Color, Bodily Capital, and Ethnoracial Division in the U.S. and Brazil by Ellis P

Color, Bodily Capital, and Ethnoracial Division in the U.S. and Brazil By Ellis P. Monk Jr. A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Loïc Wacquant, Chair Professor Mike Hout Professor Evelyn Nakano Glenn Spring 2013 Color, Bodily Capital, and Ethnoracial Division in the U.S. and Brazil © 2013 by Ellis P. Monk Jr. Abstract Color, Bodily Capital, and Ethnoracial Division in the U.S. and Brazil by Ellis P. Monk Jr. Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology University of California, Berkeley Professor Loïc Wacquant, Chair This dissertation comprises the first two parts of the first comparative, mixed-methods study of the social and economic significance of skin tone and hair type as markers of ethnoracial division among black Americans in the U.S. and the Brazilian population as a whole. Using an extended concept of “bodily capital” to capture salient and consequential phenotypical properties, it combines a quantitative analysis of several nationally representative data sets in the U.S. and Brazil with 100 in-depth interviews (50 in each country) to show that: (1) skin tone is as powerful a basis of intraracial classification and stratification among African Americans as it is within the Brazilian population at-large and (2) skin tone and hair type are both powerful markers of social experience and widely perceived to determine differential treatment in intimate, commercial and public spheres alike. These findings are mined to contribute to current debates on the foundations and lived reality of ethnoracial inequality in the two Americas, colorism in global perspective, and theories of group formation. Part I sets out the problematic I address both theoretically and empirically. I explain: (1) conceptual issues in the study of ethnoracial classification and inequality in the U.S. and Brazil respectively, as well as in comparative perspective over the past hundred years or more (centrally the conflation of folk notions and analytic concepts, particularly, the unreflexive borrowing of U.S. folk notions to understand both the U.S. and Brazil), by way of an intellectual history which focuses primarily on key figures’ conceptions of “race” and “color” and understandings of ethnoracial inequality (using persons from the U.S. and Brazil) and (2) alternatives to these practices and the current “race relations” paradigm by way of an epistemological break with dominant scholarly practices rooted in the concept of bodily capital (e.g. phenotypic characteristics such as skin tone and hair, as forms of symbolic capital, cf. Bourdieu) and an analytic concept of racial domination (which includes a re-conceptualization/definition of “race” as a particular specie of social classification, cf. Bourdieu). Using quantitative analysis of multiple nationally representative surveys, Part II of the dissertation: (1) demonstrates that skin tone continues to be a major factor of stratification among black Americans in the early 21st century despite recent arguments to the contrary; specifically, I find that skin tone has significant main effects of black Americans educational attainment, household incomes, occupational status, spouse’s skin color, and spouse’s educational attainment (i.e. spouse status), (2) finds that skin tone is a significant predictor of the frequency of perceived discrimination among black Americans (which current research has often hypothesized, but had difficulty demonstrating empirically), (3) shows that skin tone (among black Americans) is a significant predictor of social distance among black Americans (i.e. how “close” they feel to blacks as a “group” and how much they agree with negative stereotypes of blacks as a “group”) and the probability that they are depressed or suffer from hypertension (even after controlling for their age and BMI, among other factors) – again, all of these findings are new to the literature, though previous research has hypothesized such relationships to exist, (4) reveals that self- 1 reported measures of skin tone (which previous research has explicitly referred to as “inferior” to interviewer-rated skin color measures) are actually stronger predictors of health outcomes than interviewer-rated measures of skin tone among black Americans and links this finding to the notion of “reflected appraisals,” and habitus, (5) shows that the “race-color” categories (i.e. census categories, which rely on self-classification) used in research on ethnoracial inequality in Brazil are empirically distinct from skin color, (6) reveals that skin color data, which researchers have lacked in Brazil despite making claims about “the significance of skin color in Brazil,” is often a stronger predictor of basic stratification outcomes among Brazilians than the standard “race-color,” census categories (which are not skin color or ancestral categories, but instead, are social categories which