[joshuamorton]

Reducing racial bias to solely and precisely "skin color", and not the cultural biases that come with it is itself missing the point.

Begin biased against Black skin is a problem (and is the important bit in some instances). Being biased against "Black" names is also a problem, even if you can devise situations where the name is attached to a person who doesn't have Black skin. And both are racism, because they are directed at people based on the assumption that they are in a particular ethnic group, even if that assumption is wrong.

[LawTalkingGuy]

> Being biased against "Black" names is also a problem, even if you can devise situations where the name is attached to a person who doesn't have Black skin. And both are racism, because they are directed at people based on the assumption that they are in a particular ethnic group, even if that assumption is wrong.

You assume a racist motive in your scenario, but what if the bias is actually towards all unfamiliar names, only some of which are black names?

The specter of racism is so great that people are expected to be free from every potential bias because it could be race-equity related somewhere.

[joshuamorton]

"I'm not biased only against Black people, I'm actually biased against anything that is sufficiently non-white" (in this context, since we're talking about a study of conventionally WASP-y vs. black names) is not the slam dunk you think it is. And it's still racist.

> You assume a racist motive in your scenario

No, I don't assume any motive whatsoever. I'm talking only about actions.