Monday, April 27, 2015
Bigotry Wikipedia articles
Taboo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Taboo (disambiguation).
Sociology
Social Network Diagram (segment).svg
Outline ·
History
Theory
Positivism ·
Antipositivism ·
Functionalism ·
Conflict theories ·
Social constructionism ·
Structuralism ·
Interactionism ·
Critical theory ·
Structure and agency
Methods
Quantitative ·
Qualitative ·
Historical ·
Mathematical ·
Computational ·
Ethnography ·
Ethnomethodology ·
Network analysis
Subfields
Conflict ·
Criminology ·
Culture ·
Development ·
Deviance ·
Demography ·
Education ·
Economic ·
Environmental ·
Family ·
Gender ·
Health ·
Industrial ·
Inequality ·
Knowledge ·
Law ·
Literature ·
Medical ·
Military ·
Organizational ·
Political ·
Race & ethnicity ·
Religion ·
Rural ·
Science ·
Social change ·
Social movements ·
Social psychology ·
Stratification ·
Technology ·
Urban
Browse
Portal ·
People ·
Organizations ·
Journals ·
Index ·
Timeline
v ·
t ·
e
A taboo is a vehement prohibition of an action based on the belief that such behavior is either too sacred or too accursed for ordinary individuals to undertake, under threat of supernatural punishment.[1][2] Such prohibitions are present in virtually all societies.[1] The word has been somewhat expanded in the social sciences to strong prohibitions relating to any area of human activity or custom that is sacred or forbidden based on moral judgment and religious beliefs.[citation needed] "Breaking a taboo" is usually considered objectionable by society in general, not merely a subset of a culture.
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Examples
3 Function
4 Modernity
5 See also
6 References
Etymology[edit]
The term "taboo" comes from the Tongan tapu or Fijian tabu ("prohibited", "disallowed", "forbidden"),[3] related among others to the Maori tapu, Hawaiian kapu, Malagasy fady. Its English use dates to 1777 when the British explorer James Cook visited Tonga. Describing the cultural practices of the Tongans, he wrote:
Not one of them would sit down, or eat a bit of any thing.... On expressing my surprise at this, they were all taboo, as they said; which word has a very comprehensive meaning; but, in general, signifies that a thing is forbidden.[4]
When any thing is forbidden to be eaten, or made use of, they say, that it is taboo.[5]
The term was translated to him as "consecrated, inviolable, forbidden, unclean or cursed".[6] Tabu itself has been derived from alleged Tongan morphemes ta ("mark") and bu ("especially"), but this may be a folk etymology (note that Tongan does not actually have a phoneme /b/), and tapu is usually treated as a unitary, non-compound word inherited from Proto-Polynesian *tapu, in turn inherited from Proto-Oceanic *tabu, with the reconstructed meaning "sacred, forbidden".[7][8][9] In its current use on Tonga, the word tapu means "sacred" or "holy", often in the sense of being restricted or protected by custom or law. On the main island, the word is often appended to the end of "Tonga" as Tongatapu, here meaning "Sacred South" rather than "Forbidden South".
Examples[edit]
Sigmund Freud posited that incest and patricide were the only two universal taboos and formed the basis of civilization.[10] However, although cannibalism, in-group murder, and incest are taboo in the majority of societies, modern research has found exceptions for each and no taboo is known to be universal.[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]
Common taboos involve restrictions or ritual regulation of killing and hunting; sex and sexual relationships (primarily incest, necrophilia, miscegenation, adultery, fornication, pedophilia, homosexuality, intermarriage, bestiality, and masturbation); reproduction (abortion, infanticide); the deceased and their graves; as well as food and dining (primarily cannibalism and dietary laws such as vegetarianism, kashrut, and halal). In Madagascar, a strong code of taboos, known as fady, constantly change and are formed from new experiences. Each region, village or tribe may have its own fady.
Taboos often extend to cover discussion of taboo topics, resulting in euphemisms and replacement of taboo words.[citation needed]
The word "taboo" gained popularity at times, with some scholars looking for ways to apply it where other English words had previously been applied. For example, J. M. Powis Smith, in his "The American Bible" (editor's preface 1927), used "taboo" occasionally in relation to Israel's Tabernacle and ceremonial laws, including Exodus 30:36, 29:37; Numbers 16:37,38; Deuteronomy 22:9, Isaiah 65:5, Ezekiel 44:19 and 46:20.
Function[edit]
Communist and materialist theorists have argued that taboos can be used to reveal the histories of societies when other records are lacking.[19] Marvin Harris particularly endeavored to explain taboos as a consequence of ecologic and economic conditions.[specify][citation needed]
Modernity[edit]
Contemporary multicultural societies have established a number of taboos rooted in the perceived injustice and deleterious effects of modern history, particularly neocolonialism. Tribalisms (for example, ethnocentrism and nationalism) and prejudices (racism, sexism, religious extremism) are opposed at times reflexively despite the potentially high cost of diverse societies in terms of trust and solidarity.[20]
Changing social customs and standards also create new taboos, such as bans on slavery; extension of the pedophilia taboo to ephebophilia;[21] prohibitions on alcohol, tobacco, or psychopharmaceutical consumption (particularly among pregnant women); and the employment of politically correct euphemisms – at times quite unsuccessfully – to mitigate various alleged forms of discrimination.
Incest itself has been pulled both ways, with some seeking to normalize consensual adult relationships regardless of the degree of kinship[22] (notably in Europe[23][24]) and others expanding the degrees of prohibited contact (notably in the United States[25]).
See also[edit]
This "see also" section may contain an excessive number of suggestions. Please ensure that only the most relevant suggestions are given and that they are not red links, and consider integrating suggestions into the article itself. (March 2014)
ʻAi Noa
Deviance
Etiquette
Geis
Great Taboo
Haraam
Herem
Incest taboo
Kala pani
Kapu
Menstrual taboo
Mores
Mother-in-law languages
Naming taboos
Norm (sociology)
Prohibition
Public morality
Sacred
Sin
Social stigma
Stigmatic-eligibilic paraphilia
Taboo food and drink Dietary laws
Halal
Kosher (Kashrut)
Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork
Scottish pork taboo
Siqqitiq
Unclean animals
Taboo against naming the dead
Taboo on rulers
Taboo on the dead
Tapu
Word taboo
References[edit]
Look up taboo in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
1.^ Jump up to: a b Encyclopædia Britannica Online. "Taboo." Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Accessed 21 Mar. 2012
2.Jump up ^ Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, 11th Edition. "Taboo."