represent a mélange of phenotypic difference and socioeconomic status, whose usage is significantly affected by gender and region, among other factors), and (7) I find one exception to the strength of a skin color scale versus the “race-color” categories, which is household income, where I find that self-classified “race” is a stronger predictor. I view this as evidence of “whitening”/”darkening” where self-classifications of “race” always already take into account one’s socioeconomic position, in accordance with the long-standing literature on ethnoracial classification in Brazil (again, the empirical finding is novel to the current literature due to the ironic lack of skin color data in Brazil). I conclude by discussing recent debates on the future(s) of the U.S. and Brazilian “racial orders.” 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii Introduction: Beyond “Race Relations”: Towards a Comparative 1 Sociology of Racial Domination I Ships Passing in the Night: “Race” and “Color” in the Social 22 Science of the U.S. and Brazil II Skin Tone Stratification among Black Americans in the 21st 42 Century III The Cost of “Color” in the United States: Skin Color, Social 62 Distance, Discrimination, and Health among Black Americans IV Towards a Regional Model of “Race” in Brazil 97 V The Consequences of “Race” and “Color” in Brazil 121 VI Rethinking “Race” and “Color” in the U.S. and Brazil… Again. 143 Bibliography 158 i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My completion of this dissertation was made possible by the considerable help I have received for many, many years from an amazing assortment of incredibly selfless and talented individuals. While, I cannot hope that this brief statement is adequate to truly express my gratefulness to the people I mention, I do hope that with their continued support, that I will have many opportunities to show them my appreciation. Beginning with Ann Arbor, Michigan, I want to thank Terence McGinn whose unwavering encouragement was a key factor that initially gave me the motivation and confidence to pursue Sociology as my major in undergrad. I also want to thank Karyn Lacy for her incredibly inspirational course on race and ethnicity, but first and foremost, for her immense kindness. In addition, I thank Al Young Jr. for graciously allowing me to take an independent study course with him that helped shape and focus my intellectual interests at a key moment in my sociological education. I would not have ever gone to graduate school if it were not for George Steinmetz, who generously allowed me, as an undergrad, to spend countless hours with him discussing a wide range of topics in sociology, history, social theory, and philosophy. I could not ever dream of being able to repay my debt to Professor Steinmetz for caring so deeply about my intellectual development and being a constant source of encouragement and mentorship even after I left Ann Arbor for graduate school at UC Berkeley. I have been incredibly fortunate to receive the support and guidance of so many faculty members, during my time at Berkeley. Heather Haveman's course on the Logic of Inquiry was an essential part of my development as a researcher. I want to thank her for spending so much time with me working on the nuts and bolts of doing solid research, my work would be much poorer had I not taken her course and benefited from her guidance. Margaret Weir's versatile command of both sociology and political science allowed me to stretch the boundaries of my scholarship and for that, in addition to her profound kindness, I thank her sincerely. Sandra Smith's incisive attention to detail and clear understanding of the mechanics of a persuasive argument had a large impact on my first few years of graduate training in Sociology at UC Berkeley and were essential in shaping my M.A. thesis. I want to thank Cybelle Fox for being so extraordinarily generous with her time, graciously reading drafts of my work and offering insightful feedback and mentorship, despite her busy schedule and many responsibilities. I was very fortunate to have the help of such a talented scholar, who, in my opinion, is an unofficial member of my dissertation committee. In addition, I would like to thank Mike Hout for his patient guidance in helping me develop my understanding of statistics and carrying out quantitative research. His ability to answer any question I had, so very clearly, was essential in the completion of my dissertation and will certainly pay dividends going forward. I owe Evelyn Nakano Glenn a great debt for her selfless generosity in joining my dissertation committee. In my time at Berkeley, she was, without a doubt, someone I could always rely upon for support and a helping hand. I thank her sincerely for her kindness and mentorship. ii I thank my mother and father for all of their encouragement and support. Words cannot properly express my gratitude to them, so I will not even attempt such a feat.

Load more