One in Four Children Believes it is Against the Law for Women, African Americans, or Latinos to be President of the United States

A new study in the journal Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy explored elementary-school-age children’s views about the role of race and gender in the U.S. presidency. Results indicated that most children are aware that women and people of color have been excluded from the presidency. Surprisingly, one in four children in the study stated that it was currently against the law for women, African Americans, or Latinos to be President. Many children also blamed those who have been excluded, arguing that they lack the necessary attributes to hold the position, including the fact women aren’t as smart as men. The Daily Galaxy spoke with the author of the study, Rebecca S. Bigler, Ph.D., about why children such views.

“There has been an incredible level of racial and gender exclusion for the office of presidency, and most children are aware of it, but they don't really understand why,” Bigler tells The Daily Galaxy. “When they see a poster with all of the presidents and every single one of them is a white male, they naturally come up with their own explanation for it since no one talks to them about it. Sometimes the explanations they come up with are completely wrong, and in other instances the explanations they come up with are not too far off, such as when a little girl explains that there has never been a woman president because, ‘boys won't vote for girls’.”

Most of the children, in fact, attributed the lack of female, African American, and Latino presidents to gender and racial discrimination. In the year prior to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama’s bids to become the Democratic nominee, researchers interviewed children between five and ten years of age from various ethnic and racial backgrounds to assess their knowledge of and attributions for the lack of female, African American, and Latino presidents. The study found that most children endorsed the belief that the presidency should be filled by people of both genders and diverse races and ethnicities, although the majority also believed that women and people of color have been intentionally excluded from the role.

However, girls who attributed the lack of female presidents to discrimination were more likely to report that they could not really become president, even if they were interested in doing so. In contrast, among African American children, a discussion about discrimination led to an increased interest in becoming president.

But why would a child think that it’s illegal for a girl or non-white to become the president in the first place? Bigler says that when children aren’t educated about a topic they will naturally start coming up with their own explanations.

“Kids knew a surprisingly lot about the presidents,” Bigler told The Daily Galaxy. “They have seen them all over the media, on posters, in classroom history books, yet no one ever explains to them why they have all been white men. There is never a conversation about that so children start to come up with their own explanations.”

The problem with this, Bigler notes, is that by not addressing these topics with children, most of them will spend their formative years with the limited view that they are not as qualified as white males to be leaders in our country. We need to teach and empower all children, and that means not being afraid to talk to them about what might be regarded as sensitive issues.

“Just like in math and science, we need the best and brightest people in this country to want to be leaders, and to understand that they can be leaders regardless of race or gender,” says Bigler to The Daily Galaxy. The majority of children in America are not white males, and most of them perceive themselves as unqualified to ever be the president of the United States. That's unfortunate, because we are letting a lot of potentially great future leaders feel excluded.”

When asked if the current election will help dispel these myths among children, since Barack Obama is African American, Bigler explains that it will likely depend somewhat on the outcome of the election.

“This election is really important for race and gender in the united states. If Barack Obama wins, it will certainly wipe out the myth among children that it is illegal for anyone but a white male to be the president. On the other hand, if he loses it may well reinforce children's perception that only white men can ultimately become president,” Bigler says.

“But regardless of who wins, we have got to start talking to children more honestly and openly even in kindergarten. When the kids are looking at a poster of presidents and they are all white men, this is a great teaching opportunity. The teacher can ask things like, ‘Why do you think all of the presidents were white men?’ Then when kids respond with fallacies like 'because it's against the law for a woman to be the president', then that opens up a great discussion and learning opportunity for the children. The teacher can explain, ‘Well, you're right. It used to be illegal for a woman to be the president, but that wasn't fair, so they changed the law. Did you know that now a girl or boy with any skin color can now grow up to become the president?"

It’s about having discussions that empower children, says Bigler. It’s about making sure that every child knows that their gender or race should not be a barrier to achieving whatever it is that they want to become in life—even if that happens to be the president of the United States of America.

Posted by Rebecca Sato

Comments

[Dave]

It goes down hill from there;
8 in 10 adults believe in some sort of god.

Regards
Dave

[GCU Prosthetic Conscience]

Maybe the kids are just more perceptive than the adults: You Can't Be President.

(http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3909/you_cant_be_president/)

[RJ]

Oh come on Dave, believing "in some sort of God" is a whole different issue. Many brilliant scientists and other genius minds have theorized that there is likely some sort of higher intelligence involved in the creation and organization of the Universe--call it what you will. That's doesn't make them stupid or uneducated, and even most non-believing scientists admit that the "poof the Universe just appeared from nothing" theory doesn't explain things any better. So lets not ridicule others when we ourselves don't have the answer.

At any rate, this is an interesting article that has nothing to do with religion, so I'll stop there. Lets talk politics--something just as polarizing instead. :-) I thought it was a very interesting point that classrooms often avoid the kind of critical conversations that would empower children. If McCain/Palin get into office (which thank goodness, it now looks like there is little chance of that) they've made it clear that they would even oppose age-appropriate sex education that would teach children how to keep themselves safe from sexual predators.

Apparently there are people out there who still think ignorance is a viable option. However, as we see in this research, if we avoid educating our children about sensitive subjects then they're forced to make up their own explanations, or rely on equally ignorant friends to explain things.

Yes, some would argue that sensitive topics should be left to parents to explain, but research has shown time and time again that most parents don't. Ideally, children would be taught at school and at home so they have the knowledge they need to make smart, empowered choices.

[Nickrollout]

There is no need to panic; probably 50% of this age group believes the stork brings babies into the world. By the time kids turn into teenagers they get over their ignorance and manage quite nicely.
I doubt that a child of any color or gender, who is from the latest generation, and has the capacity to be president, would feel that based on their gender or race that they cannot the president.
Wealth is a far bigger barrier to anyone wishing to become president.

[Dave]

My goodness RJ ; it was exactly because (as you comment) "there are people out there who still think ignorance is a viable option" that I made my comment, and not a whole different issue at all. Ignorance is ignorance. And while I'll agree with your assessment that this might not make believers stupid, I'll still stand by my post that basically inferred that the article, while interesting in suggesting children may believe such things, is even less ridiculous than adults believing in Zeus or whatever the god of the day is.

Regards
Dave

[RJ]

Dave, my point is that children believing in something that is definitely NOT true at all is not the same things as an adult having a belief in something that no one (not even you) knows is or isn't true with complete certainty. You're trying to compare things that aren't really comparable, in my opinion, but I do get your general point.

[Dave]

Well I almost let it go RJ, bygones and all that but... There is a universe of things I will never know with complete certainty, a vast amount of things I have 'faith' in (ie things that will continue to be they way they have been for me in the past: the sun will probably rise in a couple of hours, my car should start this morning), and very little that I know for sure (I have ten digits on my two hands, two of which I have dedicated at the moment to this post; 2 whole apples plus 2 whole apples will always be 4 whole apples etc.). On my 'certainty' scale of 1-10, 10 being the most 'certain', I am unshakably a 10 that gods and witches and santa clause and goblins et al are all the product of the human imagination, invented for various reasons or no reason at all over the centuries. So yes, I do think they are exactly comparable.

Regards
Dave

[Bill]

This is great and all, but what difference does it make if the kids are missing the more important reason they can't grow up to be President... ie, they aren't old money? The little waif urchan scum...