3.Jump up ^ Dixon, Robert M. W. (1988). A Grammar of Boumaa Fijian. p. 368. ISBN 978-0-226-15429-9.
4.Jump up ^ Cook & King 1821, p. 348
5.Jump up ^ Cook & King 1821, p. 462
6.Jump up ^ (Cook & King 1821)
7.Jump up ^ Online Etymology Dictionary. "Taboo."
8.Jump up ^ "Online dictionary". Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. Retrieved 2007-06-05.
9.Jump up ^ Biggs, Bruce. "Entries for TAPU [OC] Prohibited, under ritual restriction, taboo". Polynesian Lexicon Project Online. University of Auckland. Retrieved 9 September 2012.
10.Jump up ^ Freud, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo.
11.Jump up ^ Jones, Ashley. "Incest in Ancient Egypt" (PDF).
12.Jump up ^ Strong, Anise (2006). "Incest Laws and Absent Taboos in Roman Egypt". Ancient History Bulletin 20.
13.Jump up ^ Lewis, N. (1983). Life in Egypt under Roman Rule. Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-814848-8.
14.Jump up ^ Frier, Bruce W.; Bagnall, Roger S. (1994). The Demography of Roman Egypt. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-46123-5.
15.Jump up ^ Shaw, B. D. (1992). "Explaining Incest: Brother-Sister Marriage in Graeco-Roman Egypt". Man, New Series 27 (2): 267–299. JSTOR 2804054.
16.Jump up ^ Hopkins, Keith (1980). "Brother-Sister Marriage in Roman Egypt" (PDF). Comparative Studies in Society and History 22 (3): 303–354. doi:10.1017/S0010417500009385.
17.Jump up ^ remijsen, sofie. "Incest or Adoption? Brother-Sister Marriage in Roman Egypt Revisited" (PDF).
18.Jump up ^ Scheidel, W. "Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt" (PDF).
19.Jump up ^ Marta Dyczok; Oxana Gaman-Golutvina (2009). Media, Democracy and Freedom: The Post-Communist Experience. Peter Lang. p. 209. ISBN 978-3-0343-0311-8.
20.Jump up ^ Putnam, Robert D. "E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century -- The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize". Scandinavian Political Studies. 30 (2), June 2007.
21.Jump up ^ S. Berlin, Frederick. "Interview with Frederick S. Berlin, M.D., Ph.D.". Office of Media Relations. Retrieved 2008-06-27.
22.Jump up ^ Johann Hari (2002-01-09). "Forbidden love". The Guardian. Retrieved 2008-04-11.
23.Jump up ^ Hipp, Dietmar (2008-03-11). "German High Court Takes a Look at Incest". Der Spiegel. Retrieved 2008-04-12.
24.Jump up ^ DONALDSON JAMES, SUSAN. "Professor Accused of Incest With Daughter". ABC Nightline. Retrieved 29 November 2011.
25.Jump up ^ Joanna Grossman, Should the law be kinder to kissin' cousins?
Cook, James; King, James (1821). A voyage to the Pacific Ocean: undertaken by command of His Majesty, for making discoveries in the Northern Hemisphere : performed under the direction of Captains Cook, Clerke, and Gore : in the years 1776, 1777, 1778, 1779, and 1780 : being a copious, comprehensive, and satisfactory abridgement of the voyage. Printed for Champante and Whitrow ... and M. Watson; 1793.
Cook, James (1728–1779). "The Three Voyages of Captain James Cook Round the World" 5. London: A&E Spottiswoode.
Categories: Taboo
Cultural anthropology
Psychoanalytic terminology
Freudian psychology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Kurdî
Кыргызча
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Magyar
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Basa Sunda
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
ייִדיש
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 April 2015, at 10:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taboo
Taboo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Taboo (disambiguation).
Sociology
Social Network Diagram (segment).svg
Outline ·
History
Theory
Positivism ·
Antipositivism ·
Functionalism ·
Conflict theories ·
Social constructionism ·
Structuralism ·
Interactionism ·
Critical theory ·
Structure and agency
Methods
Quantitative ·
Qualitative ·
Historical ·
Mathematical ·
Computational ·
Ethnography ·
Ethnomethodology ·
Network analysis
Subfields
Conflict ·
Criminology ·
Culture ·
Development ·
Deviance ·
Demography ·
Education ·
Economic ·
Environmental ·
Family ·
Gender ·
Health ·
Industrial ·
Inequality ·
Knowledge ·
Law ·
Literature ·
Medical ·
Military ·
Organizational ·
Political ·
Race & ethnicity ·
Religion ·
Rural ·
Science ·
Social change ·
Social movements ·
Social psychology ·
Stratification ·
Technology ·
Urban
Browse
Portal ·
People ·
Organizations ·
Journals ·
Index ·
Timeline
v ·
t ·
e
A taboo is a vehement prohibition of an action based on the belief that such behavior is either too sacred or too accursed for ordinary individuals to undertake, under threat of supernatural punishment.[1][2] Such prohibitions are present in virtually all societies.[1] The word has been somewhat expanded in the social sciences to strong prohibitions relating to any area of human activity or custom that is sacred or forbidden based on moral judgment and religious beliefs.[citation needed] "Breaking a taboo" is usually considered objectionable by society in general, not merely a subset of a culture.
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Examples
3 Function
4 Modernity
5 See also
6 References
Etymology[edit]
The term "taboo" comes from the Tongan tapu or Fijian tabu ("prohibited", "disallowed", "forbidden"),[3] related among others to the Maori tapu, Hawaiian kapu, Malagasy fady. Its English use dates to 1777 when the British explorer James Cook visited Tonga. Describing the cultural practices of the Tongans, he wrote:
Not one of them would sit down, or eat a bit of any thing.... On expressing my surprise at this, they were all taboo, as they said; which word has a very comprehensive meaning; but, in general, signifies that a thing is forbidden.[4]
When any thing is forbidden to be eaten, or made use of, they say, that it is taboo.[5]
The term was translated to him as "consecrated, inviolable, forbidden, unclean or cursed".[6] Tabu itself has been derived from alleged Tongan morphemes ta ("mark") and bu ("especially"), but this may be a folk etymology (note that Tongan does not actually have a phoneme /b/), and tapu is usually treated as a unitary, non-compound word inherited from Proto-Polynesian *tapu, in turn inherited from Proto-Oceanic *tabu, with the reconstructed meaning "sacred, forbidden".[7][8][9] In its current use on Tonga, the word tapu means "sacred" or "holy", often in the sense of being restricted or protected by custom or law. On the main island, the word is often appended to the end of "Tonga" as Tongatapu, here meaning "Sacred South" rather than "Forbidden South".
