Is it wrong to have an all-Black student dormitory at university? What about an all-white dormitory?

I think it is wrong to have dormitories that split people into any ethnic, racial, or sexual groups. This is just as bad as the problems southern America faced in the 1960s: Black students not being able to attend the same schools as Whites, use the same drinking fountains, or sit in the same area on the bus. It prevents Caucasian and Black people from having the same privileges or sharing the same space, and there is no reason for it.

In cases of adoption, agencies should try to match the ethnicity/race of children and parents, instead of doing adoptions in a racially blind manner.

I answered "not sure" to this statement, and this is not because I think that, for example, a person who is Chinese should withhold the Chinese traditions and should not accept, say, France as his/her culture. I find this question a bit difficult, because I have a lot of family friends who have adopted. One couple I know - the wife is Latina and the husband is Caucasian, so they only looked at Latino-Caucasian mixed babies. They wanted their children to look like they are actually theirs. Another close family friend adopted two gypsy children from Hungry. They have much darker skin than their parents, but I don't think that should matter. Another example is Ms. Leonard's family. She has one son by birth and an adopted daughter. I babysat Meiyi and Reid the other day, and Meiyi was talking about how people at school sometimes don't understand that even though her parents are white, they can be her feel parents, that she has other biological parents, but that doesn't make Mr. and Mrs. Leonard any less real.
I think it is reasonable to want your son or daughter to look like they belong to you. If I were to adopt, I would do it in a racially blind way or else I would adopt someone who isn't my race. I think a child in China probably needs a parents more than a white baby that every white person who is adopting might want. I think adopting someone is a good thing regardless of race, and I don't necessarily think it's wrong to only adopt someone of your race or ethnicity. However, I think it's a bit better to adopt someone of another race.
I do not think it's right for adoption agencies to only give children to people of the same race or ethnicity of the baby. I was not aware that this was even done until Mr. Richards said so in class. I think it should be the parents choice of what race they want to adopt.

Extra Credit: Have a parent take the Race IAT

I had my dad take the Race IAT tonight. His results showed "a strong automatic preference for European American compared to African American."  He seemed very skeptical that this test was a valid representation of anything within his subconscious. He argued that the order that they were grouped in is what confused him and caused him to get the result he did. He said that African American and bad were grouped together initially, so he was inclined to group them for the rest of the test.

He also said he saw no reason for why him or any other non-racist white person would prefer European Americans to African Americans. I told him what Mike had said in class, that black people are more subconsciously inclined to prefer white people.

He took the test a second time - his own choice. This time, African American was grouped with good for the first round. His results showed "a moderate automatic preference for European American compared to African American." 

Frederick Douglass Article Questions

1. Frederick Douglass became friends with boys in the neighborhood in order to learn to read. He also traded bread with poor children in exchange for them teaching him to read. In odd times throughout the week, when he was sent on errands, or his master or mistress left the house, he found times to read. He learned to write by watcher workers by the docks carve letters into timber. From that point, he learned more letters by challenging neighborhood kids to see who could write more, knowing that the boys would know more than him, so he could learn it. He then copied down words from his master’s son’s spelling book when his mistress would leave the house.

2. After his mistress taught him the alphabet, he wanted to learn more, so he learned to read. This granted him immeasurable amounts of knowledge. He later learned to write, because he thought it would lead to his eventual escape from slavery. I think he also wanted to learn to read and write, because it would put him at the same level as the white people who had so much power over him.

3. Mr. Auld did not want Frederick Douglass to be literate, because he knew it would lead him to discover how terrible slavery is and what freedom might look like, as he learned from the book The Columbian Orator. He knew that if Douglass could read and write, he would think he did not deserve his current treatment and escape. His master also thought he might infect the minds of other slaves, tell them about the opportunity of freedom, and all his master’s slaves would leave him.

4. Frederick Douglass risked being abused or killed by his master or mistress by learning how to read and write.

How should we decide what is offensive? (mascots)

In order to decide what is offensive, certain guidelines must be determined. I think something is offensive if it plays to a certain stereotype of that group, if it undermines the group, or if it accentuates stereotypical physical characteristics, among other things. These guidelines can only be assessed by the group that is in question. A council of elected officials of that group should meet to discuss each particular mascot and if they feel offended by it. Any mascot that 25% of the council or more does not approve of, should be classified as offensive and changed.

Extra Credit: Take another IAT test or two from a different category

The first additional IAT test I took was the Sexuality IAT. Gay rights have always been important to me. Perhaps I subconsciously thought I would get a result closer to what I hoped would reflect my unconscious inclinations, since my cousin is gay and have close family friends who are gay. Homosexuality is something I have been exposed to at a young age to a larger degree, I would think, than African Americans. However, after taking the test, I got the result "Slight automatic preference for straight people compared to gay people." Although I did not get the outcome I might have hoped for, I was pleased to see that there is a higher percentage of people who are neutral than those who have a slight preference for straight people. But it is upsetting that over 50% of people have strong or modern preferences for heterosexual people.

The second additional IAT test I took was the Age (Young-Old) IAT. After visiting my great grandmother this summer, I realized how little I am exposed to people outside my age range. Even on an average day, I am surrounded by primarily 14 - 18 year olds. I have always enjoyed talking to people roughly my parents age, or a bit older or younger, but I wouldn't say I spend much time with people, say, my grandparents' age on a regular basis. Therefore, I was not shocked that I got "moderate automatic preference for young compared to old" as my result. I was also not surprised by the large percentile who preferred the young. If you just look at the TV show Doctor Who as an example. The show started about fifty years ago. But now the Doctors just keep getting younger and younger, with the current Doctor in his early twenties, even though many of the die hard Who fans are older people who have been watching the show their whole lives. This clearly shows a preference of all ages to youth.

I also took the Weight (Fat-Thin) IAT, and was pleased that this was the first test I got a "neutral" response on the first try.

Break Down the Stereotype "All Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers."

1. All Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers.
2. The source of the stereotype can be the news, particularly conservative leaning stations. The big elephant in the room is prior terrorist attacks - especially September 11th. The truth is that there are some Muslims who have participated or initiated terrorist attacks.
3. If someone were to gather data that might have the number of estimated terrorists in the world, and other data that has the total number of Muslims in the world, this would disprove that all Muslims are terrorists.
4. I know a few Muslims personally who either live in America or are American. I also have one Muslim friend from Hong Kong who plans to go to an American university. None of them plan to blow up anything. They are all normal, nice people, who have a lot of the same views I do.
5. There are very few Muslims who are terrorists.