Talk:Racial color blindness
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Racial color blindness article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Racial color blindness be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. Wikipedians in the United States may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
POV – article structure
[edit]This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
The "Support" and "Criticism" sections make for a bad article structure. Such a back-and-forth between proponents and opponents unfortunately doesn't offer any clue as to the relative weight that these positions hold. Any help finding sources that put these views in context would be appreciated. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:10, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- It's also worth pointing out that the author cited 'in support' William Julius Wilson is implied to have a view which is a questionable read of the text, and in any case he later stated that if writing the book now he would emphasise the need for 'race-based policies' i.e. affirmative action programs. Whilst this doesn't make him a full-blown 'CJT' or whatever, it certainly makes him a questionable figurehead for 'colorblindism' - https://www.jstor.org/stable/23047451?seq=13#metadata_info_tab_contents
- Will likely edit this page to reference this shortly, but welcome conversation regarding this edit Maloot (talk) 07:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
"Support" and "Criticism" also rely on citations to supporters and critics, rather than disinterested secondary and tertiary sources, raising WP:WEIGHT concerns. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Comment: I'm going to beg to differ here and note that this article is clearly heavily weighted toward the view that "color-blindness" is a negative, and if anything, is weighted too far in that direction. Even the section on "Support" ends with strong critques of that position, while "Criticism" contains no such counterpoint. Now in terms of relative weight, I'm really not clear on how one objectively weights what 'expert' opinion is on a topic, and I think there is some bias on the part of editors in simply assuming that expert opinion largely views it as a negative. It's worth noting that there's popular book by Coleman Hughes called "The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America", which argues for the concept and critiques negative views of color-blindess. This book has received much press and it's a huge oversight that it is not discussed here. Peter G Werner (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Color-blindness as future goal vs as current state of affairs
[edit]The article could say more about whether color-blindness (of the kind that specifically excludes class-blindness and economic-conditions-blindness) remains a valid goal for the future, even though you acknowledge that today's society is anything but color-blind. Also it could say more about whether cultures with a lot higher proportion of interracial couples and bi- or multi-racial children than the US fare better in this regard. Also whether cultures where no racial group ever mass-enslaved another group fare better. -- 91.63.148.93 (talk) 13:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is a valid point, and something often missed by critics of the concept of color-blindness. To say that color-blindness is an ideal to strive for is not necessarily the same as saying we today live in a society that is post-racial and color-blind. However, for this distinction to be added to the article, there needs to be a verifiable, significant outside source actually arguing this point. It might be part of the arguments presented in Coleman Hughes recent book, which I think needs to be given space in this article. Peter G Werner (talk) 19:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
History
[edit]This article urgently needs a decent section on the history of this concept. For example, it does not mention Wendell Phillips, who was the first person to make the phrase popular, in the context of arguing for abolition. It would be really helpful to hear what role this idea played in the civil rights movement, etc. What about Thurgood Marshall? Doric Loon (talk) 18:15, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- All of this absolutely belongs. Among the many problems with this article is its tendency toward both WP:PRESENTISM and WP:RECENTISM, both of which are problems in the entire Wikipedia project. Peter G Werner (talk) 19:38, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: The Rhetoric of Archival Exploration
[edit] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 January 2025 and 22 March 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mayowa13 (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Mayowa13 (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm looking at the edits, and I see that User:Mayowa13 has simply contributed further to this article's existing NPOV problem and has simply added the perspective of an additional critic of the idea of color blindness. I will note that this kind of thing is an ongoing problem when Wikipedia article are used as a site for student assignments. Peter G Werner (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2025 (UTC)