Examples[edit]
Sigmund Freud posited that incest and patricide were the only two universal taboos and formed the basis of civilization.[10] However, although cannibalism, in-group murder, and incest are taboo in the majority of societies, modern research has found exceptions for each and no taboo is known to be universal.[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]
Common taboos involve restrictions or ritual regulation of killing and hunting; sex and sexual relationships (primarily incest, necrophilia, miscegenation, adultery, fornication, pedophilia, homosexuality, intermarriage, bestiality, and masturbation); reproduction (abortion, infanticide); the deceased and their graves; as well as food and dining (primarily cannibalism and dietary laws such as vegetarianism, kashrut, and halal). In Madagascar, a strong code of taboos, known as fady, constantly change and are formed from new experiences. Each region, village or tribe may have its own fady.
Taboos often extend to cover discussion of taboo topics, resulting in euphemisms and replacement of taboo words.[citation needed]
The word "taboo" gained popularity at times, with some scholars looking for ways to apply it where other English words had previously been applied. For example, J. M. Powis Smith, in his "The American Bible" (editor's preface 1927), used "taboo" occasionally in relation to Israel's Tabernacle and ceremonial laws, including Exodus 30:36, 29:37; Numbers 16:37,38; Deuteronomy 22:9, Isaiah 65:5, Ezekiel 44:19 and 46:20.
Function[edit]
Communist and materialist theorists have argued that taboos can be used to reveal the histories of societies when other records are lacking.[19] Marvin Harris particularly endeavored to explain taboos as a consequence of ecologic and economic conditions.[specify][citation needed]
Modernity[edit]
Contemporary multicultural societies have established a number of taboos rooted in the perceived injustice and deleterious effects of modern history, particularly neocolonialism. Tribalisms (for example, ethnocentrism and nationalism) and prejudices (racism, sexism, religious extremism) are opposed at times reflexively despite the potentially high cost of diverse societies in terms of trust and solidarity.[20]
Changing social customs and standards also create new taboos, such as bans on slavery; extension of the pedophilia taboo to ephebophilia;[21] prohibitions on alcohol, tobacco, or psychopharmaceutical consumption (particularly among pregnant women); and the employment of politically correct euphemisms – at times quite unsuccessfully – to mitigate various alleged forms of discrimination.
Incest itself has been pulled both ways, with some seeking to normalize consensual adult relationships regardless of the degree of kinship[22] (notably in Europe[23][24]) and others expanding the degrees of prohibited contact (notably in the United States[25]).
See also[edit]
This "see also" section may contain an excessive number of suggestions. Please ensure that only the most relevant suggestions are given and that they are not red links, and consider integrating suggestions into the article itself. (March 2014)
ʻAi Noa
Deviance
Etiquette
Geis
Great Taboo
Haraam
Herem
Incest taboo
Kala pani
Kapu
Menstrual taboo
Mores
Mother-in-law languages
Naming taboos
Norm (sociology)
Prohibition
Public morality
Sacred
Sin
Social stigma
Stigmatic-eligibilic paraphilia
Taboo food and drink Dietary laws
Halal
Kosher (Kashrut)
Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork
Scottish pork taboo
Siqqitiq
Unclean animals
Taboo against naming the dead
Taboo on rulers
Taboo on the dead
Tapu
Word taboo
References[edit]
Look up taboo in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
1.^ Jump up to: a b Encyclopædia Britannica Online. "Taboo." Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Accessed 21 Mar. 2012
2.Jump up ^ Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, 11th Edition. "Taboo."
3.Jump up ^ Dixon, Robert M. W. (1988). A Grammar of Boumaa Fijian. p. 368. ISBN 978-0-226-15429-9.
4.Jump up ^ Cook & King 1821, p. 348
5.Jump up ^ Cook & King 1821, p. 462
6.Jump up ^ (Cook & King 1821)
7.Jump up ^ Online Etymology Dictionary. "Taboo."
8.Jump up ^ "Online dictionary". Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. Retrieved 2007-06-05.
9.Jump up ^ Biggs, Bruce. "Entries for TAPU [OC] Prohibited, under ritual restriction, taboo". Polynesian Lexicon Project Online. University of Auckland. Retrieved 9 September 2012.
10.Jump up ^ Freud, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo.
11.Jump up ^ Jones, Ashley. "Incest in Ancient Egypt" (PDF).
12.Jump up ^ Strong, Anise (2006). "Incest Laws and Absent Taboos in Roman Egypt". Ancient History Bulletin 20.
13.Jump up ^ Lewis, N. (1983). Life in Egypt under Roman Rule. Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-814848-8.
14.Jump up ^ Frier, Bruce W.; Bagnall, Roger S. (1994). The Demography of Roman Egypt. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-46123-5.
15.Jump up ^ Shaw, B. D. (1992). "Explaining Incest: Brother-Sister Marriage in Graeco-Roman Egypt". Man, New Series 27 (2): 267–299. JSTOR 2804054.
16.Jump up ^ Hopkins, Keith (1980). "Brother-Sister Marriage in Roman Egypt" (PDF). Comparative Studies in Society and History 22 (3): 303–354. doi:10.1017/S0010417500009385.
17.Jump up ^ remijsen, sofie. "Incest or Adoption? Brother-Sister Marriage in Roman Egypt Revisited" (PDF).
18.Jump up ^ Scheidel, W. "Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt" (PDF).
19.Jump up ^ Marta Dyczok; Oxana Gaman-Golutvina (2009). Media, Democracy and Freedom: The Post-Communist Experience. Peter Lang. p. 209. ISBN 978-3-0343-0311-8.
20.Jump up ^ Putnam, Robert D. "E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century -- The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize". Scandinavian Political Studies. 30 (2), June 2007.
