I probably should introduce myself! Hi, I am Tanesha and I am a co-organizer for #BlackInMH Week! I am a 3rd year clinical psychology doctoral student! I am super excited to be taking over the RealScientists Page today!
So if you don't have time to read the lovely interview about me [link.medium.com/IUIZkZXlV9] I will give you the short version. I am interesting in researching how racial discrimination and socioeconomic status impact mental health outcomes (both positive and negative aspects).
As we know, racial discrimination and racism as a whole SEVERELY impacts a person's mental and physical health. I want to understand how a person's socioeconomic status (SES) changes that impact. Due to my own personal experiences with SES mobility.
What we know and is well documented in the literature is that half Black people who are born poor, stay poor. And this fact alone really sparked my interest in socioeconomic status as a whole.
It's just fascinating and devastating to me. While money isnt everything - not having it surely shapes how you interact with the world. And how the world interacts with you.
All that to say, mental health is OBVIOUSLY effected by a person's socioeconomic status, and then to layer on racism - phew! It is a lot! And that is what I will probably be spending my life's work on researching!
if you have any questions about SES and mental health and racism let me know! I'll try to get to as many as I can!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2/Our findings suggest that student evaluations of teaching seem to measure *conformity with gendered expectations* rather than teaching quality
A cause for concern given the integration of SET data into performance profiles, and management and organisation of teaching practice
3/Before I go on, in terms of the necessarily binary reporting, it is very important to say here that we recognise the ‘pluralities inherent in gender(s)’ that complicate simple binary approaches to gender (Weerawardhana, 2018, p.189), and we do discuss this in the paper
On important background, in March 2020 the IOC recognised harassment and abuse as a current human rights challenge, and in particular recognised that LGBTQI+ athletes are at “particular risk of harm and structural discrimination”
3/n
The IOC now recognise female eligibility regulation *as an organisational violence issue* and as systemic discrimination
[I'll do another tweet thread on this later, drawing on my own research on this]
I want to address a narrative that we see around women’s sport and inclusion (particularly from those who seek to exclude trans women & women with sex variations from women’s sport), and how this narrative is part of a bigger pattern that functions to keep women small
2/n
I have been hearing more frequently the narrative that women's sport apparently exists as a 'protected category' so that women can win (because, on this account, without it no woman will ever win again)
3/n
This is:
a) *not* the reason why women's sport exists as a category,
and b) it is *not* true that no woman will ever win again.
This narrative is profoundly paternalistic and keeps women small.