babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » anti-racism news and initiatives   » Prejudice > Racism

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Prejudice > Racism
Jeit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7780

posted 31 December 2004 06:39 PM      Profile for Jeit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think it's time to re-direct anti-racism to anti-prejudice. Being fat makes it harder to get a job than being a visible minority.

According to a recent study at the University of Ottawa (Tougas et al., 2004) being a visible minority accounts for 5% of unfavourable attitudes of a job interviewer.

This means 95% of the unfavourable attitudes can be attributed to things such as previous experience, education level, grooming, age, sex, similarity to interviewer.

A tri-university study: Oxford, Yale, U of Virginia, (Teachman et al. 2003) found that being fat accounts for 60% of unfavourable attitudes of a job interviewer.

Prejudice can come in different forms and we should be aware of these impacts for its current relevance.

[ 31 December 2004: Message edited by: Jeit ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 01 January 2005 03:24 AM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm going to bed.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 01 January 2005 04:00 AM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jeit:
I think it's time to re-direct anti-racism to anti-prejudice. Being fat makes it harder to get a job than being a visible minority.
Doesn't it make sense to go step by step with something like fighting for social change? I think that most people would agree that straight-up racism is wrong. Most would also agree that prejudice, insofar as it may affect hiring, is also wrong. But, it's human nature to gravitate towards the more "attractive" candidates. Plus, I imagine that it's almost impossible to demonstrate when prejudice is and is not a factor in any given hiring outside of a controlled study.

From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 01 January 2005 10:49 AM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think the reason it is about racism is the very great weight of racial prejudice and discrimination in history, and as an obstacle to building unity among progressive forces. One can look at great historical tragedies such as slavery, genocides or the impact of colonialism, but also for example at how racism has played a major part as an obstacle to developing a workers' and socialist movement in the US. That does not preclude discussions of other forms of discrimination.

Phonicidal, what is "attractive" is to a large extent socially determined. Sure, there are biological considerations connected to health and fertility that might discriminate against the extremely gaunt or the morbidly obese, but otherwise there are fashions in bodies as there are in skin and hair colour, usually connected to social class. In societies where food is scarce, or 'wasting' diseases such as consumption or AIDS are endemic, a plumper body will be considered more attractive.

I needn't remind you that your 'more attractive' criteria could also mean Aryan blond types or any other type considered ideal in a given society.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 01 January 2005 12:08 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Phonicidal:
But, it's human nature to gravitate towards the more "attractive" candidates.

While there is clinical proof that babies for example prefer to look at people with symetrical features, weight did not factor into their preference. Further, I am not aware of studies that show there is a natural gravitation towards hiring the more "attractive" candidates. Do you have proof of this assertion?

[ 01 January 2005: Message edited by: remind ]


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050

posted 02 January 2005 12:58 AM      Profile for Papal Bull   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Remind: Many studies in Europe and America have stated this. From what I heard about it from informed people (IE not the random people they toss on news most of the time)...They're flimsy studies.

Racism > Prejudice. I think that a person being tossed into a mass grave outweighs a long hair lardo like myself not getting a job because I don't want to cut my hair and I don't want to live a healthy lifestyle.


From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jeit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7780

posted 02 January 2005 02:34 AM      Profile for Jeit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
^During the Han Dynasty in China, failure to wear your hair in a topknot would cost you your head.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050

posted 02 January 2005 02:52 AM      Profile for Papal Bull   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
During the Armenian genocides being Armenian cost you and your families death.

Comparison of the two are pretty much illegitimate.


From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jeit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7780

posted 02 January 2005 03:32 AM      Profile for Jeit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why is it an illegitmate comparison? After all, you made it.

It could be argued that comparing the effects of your hairstyle 'today' is different from the effects of race in 'history'. It could also be argued that your hairstyle is within your control, while your race and perhaps weight (to some extent) are not.

How is being killed for your hairstyle in China not comparable to being killed for your race in America?

Murder is murder.

[ 02 January 2005: Message edited by: Jeit ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050

posted 02 January 2005 03:38 AM      Profile for Papal Bull   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Indeed, murder is murder.

But the motives between a hate crime and a murder at a 711 for some booze money are quite different and bred from different circumstance.


From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jeit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7780

posted 02 January 2005 04:23 AM      Profile for Jeit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So it's better to murder over a haircut than due to race?
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 02 January 2005 04:25 AM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jeit:
So it's better to murder over a haircut than due to race?
It depends. How bad is the haircut? Is it, like, Backstreet boys bad? Or, is it Kid and Play or Vanilla Ice bad?

From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 02 January 2005 07:18 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why are you approaching this as a zero-sum argument, Jeit? If you're referring to disrimination in employment, why would you want to "re-direct" anti-racism to anti-prejudice? Aren't racism and "look-ism" both deserving of equal censure? It's not like there is a finite amount of "anti" to be allocated here. Neither one's "race" nor one's appearance bear upon the ability to do the job, so neither should be deployed.

Unless you think racism is irrelevant or doesn't exist, I guess.


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 02 January 2005 10:42 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes, I have seen some proposed constucts about looks factoring in, but there were too many exceptions to make it a solid, or far sweeping fact, of always happening above consideration of qualifications.

quote:
Originally posted by Papal_Bull:
[QB]Remind: Many studies in Europe and America have stated this. From what I heard about it from informed people (IE not the random people they toss on news most of the time)...They're flimsy studies.[QB]

From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 02 January 2005 11:52 AM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
It depends. How bad is the haircut? Is it, like, Backstreet boys bad? Or, is it Kid and Play or Vanilla Ice bad?


Okay, that was funny.


From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jeit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7780

posted 02 January 2005 04:39 PM      Profile for Jeit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by verbatim:
Why are you approaching this as a zero-sum argument, Jeit? If you're referring to disrimination in employment, why would you want to "re-direct" anti-racism to anti-prejudice? Aren't racism and "look-ism" both deserving of equal censure? It's not like there is a finite amount of "anti" to be allocated here. Neither one's "race" nor one's appearance bear upon the ability to do the job, so neither should be deployed.

Unless you think racism is irrelevant or doesn't exist, I guess.


The studies I had showed that racism was relevant, but obesity was more relevant. Frankly there is only so much "anti" in practicality... equal employment efforts have been made to consider race, but none consider obesity.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 03 January 2005 01:44 AM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
I'm going to bed.

Heh -- Condolences.


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca