The Foundations of Prejudice

Human beings are not born with prejudice- when they’re born they are unaware of immense division among people and the world, they’re unaware of races and religions and any kind of discrimination, and as they start growing up they learn to hate as they learn to recognize alphabets. In accordance to the approaches of observational learning to prejudice and discrimination, the behavior of the surroundings such as parents, friends are what shape a child’s feelings towards a certain group of people. Being in the context, we can now talk about societal class division- upper class, middle class and lower class divisional approach. In Bangladesh, the societal divisional approach is a matter of complexity and practiced regularly, e.g. the higher class people who are financially strong has more power over those who belongs to lower class group. And as a child is born in a higher class family, his upbringing is shaped in such a way as to empower the lower class people with the same form of pride and prejudice. The media is also a reflection of the practice of stereotyping not only for the kids rather also for the adults. Nowadays, the media portrays in such a way that when we first hear of a Russian- we form a picture of  him as a mafia-mobster, when we hear of Jew- we form an impression of him as a greedy banker, etc. there are many examples which would portray the immense level of stereotyping brought by the media. In other ways when prejudice and discrimination is explained, the focus remains on how being in a certain group reflects a particular person’s self-respect. Membership in a certain group is viewed as a basis of pride and self-esteem as per the approach of the social identity theory. As led by the suggestion of the theory, people are more centered with ethnicity understanding the world from their own point of view and arbitrating people in terms of their group membership. E.g. slogans for women are used, “there’s a women at the beginning of all great things.”(Alphonse De Lamartine)- Such slogans always portray the fact that no matter which group we belong, our group always provides us with high self-esteem. On the other hand, as such slogans motivates us for belonging to the group we belong the same way it gives us the feeling that all other outer groups are inferior to our own or inner group- and that’s where the practice of prejudice and discrimination occurs again i.e. we consider the positive sides of our group and the same way devalue the outer group. The societal identity approach or the observational learning approach- none of them explains the ‘stereotyping’ fully. According to the argument led by few psychologists, stereotyping even occurs when there is a supposed competition for scarce societal resources, such as jobs, housing, etc. Hereby, when competition remains for such societal resources members of majority of the groups may unjustly believe that minority members are hampering their effort to accomplish their objectives, and such opinions may lead to prejudice. Furthermore, additional descriptions for prejudice views human cognitive boundaries leading us to classify people on the grounds of outer physical features like ethnicity, sex or race. Hence, such categorizing implementation may result in discrimination and prejudice once again. Social neuroscience is the most recent approach for understanding prejudice and discrimination in terms of neural basis. It ascertains the way we identify our group understanding, interpersonal relationship, and emotions in terms of neuro-scientific foundations.

Measuring Prejudice and Discrimination: The Implicit Personality Test

In Washington office, a 34 year women was being sat down to take a psychic test. The decorations of her office viewed her taste for civil-rights and she was also a senior activist at a national gay rights organization and she was a lesbian herself fighting against discrimination. What the test asked her to do was differentiate among a couple of black and white faces, and when she identified a black face she was supposed to click a key on the left key and when seen a black face a right key was to be clicked. Positive words required a left click, and negative words required a right click. The simple test brought a result such that the lady hit the right key if she saw a white face or a positive word and left key when she saw a black face or a left key. Then, she was required to sort out the black faces with the positive words and the white face with negative words- she did the task correctly, yet took longer time to sort the task out. The activist was quite alarmed with the outcome of the test which was such that she supportive or biased with her own race of white faces over black faces. As ascertained by the Implicit Association Test (IAT), the researchers say that it is certainly possible that people can be prejudiced even when they don’t realize it. People often hide it from others and even at times don’t know within themselves that they are prejudiced, however they originally differ among people according to races, religion and sexual orientations. The IAT has performed as a really good and accurate measure for identifying people’s prejudice as direct questioning results in wrong interpretations as people when asked directly hide their true answers, and even at times they don’t know what they actually feel. The IAT has a belief that people’s automatic reaction generates more appropriate signals of what they actually convey in their mind. Acquiring an unspoken unsupportiveness does not imply in any way that people always reacts with highly conveyed discrimination. Yet, it does imply that our culture with which we are raised up have some level of influence on our behavior.

Reducing the Consequence of Prejudice and Discrimination

For diminishing the effects of prejudice and discrimination, psychologists came up with few effective strategies:

·         Increasing the communication among the stereotyping target and its holder:

In 1954, the USA Supreme Court ruled that black and white students will start learning together in the same school. This communicational strategy was meant for reducing discrimination and prejudice among different races. And the research was quite effective which showed that increasing communication can reduce negative stereotyping.

