Shut Up and Dribble

 Covert Racism within Institutional settings

Rodney Coates

Often when we think about racism and racial discrimination, we tend to view it in terms of that which is openly seen and experienced. Unfortunately, as the laws and attitudes have changed, more discrimination against persons of color is less blatant, concealed, and less visible. These more subtle forms of racism are termed "covert" and often go under the radar or are dismissed as less racist. This essay will explore these covert forms of racism as it applies to employment, housing, education, and the law within the U.S. context. In addition, we shall explore how these covert forms of racism systemically interact with intersectional identities to produce almost invisible webs that trap and impede the progress of various groups. 

 

Covert VS. Overt  

 

Since Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, apparent discrimination in various settings includes employment, housing, voting, public accommodations, and education. In addition, the law prohibits discrimination because of race, color, sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or pregnancy status. Sexual harassment and harassment based on other protected characteristics are also prohibited under this law.   The law also prohibits discrimination in granting benefits, promotions, or punishments. 

Contrary to the law, and while various corporations, institutions, and establishments may comply with the "letter of the law," they often skirt the "spirit" of the law in rather subtle and concealed ways, and discrimination has continued to flourish. When operant within institutional settings, we labeled covert racism in these quiet and hidden ways. While such covert mechanisms are often difficult to identify or even trace, they still represent problems that must be eradicated if we are to maximize opportunities within and across our various institutions. We eliminate these mechanisms by identifying how they operate and remain so intractable. Next, we shall look within specific institutions to better clarify the mechanisms. In so doing, It is understood that these mechanisms are as dynamic as the institutions they operate and are in constant flux as systems, laws, and identities change. Let us begin. 

 

The Great Melting Pot Myth

All nations have various myths that present a narrative that serves to articulate, symbolize, and affirm their values, histories, and character. In many ways, they form a kind of civil religion that is deemed by many to be inviolate, indisputable, and inherently trustworthy. Unfortunately, and rarely is the case, these myths rarely are accurate and are often used to obscure the realities of discrimination, inequality, and injustice. One such myth within the United States is the "Great Melting Pot Myth," which presumes that the United States embraces, encourages, and welcomes people from all over the world. Between 1820 and 2020, over 80 million people ventured to our shores and became permanent residents, which suggests this myth's efficacy. These people from different nations, cultures, religions, and traditions now share a common destiny, a typical American dream, and are all blended together. One can but wonder if the dream is a nightmare as we look at the United States of erica, in 2022, with the sharp rise in hate crimes, gun violence, mass shootings, racial targeting of racialized groups by police, the cradle to prison pipeline, and the increasing number of women of color or males left out of the American dream. These realities only make sense if we look at the covert mechanisms which support them and make the outcomes so manifest.   But what is this Mechanism?

 

Covert Mechanism within select institutions

One of the first things we discover as we investigate the Mechanism of covert racism is that we do not have one melting pot but several. We have the White, Black, Brown, Yellow, and Red melting pot. Each pot has distinct ingredients such as ethnicity, sex, gender, sexuality, age, class, and handicap. The reality is further conflated when we understand that in each pot, there are multiple layers, types of combinations, and rules of inclusion and exclusion. This means that one size or our analogy pot does not fit all. Or, more aptly -the experiences of select intersectional identities within each pot are distinctly different. Hence, the experiences, opportunities, and restraints on this generation's Black, trans, female-identifying Ghanaians differ significantly from those of a generation ago. They have different forces to contend with, different landscapes to traverse, and other constraints to tackle. For this reason, our efforts to combat racial discrimination often have been minimal at best. Therefore, our actions, policies, and strategies must be as diverse as the identities that we are dealing with. Perhaps some examples within selected institutions may be illustrative.

Education

Over the past few decades, there has been an increasing awareness of the underachievement of males throughout academia. 

 Why the gap between men and women finishing college is growing | Pew Research Center

This pattern is most pronounced within college completion, as noted above. For most before 1982, males were the dominant force within colleges. But after that point, continued to this day, there has been a steady reversal. Now and in the future, women are expected to outperform their male counterparts. The gender gap in education is most pronounced among males of color and from low-income backgrounds. What does research tell us regarding these outcomes?

De jure segregation has been eliminated, but de facto segregated schools remain. According to a recent study, U.S. public schools remain racially and economically segregated. (Reardon, Weathers, Fahle, Jang, and Kalogrides 2022) Racial segregation concentrates racially marginalized students into high-poverty schools. These schools also have significantly lower achievement. And although whites only make up 50% of the public-school enrollment, they make up 60 percent of those in gifted programs. (Dreilinger 2020) Across the nation, more than 13 percent of all Asian and 8 percent of White students are in gifted programs. This compares to just 4 percent of Black and 5 percent of Hispanic students in gifted programs. (NCES 2017) This data reflects that their predominantly white teachers often overlook black students. For example, here in Ohio, 20 percent of high achieving third graders were likelier to be ignored if they were either Black or low-income students. And as these high achieving students grow older, they are increasingly less likely to go to college. (Imberman, Scott. 2021) Added to this, Black, Hispanic, and Native American students, particularly males, are substantially more likely to be sent to the office and suspended or expelled than their White or Asian American counterparts. Black students lost, on average, 103 days per 100 students enrolled and 82 more days than the 21 days of their White peers because of out-of-school suspensions. This was most extreme among Black boys, who lost 132 days per 100 student days, while Black girls lost 77 days per 100 students.   The racial disparities were even more significant when considering state-level data and specific groups. For example, Black students in Missouri lost 162 more days of instruction than their white peers. While Hispanics in New Hampshire lost 75 more than white students. And in North Carolina, native Americans lost 102 days compared to white students. (Camera 2019)

 

 

Citations

Camara, Lauren. 2019. Race and School Discipline. U.S. News. Accessed September 23, 2022, at URL: Civil Rights Commission Tackles Discipline of Black Students with Disabilities (usnews.com).

Dreilinger, Danielle. 2020. America's gifted education programs have a race problem. Can it be fixed"? NBC News. Accessed September 23, 2022, at URL: America's gifted education programs have a race problem. Can it be fixed? (nbcnews.com).  

 

Imberman, Scott. 2021. "Ohio's Lost Einstein's: The Inequitable outcomes of early high achievers. Fordham Institute. Accessed September 23, 2022, at URL: Ohio's Lost Einsteins: The inequitable outcomes of early high achievers | The Thomas B. Fordham Institute

NCES, 2017. Digest of Education Statistics. National Center for Education Statistics. Accessed on September 23, 2022, at URL: Percentage of public school students enrolled in gifted and talented programs, by sex, race/ethnicity, and state: Selected years, 2004 through 2013-14

Parker, Kim. (2021). What's behind the growing gap between men and women in college completion." Pew Research Center. Accessed September 23, 2022, at URL: Why the gap between men and women finishing college is growing | Pew Research Center.  

Reardon, S.F., Weathers, E.S., Fahle, E.M., Jang, H., & Kalogrides, D. (2022). Is Separate Still Unequal? New Evidence on School Segregation and Racial Academic Achievement Gaps.