21.Jump up ^ S. Berlin, Frederick. "Interview with Frederick S. Berlin, M.D., Ph.D.". Office of Media Relations. Retrieved 2008-06-27.
22.Jump up ^ Johann Hari (2002-01-09). "Forbidden love". The Guardian. Retrieved 2008-04-11.
23.Jump up ^ Hipp, Dietmar (2008-03-11). "German High Court Takes a Look at Incest". Der Spiegel. Retrieved 2008-04-12.
24.Jump up ^ DONALDSON JAMES, SUSAN. "Professor Accused of Incest With Daughter". ABC Nightline. Retrieved 29 November 2011.
25.Jump up ^ Joanna Grossman, Should the law be kinder to kissin' cousins?
Cook, James; King, James (1821). A voyage to the Pacific Ocean: undertaken by command of His Majesty, for making discoveries in the Northern Hemisphere : performed under the direction of Captains Cook, Clerke, and Gore : in the years 1776, 1777, 1778, 1779, and 1780 : being a copious, comprehensive, and satisfactory abridgement of the voyage. Printed for Champante and Whitrow ... and M. Watson; 1793.
Cook, James (1728–1779). "The Three Voyages of Captain James Cook Round the World" 5. London: A&E Spottiswoode.
Categories: Taboo
Cultural anthropology
Psychoanalytic terminology
Freudian psychology
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Kurdî
Кыргызча
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Magyar
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Basa Sunda
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
ייִדיש
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 April 2015, at 10:32.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taboo
Prejudice
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about a discrimination concept. For legal procedure, see Prejudice (legal procedure).
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Prejudice is prejudgment, or forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward people or a person because of gender, political opinion, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on their perceived group membership.[1] Prejudice can also refer to unfounded beliefs[2] and may include "any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational influence".[3] Gordon Allport defined prejudice as a "feeling, favorable or unfavorable, toward a person or thing, prior to, or not based on, actual experience".[4]
Contents [hide]
1 Historical approaches
2 Contemporary theories and empirical findings
3 Controversies and prominent topics 3.1 Sexism
3.2 Nationalism
3.3 Classism
3.4 Sexual discrimination
3.5 Racism
3.6 Religious discrimination
3.7 Linguistic discrimination
4 Multiculturalism
5 Reducing prejudice 5.1 The contact hypothesis
5.2 Empirical research
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
Historical approaches[edit]
The first psychological research conducted on prejudice occurred in the 1920s. This research attempted to prove white supremacy. One article from 1925 reviewing 73 studies on race concluded that the studies seemed "to indicate the mental superiority of the white race".[5] These studies, along with other research, led many psychologists to view prejudice as a natural response to inferior races.
In the 1930s and 1940s, this perspective began to change due to the increasing concern about anti-Semitism. At the time, theorists viewed prejudice as pathological and thus looked for personality syndromes linked with racism. Theodor Adorno believed that prejudice stemmed from an authoritarian personality; he believed that people with authoritarian personalities were the most likely to be prejudiced against groups of lower status. He described authoritarians as "rigid thinkers who obeyed authority, saw the world as black and white, and enforced strict adherence to social rules and hierarchies".[6]
In 1954, Gordon Allport linked prejudice to categorical thinking. Allport claimed that prejudice is a natural and normal process for humans. According to him, "The human mind must think with the aid of categories… Once formed, categories are the basis for normal prejudgment. We cannot possibly avoid this process. Orderly living depends upon it."[7]
In the 1970s, research began to show that prejudice tends to be based on favoritism towards one's own groups, rather than negative feelings towards another group. According to Marilyn Brewer, prejudice "may develop not because outgroups are hated, but because positive emotions such as admiration, sympathy, and trust are reserved for the ingroup."[8]
In 1979, Thomas Pettigrew described the ultimate attribution error and its role in prejudice. The ultimate attribution error occurs when ingroup members "(1) attribute negative outgroup behavior to dispositional causes (more than they would for identical ingroup behavior), and (2) attribute positive outgroup behavior to one or more of the following causes: (a) a fluke or exceptional case, (b) luck or special advantage, (c) high motivation and effort, and (d) situational factors."[6]
Contemporary theories and empirical findings[edit]
The out-group homogeneity effect is the perception that members of an out-group are more similar (homogenous) than members of the in-group. Social psychologists Quattrone and Jones conducted a study demonstrating this with students from the rival schools Princeton University and Rutgers University.[9] Students at each school were shown videos of other students from each school choosing a type of music to listen to for an auditory perception study. Then the participants were asked to guess what percentage of the videotaped students' classmates would choose the same. Participants predicted a much greater similarity between out-group members (the rival school) than between members of their in-group.
The justification-suppression model of prejudice was created by Christian Crandall and Amy Eshleman.[10] This model explains that people face a conflict between the desire to express prejudice and the desire to maintain a positive self-concept. This conflict causes people to search for justification for disliking an out-group, and to use that justification to avoid negative feelings (cognitive dissonance) about themselves when they act on their dislike of the out-group.
The realistic conflict theory states that competition between limited resources leads to increased negative prejudices and discrimination. This can be seen even when the resource is insignificant. In the Robber's Cave experiment,[11] negative prejudice and hostility was created between two summer camps after sports competitions for small prizes. The hostility was lessened after the two competing camps were forced to cooperate on tasks to achieve a common goal.
Another contemporary theory is the integrated threat theory (ITT), which was developed by Walter G Stephan.[12] It draws from and builds upon several other psychological explanations of prejudice and ingroup/outgroup behaviour, such as the realistic conflict theory and symbolic racism.[13] It also uses the social identity theory perspective as the basis for its validity; that is, it assumes that individuals operate in a group-based context where group memberships form a part of individual identity. ITT posits that outgroup prejudice and discrimination is caused when individuals perceive an outgroup to be threatening in some way. ITT defines four threats:
Realistic threats
Symbolic threats
Intergroup anxiety
Negative stereotypes
Realistic threats are tangible, such as competition for a natural resource or a threat to income. Symbolic threats arise from a perceived difference in cultural values between groups or a perceived imbalance of power (for example, an ingroup perceiving an outgroup's religion as incompatible with theirs). Intergroup anxiety is a feeling of uneasiness experienced in the presence of an outgroup or outgroup member, which constitutes a threat because interactions with other groups cause negative feelings (e.g., a threat to comfortable interactions). Negative stereotypes are similarly threats, in that individuals anticipate negative behaviour from outgroup members in line with the perceived stereotype (for example, that the outgroup is violent). Often these stereotypes are associated with emotions such as fear and anger. ITT differs from other threat theories by including intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes as threat types.