·         Making values and norms against prejudice more conspicuous:

At times reminding people of only about being fair is enough for making them avoid being prejudiced and discriminate among people.

·         Providing information about the target of stereotyping:

Education is probably a very effective way of changing or reducing stereotyping or discriminatory attitude i.e. to teach people to consider the positive sides of the stereotyping target.

As a conclusion, I would like to include that prejudice and discrimination is a regular practice in each part of Bangladesh and in our everyday lives, gender discrimination, racial discrimination, prejudiced religious views, etc. are the commonly known aspects of prejudice and discrimination. For changing such attitudes or for limiting them, we should make people more aware and educate them to let them know of the positive sides of the stereotyping target, increasing communication among the stereotype holder and making people understand the fair means of life.

In practise this means, if anyone is caught calling someone fat they can be arrested, put in a cell and prosecuted.

Now, I am staunchly anti-bullying. I can not tell you how much it sickens me how poorly people are treated if they look slightly different or do not fit in for any other number of reasons. Someone being picked on because they are overweight is inexcusable.

Having said this, I cannot condone this move to make calling someone fat a hate crime.

The move is being driven by a report by the all-party parliamentary group on body image. This group believe the government should put appearance-based discrimination on a par with race and sexual discrimination.

The body image group however are missing a crucial point to my mind. While you cannot help what race you are or what sex you are, you do have a certain amount of control over what size you are. There are some people who have health conditions which mean they put on excessive weight but all in all – and this is the controversial part I know – a lot of people tend to be fat because they eat too much and do not exercise enough.

I fear that if there were any moves to make calling someone fat a hate crime it would only fuel this complacency people have with their weight.

A lot of people seem to be quite flummoxed about how they reached the size they are in the first place. If we as a society start to tiptoe around people who we can see are overweight and damaging their health then it will mean soon the vast majority of people will fall into this overweight category and we will have a serious problem on our hands.

I’m not saying we should be abusing these people into seeing sense but there does need to be more openness about people’s weight problems.

The body image group are also hoping to ban NHS weigh-ins for five and ten-year-olds because they believe young children should not have to worry about their weight.

I agree with this last sentiment entirely but at the same time if a child is beginning to become overweight and looks like they could be obese in the future it is much kinder to help them at an earlier age to eat healthily and be encouraged to take more exercise.

It is the same with doctors. NICE – the National Institute of Clinical Excellence – are ploughing the way for doctors to be prevented from telling their patients they are obese. This is the one place where surely honesty is of the utmost importance.

A doctor telling someone they need to look at their weight isn’t the same as a yob hurling abuse at a fat person as they walk down the street. But if this yob is seen to be carted away in a police van as a result of his tirade, this is surely saying that being fat is just as out of a person’s control as the colour of their skin.

A woman Lauren Odes from Manhattan (US) has filed a lawsuit against her former employers, who has sacked her for being ‘too hot’ at work.

Lauren Odes and her lawyer, celebrity attorney Gloria Allred has alleged that her bosses meted out discriminatory, profoundly humiliating and unlawful treatment to her.

“When my supervisor asked me to tape down my breasts I asked my supervisor, are you kidding?”

At a news conference on Monday, Lauren Odes and her attorney Gloria Allred, held up some of the outfits in question, all of which Odes felt were appropriate, considering she was “working in a business that is not a synagogue but is instead selling thongs with hearts placed in the female genital area and boy shorts for women that say ‘hot’ in the buttocks area,” Odes argues.

The complaint currently filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with the allegations of gender and religious discrimination.

The voluptuous blond Lauren Odes was hired on April 24th to coordinate shipments of sample to customers and maintained that her supervisors repeatedly complained about her physical appearance and attire, even though she insists there was no dress code, as co-workers wore tank tops, and were casually dressed.

Odes claims that when she wore a short sleeve purple dress on day two of her job she was allegedly told by her conservative Orthodox Jewish employers at Native Intimates to tape down her breasts to make them smaller and on the fifth day, she wore a knee-length black dress with a shawl over it hoping to please her bosses, instead she was asked to wear a red bathrobe to cover an outfit.

“I felt ridiculous and extremely embarrassed, others in the office were laughing and asking why I was wearing it and I told them what I was told,” Odes said.

Odes took off the robe and went to buy yet another outfit that she thought would be appropriate, but instead got a phone call saying that she was fired, she feels because of the size of her breast and shape of her body.

She eventually agreed to wear a long sweater at work, but while she was shopping for the cover-up item, she received notice that she was fired.

