A week away from the controversy
May. 24th, 2011 09:32 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
novapsycheSo, with my altered habits vis-a-viz Internet news, I missed the brouhaha of this amazing gem:
Why Are Black Women Rated Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women, But Black Men Are Rated Better Looking Than Other Men? : Why black women, but not black men?
This article, such as it is, was originally published in the Scientific Fundamentalist by Satoshi Kanazawa. It was picked up & broadcast by Psychology Today. Apparently a firestorm of criticism occurred, because Psychology Today took the article down quite quickly.
I happened to mention this as an aside tonetmouse this weekend. Although I did not adequately describe in words how atrocious Mr. Kanazawa's non-sourced "scientific" article was, I did so in tone. I promised to follow up by sending the two articles once I got home.
Coincidentally,netmouse's reply came the same day that ColorofChange.org sent a missive about this very incident. Therein the authors say:
Yes. Unlike Mr. Kanazawa, ColorOfChange.org cites its sources.
netmouse concisely termed Mr. Kanazawa's work "bunk". Unfortunately, he keeps getting a platform.
ColorOfChange.org has a petition asking for a formal apology, if you're interested in signing. But to tell you the truth, not even a full retraction would undo the damage already done.
Why Are Black Women Rated Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women, But Black Men Are Rated Better Looking Than Other Men? : Why black women, but not black men?
This article, such as it is, was originally published in the Scientific Fundamentalist by Satoshi Kanazawa. It was picked up & broadcast by Psychology Today. Apparently a firestorm of criticism occurred, because Psychology Today took the article down quite quickly.
I happened to mention this as an aside to
netmouse this weekend. Although I did not adequately describe in words how atrocious Mr. Kanazawa's non-sourced "scientific" article was, I did so in tone. I promised to follow up by sending the two articles once I got home.Coincidentally,
netmouse's reply came the same day that ColorofChange.org sent a missive about this very incident. Therein the authors say:Last week [Psychology Today] published an article claiming it to be scientific fact that Black women are less beautiful than women of other races,2 penned by Satoshi Kanazawa, who is notorious for hiding behind pseudoscience to promote discredited racist and sexist ideas.3
By giving Kanazawa a platform and validating his ideas, Psychology Today dehumanized Black women and girls everywhere. After widespread public outcry, they removed the article from their website.4 (emphasis in the original)
Yes. Unlike Mr. Kanazawa, ColorOfChange.org cites its sources.
netmouse concisely termed Mr. Kanazawa's work "bunk". Unfortunately, he keeps getting a platform.ColorOfChange.org has a petition asking for a formal apology, if you're interested in signing. But to tell you the truth, not even a full retraction would undo the damage already done.