Additionally, social dominance theory states that society can be viewed as group-based hierarchies. In competition for scarce resources such as housing or employment, dominant groups create prejudiced "legitimizing myths" to provide moral and intellectual justification for their dominant position over other groups and validate their claim over the limited resources.[14] Legitimizing myths, such as discriminatory hiring practices or biased merit norms, work to maintain these prejudiced hierarchies.
Prejudice can be a central contributing factor to depression.[15] This can occur in someone who is a prejudice victim, being the target of someone else's prejudice, or when people have prejudice against themselves that causes their own depression.
Controversies and prominent topics[edit]
One can be prejudiced against or have a preconceived notion about someone due to any characteristic they find to be unusual or undesirable. A few commonplace examples of prejudice are those based on someone's race, gender, nationality, social status, sexual orientation, or religious affiliation, and controversies may arise from any given topic.
Sexism[edit]
Main article: Sexism
The term sexism is generally linked to negative sentiments with regard to females that derive from the belief that females are worth less or less capable than males.[16] The discussion of such sentiments, and actual gender differences and stereotypes continue to be controversial topics. Throughout history, women have been thought of as being subordinate to men, often being ignored in areas like the academia or belittled altogether. Traditionally, men were thought of as being more capable than women, mentally and physically.[16] In the field of social psychology, prejudice studies like the "Who Likes Competent Women" study led the way for gender-based research on prejudice.[16] This resulted in two broad themes or focuses in the field: the first being a focus on attitudes toward gender equality, and the second focusing on people's beliefs about men and women.[16] Today, studies based on sexism continue in the field of psychology as researchers try to understand how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors influence and are influenced by others.
Nationalism[edit]
Main article: Nationalism
Nationalism is a sentiment based on common cultural characteristics that binds a population and often produces a policy of national independence or separatism.[17] It suggests a "shared identity" amongst a nation's people that minimizes differences within the group and emphasizes perceived boundaries between the group and non-members.[18] This leads to the assumption that members of the nation have more in common than they actually do, that they are "culturally unified", even if injustices within the nation based on differences like status and race exist.[18] During times of conflict between one nation and another, nationalism is controversial since it may function as a buffer for criticism when it comes to the nation's own problems since it makes the nation's own hierarchies and internal conflicts appear to be natural.[18] It may also serve a way of rallying the people of the nation in support of a particular political goal.[18] Nationalism usually involves a push for conformity, obedience, and solidarity amongst the nation's people and can result not only in feelings of public responsibility but also in a narrow sense of community due to the exclusion of those who are considered outsiders.[18] Since the identity of nationalists is linked to their allegiance to the state, the presence of strangers who do not share this allegiance may result in hostility.[18]
Classism[edit]
Main article: Classism
Classism is defined by dictionary.com as "a biased or discriminatory attitude on distinctions made between social or economic classes."[19] The idea of separating people based on class is controversial in itself. Some argue that economic inequality is an unavoidable aspect of society, so there will always be a ruling class.[20] Some also argue that, even within the most egalitarian societies in history, some form of ranking based on social status takes place. Therefore, one may believe the existence of social classes is a natural feature of society.[21]
Others argue the contrary. According to anthropological evidence, for the majority of the time the human species has been in existence, humans have lived in a manner in which the land and resources were not privately owned.[21] Also, when social ranking did occur, it was not antagonistic or hostile like the current class system.[21] This evidence has been used to support the idea that the existence of a social class system is unnecessary. Overall, society has neither come to a consensus over the necessity of the class system, nor been able to deal with the hostility and prejudice that occurs because of the class system.
Sexual discrimination[edit]
Main article: Homophobia
One's sexual orientation is the "direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes".[22] Like most minority groups, homosexuals and bisexuals are not immune to prejudice or stereotypes from the majority group. They may experience hatred from others because of their sexual preferences; a term for such intense hatred based upon one's sexual orientation is homophobia.
Due to what social psychologists call the vividness effect, a tendency to notice only certain distinctive characteristics, the majority population tends to draw conclusions like gays flaunt their sexuality.[23] Such images may be easily recalled to mind due to their vividness, making it harder to appraise the entire situation.[23] The majority population may not only think that homosexuals flaunt their sexuality or are "too gay", but may also erroneously believe that homosexuals are easy to identify and label as being gay or lesbian when compared to others who are not homosexual.[24]
The idea of heterosexual privilege seems to flourish in society. Research and questionnaires are formulated to fit the majority; i.e., heterosexuals. This discussion of whether heterosexuals are the privileged group and whether homosexuals are a minimized group is controversial. Research shows that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a powerful feature of many labor markets. For example, controlling for human capital, studies show that gay men earn 10% - 32% less than heterosexual men in the United States, and that there is significant discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation in many labor markets.[25]
Racism[edit]
Main article: Racism
Racism is defined as the belief that physical characteristics determine cultural traits, and that racial characteristics make some groups superior.[26] By separating people into hierarchies based upon their race, it has been argued that unequal treatment among the different groups of people is just and fair due to their genetic differences.[26] Racism can occur amongst any group that can be identified based upon physical features or even characteristics of their culture.[26] Though people may be lumped together and called a specific race, everyone does not fit neatly into such categories, making it hard to define and describe a race accurately.[26]
Scientific racism began to flourish in the eighteenth century and was greatly influenced by Charles Darwin's evolutionary studies, as well as ideas taken from the writings of philosophers like Aristotle; for example, Aristotle believed in the concept of "natural slaves".[26] This concept focuses on the necessity of hierarchies and how some people are bound to be on the bottom of the pyramid. Though racism has been a prominent topic in history, there is still debate over whether race actually exists,[citation needed] making the discussion of race a controversial topic. Even though the concept of race is still being debated, the effects of racism are apparent. Racism and other forms of prejudice can affect a person's behavior, thoughts, and feelings, and social psychologists strive to study these effects.