This isn’t Allred’s first “too sexy” dismissal case. In 2010, she defended Debrahlee Lorenzana, an ex-Citibank employee who claimed her attractiveness played into her dismissal, not her work performance. Citibank denied the claim. Lorenzana’s case, settled out of court, is now closed.

Posts you may Like:

19 Year Girl to Go Naked for World Cup Victory

Are You Good Looking? Golden Ratio(phi) Test

Top healthy Indian foods

Angry Birds Makers to Launch Amazing Alex

Premier League Reporter

George Zimmerman will be monitored by a GPS tracking device so that law officials can monitor his where abouts. Zimmerman faces second degree murder charges. Question: is he really sorry for gunning down a 17 year old kid, or is he sorry for being the center of negative press? Many people will be upset if Zimmerman gets off. He must take responsibility for his actions.

Will this case and others cause a division of races? This case is worldwide. Zimmerman made a bad decision and now he must face the consequences. No one can predict the outcome of the case but if  he does not get any time than Justice was not served. It does not matter about race. No one should get away with committing a crime such as this should. This deserves harsh punishment. We have to believe that the Justice System will do the right thing.

   Pictures courtesy of the blaze.com

Is it possible to be overweight or obese and still be healthy? Should one worry about ones size or should one try to find a measure of joy in life as it is? Should a person be denied a job because their body mass is over a certain set level?

In Texas a hospital comes under fire for this hiring policy–those with a body mass index (bmi) of more than 35 need not apply. Peggy Howell, of the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance, believes that this is plain and simply discrimination. Does an employer have the right to now your bmi? Should your ability to do a job be based on the fact that your body mass is less than a pre-set number of 35?

It is not just this hospital that has this type of policy in place. There are some Canadian fertility clinics and doctors that insist that a woman seeking treatment have a body mass index of less than 35. In this case I am not sure that it is about discrimination as much as it is that the more obese a woman is the less likely she is to conceive. In this case maybe not weighing more or having a lower bmi could increase the likelihood of conception.

I am not as sure about an employer who does not hire you on the basis that your bmi is over 35, unless of course that it prevents you from doing the job correctly, efficiently, and safely. I am not sure why a hospital would discriminate against those with a higher body mass index. I do believe that it is discrimination. I am also sure that the person who has a higher bmi has probably put up with a great deal of this type of discrimination already and should not have to go through it while applying for a job. Maybe this hospital should develop some type of policy that would help employees embrace choices that would lead to a happy and healthy lifestyle change if necessary.

There is a fabulous and unique blog that I came across, Dances With Fat, that offers a look at how health comes in all sizes and how one needs to have self acceptance to be truly happy in life. Self acceptance goes along way toward being confident and happy no matter what goal you are trying to achieve.

I also came across a video from ASDAH, Association For Size Diversity And Health. This is a community of people committed to the Health At Every Size principles.

Sources:

http://www.canada.com/health/Live+chat+Obesity+discrimination/6455316/story.html

http://www.sizediversityandhealth.org/

Lets say that a Mexican was driving a Cadillac with rims and chrome. Would you instantly think that they were apart of a gang? Many would think that way. Do you think that stereotyping is right? Whether its right or not many of us have been guilty of it. The police stereotype because of their experiences. They have been in neighborhoods where most of the calls were burglary’s,  auto thefts, or shootings. Stereotyping could be perceived as a form of discrimination. 

The media helps buid this up. They may use words like a black man robbed a corner store or a street thug was shooting in an inner city neighborhood. We must look at people as human beings and not judge them because of where they live or what they wear. Stereotyping hurts people’s feelings and may not be the best tactic to use in any situation. Just remember that everybody is not the same. When one person or a group of people are guilty, they all are not guilty.

Courtesy of colorcurve.com

Courtesy of

photographybyjohncorney.com

A lot of people are upset about it and say it goes against the University’s anti discrimination policies. They said the policy can’t discriminate ” on the basis of…gender identity and expression”.

Jane Feuer who is the chair of the ADPC and this group tells the University Senate on discrimination issues said, “a lot of people were really shocked that they had taken such a harsh decision. It was just dropped on us like a bomb.”

At Pitt Johnstown branch, they expelled a trans gender who identified with a male for using the male locker room late 2011.

Before this new rule, there were no bathroom rules and it was judged on an individual basis on the case, which is how the Pitt Johnstown student got expelled.

A resolution was passed in February 2012 from the ADPC that expelling the trans gender student from Pitt Johnstown went against the University’s anti discrimination policy for trans gender students and use of the bathroom.

