompass all three causalities (biological, freewill, and determinism). I believe (and the research in health has shown) that an individual’s economic, educational, career, or health status is affected by biological causes, individual choices, and institutionalized racism (determinism). I also believe that since these are interrelated causalities, any significant differences (negative or positive) seen in social condition or life circumstance between groups are unjust because they are not the sole responsibility of the individual.

Here is an example that I hope illustrate my point. This is widely accepted hypothesis that involved all three causalities play a role on a population level. Obesity is the most prevalent among Native Americans, compared to other groups living in the United States. Research has shown that Native American’s ancestral past was plagued by uncertain food conditions in which famine was common. The present day Native Americans are descended from ancestors who had the type of metabolism (biology) necessary to live, have sex, and pass on their genes. This hypothesis is known as the thrifty gene hypothesis and has been associated with rising rates of diabetes. This metabolism essentially allows Native Americans to store food calories as fat much more effectively than other racial/ethnic groups. This talent is the body’s preparation for possible famine. However, through several treaties discussing Native Americans’ land, the U.S. began to take control over the land and livestock that previously sustained this group. After taking away Native Americans’ ability to feed themselves, the U.S. decided to provide them subsidized and prepackaged food so that they wouldn’t starve. Unfortunately, these foods were drastically different from the fibrous fruits, grains, and vegetables they used to eat. The meats were also processed such that they contained more fat than is natural. With only these foods to choose from (a form of determinism, and what I would call institutionalized racism because this group wasn't given the means to choose other, better food), the Native Americans ate to ward off starvation. During this time free will also allowed them to choose among the foods available. Of course some individuals chose to eat foods that were healthier and others chose foods that were less healthy. Unfortunately, their "thrifty" genes played a role in rising rates of obesity and diabetes in this population. So in this way, biology, free will, and determinism all played a role in this health disparity and I think that something should be done to reverse this process.

Hello everyone! I’m the girl asking the question, and I just wanted to clarify what I’m asking and why I ask it. My genetic test found that I am 41% East Asian & Native American, 29% European, 4.4% Sub-Saharan African, 0.5% Middle Eastern & North African, and <0.1% South Asian. 24.4% of me is “Unassigned”. Before knowing this, I just checked off the racial category of Hispanic, but lately the Census and other surveys now separate race and ethnicity in their questions. So.... where do I stand? Last time on the Census, I wasn’t satisfied checking off any race so I checked off “Other” and wrote in “Hispanic.” Since I now know this is inaccurate, what am I supposed to do? I’m curious to hear from people with lots of different perspectives.

I usually feel uncomfortable checking off the “Native American” box just because a tribal affiliation is usually expected and sometimes required. Furthermore, I assume that the question really asks about Native North American tribes - which I do not belong to. I also am not formally involved in any South American tribes. I am also hesitant to mark this on forms just because it may make me eligible for special programs or scholarships for Native American students, which really aim to help a group of people who aren’t all that similar to me. A more controversial question is "How Native American must someone be to be able to mark Native American?"

Also, I’m not a majority of any one race and 24.4% is “Unassigned”. Am I really in that “Other” category? What are the implications of marking the “other” category? Does it accurately represent me when I am interested in opportunities for underrepresented students? I had the chance to talk to a few Puerto Rican women I knew and when asked about their race, they told me that they check off “Other” and write in “Puerto Rican.” I was born in America but my parent are immigrants from Peru. Does this mean I can check off “other” and write in “Peruvian”? But since Sam said race was about physical categories, and since lots of Peruvians look different… it doesn’t seem like the “right” answer either.

Another question I ask myself is, "How does me answering the race question impact Penn State or the US demographics?" And "What are the implications of these changing demographics?"

Since I grew up in a predominantly White neighborhood, and went to school where the only two racial groups were White and Black, I never really identified with either group and I didn’t have other Hispanic or Native American, or South American people to identify with either. Therefore, I don’t really “feel” like anything, I just feel like an extra.