Religious discrimination[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination
While various religions teach their members to be tolerant of those who are different and to have compassion, throughout history there have also been instances where religion has been used to promote hate.[27] Researchers have done various studies explore the relationship between religion and prejudice; thus far, they have received mixed results. A study done with US college students found that those who reported religion to be very influential in their lives seem to have a higher rate of prejudice than those who reported not being religious.[27] Other studies found that religion has a positive effect on people as far as prejudice is concerned.[27] This difference in results may be attributed to the differences in religious practices or religious interpretations amongst the individuals. Those who practice "institutionalized religion", which focuses more on social and political aspects of religious events, are more likely to have an increase in prejudice.[28] Those who practice "interiorized religion", in which believers devote themselves to their beliefs, are most likely to have a decrease in prejudice.[28]
Linguistic discrimination[edit]
Main article: Linguistic discrimination
Individuals or groups may be treated unfairly based solely on their use of language. This use of language may include the individual's native language or other characteristics of the person's speech, such as an accent, the size of vocabulary (whether the person uses complex and varied words), and syntax. It may also involve a person's ability or inability to use one language instead of another. In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas captured this idea of discrimination based on language as the concept of linguicism. Kangas defined linguicism as the ideologies and structures used to "legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources (both material and non-material) between groups which are defined on the basis of language."[29]
Multiculturalism[edit]
Main article: Multiculturalism
Humans have an evolved propensity to think categorically about social groups, manifested in cognitive processes with broad implications for public and political endorsement of multicultural policy, according to psychologists Richard J. Crisp and Rose Meleady.[30] They postulated a cognitive-evolutionary account of human adaptation to social diversity that explains general resistance to multiculturalism, and offer a reorienting call for scholars and policy-makers who seek intervention-based solutions to the problem of prejudice.
Reducing prejudice[edit]
The contact hypothesis[edit]
The contact hypothesis predicts that prejudice can only be reduced when in-group and out-group members are brought together.[31] In particular, there are six conditions that must be met to reduce prejudice, as were cultivated in Elliot Aronson's "jigsaw" teaching technique.[31] First, the in- and out-groups must have a degree of mutual interdependence. Second, both groups need to share a common goal. Third, the two groups must have equal status. Fourth, there must be frequent opportunities for informal and interpersonal contact between groups. Fifth, there should be multiple contacts between the in- and the out-groups. Finally, social norms of equality must exist and be present to foster prejudice reduction.
Empirical research[edit]
Academics Thomas Pettigrew and Linda Tropp conducted a meta-analysis of 515 studies involving a quarter of a million participants in 38 nations to examine how intergroup contact reduces prejudice. They found that three mediators are of particular importance: Intergroup contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about intergroup contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective-taking. While all three of these mediators had mediational effects, the mediational value of increased knowledge was less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy.[32] In addition, some individuals confront discrimination when they see it happen, with research finding that individuals are more likely to confront when they perceive benefits to themselves, and are less likely to confront when concerned about others' reactions.[33]
See also[edit]
Ambivalent prejudice
Benevolent prejudice
Bigotry
Common ingroup identity
Hostile prejudice
Idée fixe (psychology)
Stigma management
Suspension of judgment
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner. S. L. (2010). "Intergroup bias". In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
2.Jump up ^ William James wrote: "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." Quotable Quotes – Courtesy of The Freeman Institute
3.Jump up ^ Rosnow, Ralph L. (March 1972). "Poultry and Prejudice". Psychologist Today 5 (10): 53–6.
4.Jump up ^ Allport, Gordon (1979). The Nature of Prejudice. Perseus Books Publishing. p. 6. ISBN 0-201-00179-9.
5.Jump up ^ Garth, T. Rooster. (1930). "A review of race psychology". Psychological Bulletin 27 (5): 329–56. doi:10.1037/h0075064.
6.^ Jump up to: a b Plous, S. "The Psychology of Prejudice". Understanding Prejudice.org. Web. 07 Apr. 2011.[verification needed]
7.Jump up ^ Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.[page needed]
8.Jump up ^ Brewer, Marilynn B. (1999). "The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?". Journal of Social Issues 55 (3): 429–44. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126.
9.Jump up ^ Quattrone, George A.; Jones, Edward E. (1980). "The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38: 141–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141.
10.Jump up ^ Crandall, Christian S.; Eshleman, Amy (2003). "A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice". Psychological Bulletin 129 (3): 414–46. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414. PMID 12784937.
11.Jump up ^ Sherif, Muzafer; Harvey, O. J.; White, B. Jack; Hood, William R.; Sherif, Carolyn W. (1988). The Robbers Cave Experiment: Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press. ISBN 978-0-8195-6194-7.[page needed]
12.Jump up ^ Stephan, Cookie White; Stephan, Walter C.; Demitrakis, Katherine M.; Yamada, Ann Marie; Clason, Dennis L. (2000). "Women's Attitudes Toward Men: an Integrated Threat Theory Approach". Psychology of Women Quarterly 24: 63–73. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01022.x.
13.Jump up ^ Riek, Blake M.; Mania, Eric W.; Gaertner, Samuel L. (2006). "Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review". Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (4): 336–53. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4. PMID 17201592.
14.Jump up ^ Sidanius, Jim; Pratto, Felicia; Bobo, Lawrence (1996). "Racism, conservatism, Affirmative Action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 476–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.476.
15.Jump up ^ Cox, William T. L.; Abramson, Lyn Y.; Devine, Patricia G.; Hollon, Steven D. (2012). "Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Depression: The Integrated Perspective". Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (5): 427–49. doi:10.1177/1745691612455204.
16.^ Jump up to: a b c d Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 108. Print.
17.Jump up ^ "Nationalism", dictionary.com
18.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Blackwell, Judith; Smith, Murray; Sorenson, John (2003). Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press. pp. 31–2.
19.Jump up ^ "Classism", dictionary.com
20.Jump up ^ Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 145. Print.
21.^ Jump up to: a b c Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 146. Print.
22.Jump up ^ "Sexual Orientation", dictionary.com
23.^ Jump up to: a b Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 198. Print.
24.Jump up ^ Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 200. Print.
25.Jump up ^ Tilcsik, A (2011). "Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States". American Journal of Sociology 117 (2): 586–626. PMID 22268247.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 37–38. Print.
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 413. Print.
28.^ Jump up to: a b Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 414. Print.