As a result came the March 20, 2012 new policy that we talked about at the beginning of this article.

Robert Hill of Pitt sent out an email that said the faculty member or student can use the bathroom that is “his or her declared gender identity after he or she has obtained a birth certificate designating the declared gender. ” The email goes on to say, “This does not represent a change in policy. Rather, it is an articulation of a long standing University practice.”

A Pittsburgh advocate for transgender people andtheir rights finds this a problem with this because to have your gender to change on your birth certificate you have to get a sex change. Many transgenders don’t want to do it and of those who do, many cannot afford it.

Life for blacks in the 1930’s has been described as an “American hell” but it wasn’t just the 1930’s, basically from 1863 to 1965. The conditions in that time period were basically the same for blacks.

In 1930 blacks had no civil rights, land ownership was possible but very limited. for instance if a black family “owned” land, the white people could take it if the saw a use for it. blacks were not allow to serve in any political positions on any level.

the threat of violence was a everyday possibility. multiple hanging, lynchings, and being burn on the cross was happening, most of the violence against blacks were done at the hands of the white police, mosty the local sheriff or the pastor of a church, and othe peopl of authority.

there have been several accounts of white sheriffs breaking in the homes of black families and raped the women and children at gun point.

blacks were forced to say “yes sir” and ‘Yes ma’am” to small white kids.

40% of the lynchings that happened to blacks where because of the false accusations from white women. 

the white man would beat or rape his wife / girlfriend.. and then accuse a black person of the act just to protect her spouse.

I know my message wont get out very far, if it gets out at all, but if I could just make 1 person turn around then that would make this whole thing worth it.

War. What is war? What is fighting? Why are we doing it? Simply because 2 adults can’t sort things out between themselves so they have to put innocent people in harms way?  Simply because one country doesn’t have enough supplies so they go to another country and beat the crap out of them until they give it up? Simply because one country goes and bombs another country so that country flies a bomb into their country and then their country goes and kills the one person that country depends on. Why? I honestly think it’s stupid and the governments need to be put in time out because they are acting like 2 year olds. They can sit in the corner, think about what they’ve done then go and hug their neighbour.

Countries are homes, citizens are families. We all live on this earth, we should all be one big family and treat everyone like a long lost cousin, who knows… they might even be a long lost cousin! If everone shared what they have, gave what little they have left to those who have nothing, or even spared a dollar or two to the man living on the street then people would have a reason to smile. 

No more violence! Why is everyone so angry at one another? Why are we constantly picking at eachother for nothing? “That girls too fat!” “That girls too thin!” “That guy’s sooo gay!” “That guy’s hair is a birds nest!” WHO GIVES A CRAP HOW MUCH SHE WEIGHS OR WHAT SEXUAL PREFERENCE THAT GUY IS? WHO CARES WHAT TATTOO SHE JUST GOT ON HER LEG OR WHAT GIRL HE JUST DECIDED TO SLEEP WITH?? WHO CARES WHAT HER EYELINER LOOKS LIKE TODAY OR WHAT HIS DRAWING IN ART LOOKS LIKE? WHY BOTHER? Why bother putting other people down or even noticing their flaws? Honestly, does it matter? Does it honestly matter what brand of clothing they are wearing today? Simply because your dress $100 more then hers, or because her shoes are from target and yours are from some french designer? If someone feels good then that is it. It doesn’t matter how they look. It doesn’t matter how many pimples they have or if they get around in a wheelchair… Does it? They are still a person and they should be treated like one.

The government aren’t teaching young people to be accepting and non-racial when they are going out and fighting with other countries. How are we meant to accept different colours if they are the colour of the people we are having a war with? If we accept them then we accept all of them. Everyone should speak with 1 language, but they don’t so all we can do is speak with 1 voice… the problem is, there aren’t enough voices to for someone to hear. 

It’s my hope, that one day the governments will let down their guard and stop with all this nonsence. Maybe one day we can all shake hands with the colours of the rainbow.

We all bleed red from a red heart. That makes us all the same.  

Some members of society will not tolerate racial profiling and officers find it difficult to get cooperation from the community when it comes to this tactic. They may patrol neighborhoods and ask questions about serious crimes with little to no cooperation. Africa Americans think that racial profiling is just another way to discriminate on minorities. When police use this tactic they feel offended and display frustrations. Racial profiling may benefit the police in some ways but it is also a thorn in their side as well. Should the police continue to use this tactic? The answer is merely opinionated and the results may be bleak. I believe racial profiling is not going anywhere, whether we agree or not.