Racialized names carry both penalties and premiums in social life. Prior research on implicit associations shows that racialized names tend to activate feelings of racial bias, such that people are more positively inclined toward White-sounding names than they are toward Black- and Hispanic-sounding names. But to what extent do racialized names continue to matter when they do not belong to people? In this article, we use an original data set collected over six months at a high-volume shelter where dogs are frequently given racialized names (N = 1,636). We also conducted a survey with a crowdsourced sample to gauge the racial perceptions of each dog’s name. We combine these data sets to examine how racial perceptions of names are associated with time to adoption, a meaningful outcome that captures people’s willingness to welcome a dog into their family. We find that as dogs’ names are increasingly perceived as White, people adopt them faster. Conversely, as dogs’ names are increasingly perceived as nonhuman (e.g., Fluffy), people adopt them slower. Perceptions of Black names are likewise tied to slower times to adoption, with this effect being concentrated among pit bulls, a breed that is stereotyped as dangerous and racialized as Black. These findings demonstrate the remarkable durability of racialized names. These names shape people’s behavior and their impressions of others even when they are attached to animals—not just humans.

Although science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors remain male dominated, women’s greater enrollment in STEM is one of the greatest transformations to occur in U.S. higher education in the past half century. But to what extent have women’s gains in STEM enrollment translated to greater parity in labor market outcomes? Although the challenges women face in STEM have been well documented, questions about the influence of gender for STEM employment and earnings differences remain. In the present research, the authors use data from recent birth cohorts in the American Community Survey between 2009 and 2018 (starting with the first year college majors were available in the survey) and a reweighting technique from labor economics to track the evolution of gender inequalities in STEM employment and earnings inequality among STEM work at the onset of labor market entry. Even among a sample expected to produce highly conservative gender differences, sizable gender inequalities in STEM employment are observed. The authors show that despite women’s gains in STEM education among recent cohorts, women with STEM degrees face employment prospects in STEM work that more closely resemble those of men without STEM degrees than men with STEM degrees. Moreover, although modest gender earnings gaps eventually emerge for those without STEM degrees, large gaps occur at the outset of employment for STEM workers. Thus, although STEM education provides important opportunities for women’s earning potential, it may be less effective in itself to address significant gender inequalities among STEM employment.

This article assesses the relationships between race, gender, and parental college savings. Some prior studies have investigated race differences in parental college savings, yet none have taken an intersectional approach, and most of these studies were conducted with cohorts of students who predate key demographic changes among U.S. college goers (e.g., the reversal of the gender gap in college completion). Drawing on theories of parental investment and data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS:09), we show that both race and gender are associated with whether parents save for college, as well as how much they save. Both black boys and black girls experience savings disadvantages relative to their white peers. However, black girls experience particularly striking disparities: Black girls with the strongest academic credentials receive savings equivalent to black girls with the weakest academic credentials. Results suggest this is due, at least in part, to the fact that high-achieving black girls tend to come from families that are much less well-off than high achievers in other race-gender groups. As a result, parents of black girls frequently rely on funding sources other than their own earnings or savings to pay for their children’s college. These funding sources include private loans that may pose financial challenges for black girls and their families across generations, thus deepening inequalities along the lines of gender, race, and class. These findings demonstrate the power of taking an intersectional approach to the study of higher education in general and college funding in particular.

Abstract This article investigates White, Black, and Hispanic men’s and women’s access and midlife labor market returns to college quality. To do so, we use data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth-1979 Cohort (NLSY-79), merged with college quality information from the Barron’s Admissions Competitiveness Index. Although prior research has investigated similar dynamics in access and returns to higher education, this work typically excludes Hispanics and does not assess enrollments at community colleges and other less competitive colleges where Black and Hispanic enrollments tend to cluster. We find that Black–White and Hispanic–White differences in college quality, to Whites’ advantage, were fully explained or reversed once we accounted for differences in students’ backgrounds. At midlife, Hispanic and especially Black men had lower rates of labor force participation than White men who attended colleges of the same quality. Including such differences (i.e., years of no or part-time work) in assessing the earnings returns to college quality demonstrated striking disadvantages facing college-educated Black men relative to White men, which were not fully accounted for by background characteristics. Employment and earnings returns to college quality were not as disparate by race for women. Relative to White women, we find earnings advantages for Hispanic women among those who attended community colleges. This article demonstrates the utility of taking an intersectional and life course approach to the study of higher education and the economic returns to schooling.

Over the past 60 years, we have witnessed a relocation of gender wage inequality. Whereas the largest wage gaps were once concentrated among lower-paid, lower-educated workers, today these wage gaps sit among the highest-paid, highly-educated workers. Given this reordering of gender wage inequality and the centrality of college graduates to total inequality trends, in this article, we assess the contribution of higher education mechanisms to top-end gender inequality. Specifically, we use Census and ACS data along with unique decomposition models to assess the extent to which two mechanisms rooted in higher education-bachelor's-level fields of study and the attainment of advanced degrees-can account for the gender wage gap across the wage distribution. Results from these decomposition models show that while these explanatory mechanisms fare well among bottom and middle wages, their explanatory power breaks down among the highest-paid college workers. We conclude that women's attainment of "different" education (via fields of study) or "more" education (via advanced degrees) would do little to close the gender wage gaps that are contributing most to contemporary wage inequality trends. We suggest some directions for future research, and we also take seriously the role of discriminatory pay-setting at the top of the wage distribution.

Abstract: This article assesses how the economic context of higher education expansion since the mid-20th century has shaped families’ financial lives—in terms of income and wealth/debt—as well as how these trends have differed for Black and White women and men. We use data from the NLSY-79 (comprising trailing-edge Baby Boomers) and NLSY-97 (comprising early Millennials) to show how academically similar students in these two cohorts fared in terms of educational attainment, household income, household wealth, and total student debt accrued by age 35. While we discuss findings across race-gender groups, our results call attention to the education-related economic disadvantages faced by Black women that have accelerated across cohorts. Over time, Black women’s educational attainment has increased substantially, and high-achieving Black women, in particular, have become uniquely likely to progress beyond the BA. But while high-achieving Black women have made many advances in higher education, they also have become more likely than similarly high-achieving White men, White women, and Black men to have zero or negative wealth at the household level, and to accrue student debt for themselves and for their children. Our findings demonstrate that the costs of expanded access to credit for higher education have not been borne equally across race, gender, and achievement, and that these patterns have multigenerational financial consequences for college attendees and their families.

Drawing on the first national survey experiment of its kind ( n = 3,922), the authors examine Americans’ perceptions of transgender people’s sex and the factors that underlie these perceptions. The authors randomly assigned respondents to a vignette condition describing a transgender person whose self-identified gender (i.e., identifies as a man or a woman), age (i.e., adult or teenager), and gender conformity in physical appearance (i.e., conforming, nonconforming, ambiguous, or unspecified) had been experimentally manipulated. Then, respondents were asked how they would personally classify that person’s sex. The findings suggest that Americans are more likely to perceive a transgender person’s sex as consistent with their sex assigned at birth than with their gender identity. Furthermore, of the experimental manipulations included in the experiment, only the transgender person’s level of gender conformity—not their self-identified gender or age—affects public perceptions of sex. The authors also find distinct cleavages along sociodemographic lines, including politics, sexual orientation, and interpersonal contact with transgender people. Implications for research on sex and gender are discussed.