29.Jump up ^ Quoted in Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Phillipson, Robert, "'Mother Tongue': The Theoretical and Sociopolitical Construction of a Concept". In Ammon, Ulrich (ed.) (1989), Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties, p. 455. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co. ISBN 3-11-011299-X.
30.Jump up ^ Crisp, Richard J.; Meleady, Rose (2012). "Adapting to a Multicultural Future". Science 336 (6083): 853–5. doi:10.1126/science.1219009. PMID 22605761.
31.^ Jump up to: a b Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social Psychology (7th edition). New York: Pearson.
32.Jump up ^ Pettigrew, Thomas F.; Tropp, Linda R. (2008). "How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators". European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (6): 922–934. doi:10.1002/ejsp.504.
33.Jump up ^ Good, J. J.; Moss-Racusin, C. A.; Sanchez, D. T. (2012). "When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others". Psychology of Women Quarterly 36: 210–226. doi:10.1177/0361684312440958.
Further reading[edit]
Adorno, Th. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J. and Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Dorschel, A., Rethinking prejudice. Aldershot, Hampshire – Burlington, Vermont – Singapore – Sydney: Ashgate, 2000 (New Critical Thinking in Philosophy, ed. Ernest Sosa, Alan H. Goldman, Alan Musgrave et alii)
MacRae, C. Neil; Bodenhausen, Galen V. (2001). "Social cognition: Categorical person perception". British Journal of Psychology 92: 239–55. doi:10.1348/000712601162059.
Sherman, Jeffrey W.; Lee, Angela Y.; Bessenoff, Gayle R.; Frost, Leigh A. (1998). "Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: Encoding flexibility under cognitive load". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75 (3): 589–606. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.589. PMID 9781404.
Kinder, Donald R.; Sanders, Lynn M. (1997). "Subtle Prejudice for Modern Times". Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. American Politics and Political Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 92–160. ISBN 978-0-226-43574-9.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Prejudice.
Look up prejudice or prejudgment in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Abuse
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
Categories: Abuse
Discrimination
Prejudices
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Български
Català
Čeština
Corsu
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Magyar
Македонски
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Vèneto
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 7 April 2015, at 11:49.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice
Prejudice
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about a discrimination concept. For legal procedure, see Prejudice (legal procedure).
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Prejudice is prejudgment, or forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward people or a person because of gender, political opinion, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on their perceived group membership.[1] Prejudice can also refer to unfounded beliefs[2] and may include "any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational influence".[3] Gordon Allport defined prejudice as a "feeling, favorable or unfavorable, toward a person or thing, prior to, or not based on, actual experience".[4]
Contents [hide]
1 Historical approaches
2 Contemporary theories and empirical findings
3 Controversies and prominent topics 3.1 Sexism
3.2 Nationalism
3.3 Classism
3.4 Sexual discrimination
3.5 Racism
3.6 Religious discrimination
3.7 Linguistic discrimination
4 Multiculturalism
5 Reducing prejudice 5.1 The contact hypothesis
5.2 Empirical research
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
Historical approaches[edit]
The first psychological research conducted on prejudice occurred in the 1920s. This research attempted to prove white supremacy. One article from 1925 reviewing 73 studies on race concluded that the studies seemed "to indicate the mental superiority of the white race".[5] These studies, along with other research, led many psychologists to view prejudice as a natural response to inferior races.
In the 1930s and 1940s, this perspective began to change due to the increasing concern about anti-Semitism. At the time, theorists viewed prejudice as pathological and thus looked for personality syndromes linked with racism. Theodor Adorno believed that prejudice stemmed from an authoritarian personality; he believed that people with authoritarian personalities were the most likely to be prejudiced against groups of lower status. He described authoritarians as "rigid thinkers who obeyed authority, saw the world as black and white, and enforced strict adherence to social rules and hierarchies".[6]
In 1954, Gordon Allport linked prejudice to categorical thinking. Allport claimed that prejudice is a natural and normal process for humans. According to him, "The human mind must think with the aid of categories… Once formed, categories are the basis for normal prejudgment. We cannot possibly avoid this process. Orderly living depends upon it."[7]
In the 1970s, research began to show that prejudice tends to be based on favoritism towards one's own groups, rather than negative feelings towards another group. According to Marilyn Brewer, prejudice "may develop not because outgroups are hated, but because positive emotions such as admiration, sympathy, and trust are reserved for the ingroup."[8]
In 1979, Thomas Pettigrew described the ultimate attribution error and its role in prejudice. The ultimate attribution error occurs when ingroup members "(1) attribute negative outgroup behavior to dispositional causes (more than they would for identical ingroup behavior), and (2) attribute positive outgroup behavior to one or more of the following causes: (a) a fluke or exceptional case, (b) luck or special advantage, (c) high motivation and effort, and (d) situational factors."[6]
Contemporary theories and empirical findings[edit]
The out-group homogeneity effect is the perception that members of an out-group are more similar (homogenous) than members of the in-group. Social psychologists Quattrone and Jones conducted a study demonstrating this with students from the rival schools Princeton University and Rutgers University.[9] Students at each school were shown videos of other students from each school choosing a type of music to listen to for an auditory perception study. Then the participants were asked to guess what percentage of the videotaped students' classmates would choose the same. Participants predicted a much greater similarity between out-group members (the rival school) than between members of their in-group.
The justification-suppression model of prejudice was created by Christian Crandall and Amy Eshleman.[10] This model explains that people face a conflict between the desire to express prejudice and the desire to maintain a positive self-concept. This conflict causes people to search for justification for disliking an out-group, and to use that justification to avoid negative feelings (cognitive dissonance) about themselves when they act on their dislike of the out-group.
The realistic conflict theory states that competition between limited resources leads to increased negative prejudices and discrimination. This can be seen even when the resource is insignificant. In the Robber's Cave experiment,[11] negative prejudice and hostility was created between two summer camps after sports competitions for small prizes. The hostility was lessened after the two competing camps were forced to cooperate on tasks to achieve a common goal.