I think everyone needs to consider perspective when discussion money. In college, among my friends, I hear a lot of comments like “I’m broke” and “we’re all poor.” Although I’m never certain about how much money my friends actually have in their bank account, and I almost never share how much I have, I tend to believe that, yes, we’re poor. I’m a full time student, working part time, my tuition is paid by a scholarship, and my parents only give me money in the form of gift cards for my birthday. I am so lucky that I am not in massive debt, but day-to-day I feel poor because I don’t have a smartphone, I’m not going on a beach-y international Spring Break, and I really shouldn’t be digging into my savings to eat lunch – but that’s where the point of perspective comes into play. “I shouldn’t be digging into my savings”… I obviously have clothes on my back, have an apartment to live in, and I get to eat food every day. By world-wide standards, I am nowhere close to poor. And the fact that I said “savings” is an indication that I money that I intend to use in the future.

I once told my mom I felt poor because I didn’t want to use my savings for food and rent. She, who grew up in a tiny desert town in Peru with one working parent and seven siblings, looked at me as if she couldn’t believe how ignorant I was. I really got sucked into the college-life bubble and, like a sponge, absorbed all the concerns of those around me. I guess the college bubble is an even more localized form of ethnocentrism. While inside this bubble, I compare myself to my friends, and my circumstances against theirs.

Only every two weeks or so do I glimpse outside that bubble. It’s just about every time I go to Walmart. Across the street, on Vairo Blvd, there is a residential trailer park. I never see anyone over there, but for the whole time that it takes to grocery shop I think about how petty my concerns are. Inevitably, I end up convincing myself that I can live of less (which it completely possible), but by mid-week I complain about “starving,” I open my wallet, see a two one dollar bills, call my friends up to go out for dinner and drinks, and regret spending my savings the next day. Much like the slavery discussion in class, I think I just need a reminder, I need to see a more representative sample of people whom I interact with for me to compare my means to. But, since asking the world to come to me (very ethnocentric thinking), I need to make sure I remind myself and that I make the effort to go out, meet, and remember other people who aren’t in the same financial situation as I am.

I though Sam was very clever when he asked the boy in class to react to a gay man giving him a compliment. Although the boy could only really vocalize that it felt “weird,” many of the people sitting around me started to discuss how they would feel in the same situation. Then someone posed a question along the lines of “would it feel the same way as if it were an ugly girl, or an unwanted approach?” I can’t speak on behalf of anyone else, but I think, if I were a guy I would feel the same “weirdness” about a gay man giving me a compliment and about a completely unwanted girl (someone much older, or someone who is somehow just not the right type).
However, the question of “what is the difference between a guy giving a compliment, and a girl giving a compliment,” I think is a different story. Again, I only speak for myself, and these are just what my gut feelings are about people hitting on me. I feel like people can offer compliments in two ways. One way is with the intention to make someone feel more confident/better/ or “make their day.” The other way is with the intention to, in the near future, jump into a sexual relationship. I mean maybe I’m very guarded about how I receive compliments, but I usually react negatively to the latter compliments if they come from anyone too soon after meeting them.
So I believe that at least some people may think the way I do, and thus, gauge the intonation of the complimenter’s voice and facial expression to determine his/her intentions. The times I’ve felt uncomfortable receiving compliments were when they were from men I didn’t know and men that were significantly older than me or were noticeably very poor or dirty. But, when my female friends, or other females I meet, pay me compliments I can usually read that they want to make me feel like I look good or that they’re joking around and pretending to be sexually interested. I have never been given a compliment by a woman that made me feel uncomfortable, but I don’t have a lot of friends or know many lesbian women.
I think that some guys may have these same types of interactions when they get ready to go to a bar or to a concert all together. Based on some feedback from my guy friends, I really think that they’ve only heard compliments from other men who were their close friends. For all these reasons, I can understand why the boy in class described the situation as “weird.” It may also be an issue of him not understanding the intentions of gay men when they complement him.