Another contemporary theory is the integrated threat theory (ITT), which was developed by Walter G Stephan.[12] It draws from and builds upon several other psychological explanations of prejudice and ingroup/outgroup behaviour, such as the realistic conflict theory and symbolic racism.[13] It also uses the social identity theory perspective as the basis for its validity; that is, it assumes that individuals operate in a group-based context where group memberships form a part of individual identity. ITT posits that outgroup prejudice and discrimination is caused when individuals perceive an outgroup to be threatening in some way. ITT defines four threats:
Realistic threats
Symbolic threats
Intergroup anxiety
Negative stereotypes
Realistic threats are tangible, such as competition for a natural resource or a threat to income. Symbolic threats arise from a perceived difference in cultural values between groups or a perceived imbalance of power (for example, an ingroup perceiving an outgroup's religion as incompatible with theirs). Intergroup anxiety is a feeling of uneasiness experienced in the presence of an outgroup or outgroup member, which constitutes a threat because interactions with other groups cause negative feelings (e.g., a threat to comfortable interactions). Negative stereotypes are similarly threats, in that individuals anticipate negative behaviour from outgroup members in line with the perceived stereotype (for example, that the outgroup is violent). Often these stereotypes are associated with emotions such as fear and anger. ITT differs from other threat theories by including intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes as threat types.
Additionally, social dominance theory states that society can be viewed as group-based hierarchies. In competition for scarce resources such as housing or employment, dominant groups create prejudiced "legitimizing myths" to provide moral and intellectual justification for their dominant position over other groups and validate their claim over the limited resources.[14] Legitimizing myths, such as discriminatory hiring practices or biased merit norms, work to maintain these prejudiced hierarchies.
Prejudice can be a central contributing factor to depression.[15] This can occur in someone who is a prejudice victim, being the target of someone else's prejudice, or when people have prejudice against themselves that causes their own depression.
Controversies and prominent topics[edit]
One can be prejudiced against or have a preconceived notion about someone due to any characteristic they find to be unusual or undesirable. A few commonplace examples of prejudice are those based on someone's race, gender, nationality, social status, sexual orientation, or religious affiliation, and controversies may arise from any given topic.
Sexism[edit]
Main article: Sexism
The term sexism is generally linked to negative sentiments with regard to females that derive from the belief that females are worth less or less capable than males.[16] The discussion of such sentiments, and actual gender differences and stereotypes continue to be controversial topics. Throughout history, women have been thought of as being subordinate to men, often being ignored in areas like the academia or belittled altogether. Traditionally, men were thought of as being more capable than women, mentally and physically.[16] In the field of social psychology, prejudice studies like the "Who Likes Competent Women" study led the way for gender-based research on prejudice.[16] This resulted in two broad themes or focuses in the field: the first being a focus on attitudes toward gender equality, and the second focusing on people's beliefs about men and women.[16] Today, studies based on sexism continue in the field of psychology as researchers try to understand how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors influence and are influenced by others.
Nationalism[edit]
Main article: Nationalism
Nationalism is a sentiment based on common cultural characteristics that binds a population and often produces a policy of national independence or separatism.[17] It suggests a "shared identity" amongst a nation's people that minimizes differences within the group and emphasizes perceived boundaries between the group and non-members.[18] This leads to the assumption that members of the nation have more in common than they actually do, that they are "culturally unified", even if injustices within the nation based on differences like status and race exist.[18] During times of conflict between one nation and another, nationalism is controversial since it may function as a buffer for criticism when it comes to the nation's own problems since it makes the nation's own hierarchies and internal conflicts appear to be natural.[18] It may also serve a way of rallying the people of the nation in support of a particular political goal.[18] Nationalism usually involves a push for conformity, obedience, and solidarity amongst the nation's people and can result not only in feelings of public responsibility but also in a narrow sense of community due to the exclusion of those who are considered outsiders.[18] Since the identity of nationalists is linked to their allegiance to the state, the presence of strangers who do not share this allegiance may result in hostility.[18]
Classism[edit]
Main article: Classism
Classism is defined by dictionary.com as "a biased or discriminatory attitude on distinctions made between social or economic classes."[19] The idea of separating people based on class is controversial in itself. Some argue that economic inequality is an unavoidable aspect of society, so there will always be a ruling class.[20] Some also argue that, even within the most egalitarian societies in history, some form of ranking based on social status takes place. Therefore, one may believe the existence of social classes is a natural feature of society.[21]
Others argue the contrary. According to anthropological evidence, for the majority of the time the human species has been in existence, humans have lived in a manner in which the land and resources were not privately owned.[21] Also, when social ranking did occur, it was not antagonistic or hostile like the current class system.[21] This evidence has been used to support the idea that the existence of a social class system is unnecessary. Overall, society has neither come to a consensus over the necessity of the class system, nor been able to deal with the hostility and prejudice that occurs because of the class system.
Sexual discrimination[edit]
Main article: Homophobia
One's sexual orientation is the "direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes".[22] Like most minority groups, homosexuals and bisexuals are not immune to prejudice or stereotypes from the majority group. They may experience hatred from others because of their sexual preferences; a term for such intense hatred based upon one's sexual orientation is homophobia.
Due to what social psychologists call the vividness effect, a tendency to notice only certain distinctive characteristics, the majority population tends to draw conclusions like gays flaunt their sexuality.[23] Such images may be easily recalled to mind due to their vividness, making it harder to appraise the entire situation.[23] The majority population may not only think that homosexuals flaunt their sexuality or are "too gay", but may also erroneously believe that homosexuals are easy to identify and label as being gay or lesbian when compared to others who are not homosexual.[24]
The idea of heterosexual privilege seems to flourish in society. Research and questionnaires are formulated to fit the majority; i.e., heterosexuals. This discussion of whether heterosexuals are the privileged group and whether homosexuals are a minimized group is controversial. Research shows that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a powerful feature of many labor markets. For example, controlling for human capital, studies show that gay men earn 10% - 32% less than heterosexual men in the United States, and that there is significant discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation in many labor markets.[25]
Racism[edit]
Main article: Racism
Racism is defined as the belief that physical characteristics determine cultural traits, and that racial characteristics make some groups superior.[26] By separating people into hierarchies based upon their race, it has been argued that unequal treatment among the different groups of people is just and fair due to their genetic differences.[26] Racism can occur amongst any group that can be identified based upon physical features or even characteristics of their culture.[26] Though people may be lumped together and called a specific race, everyone does not fit neatly into such categories, making it hard to define and describe a race accurately.[26]
Scientific racism began to flourish in the eighteenth century and was greatly influenced by Charles Darwin's evolutionary studies, as well as ideas taken from the writings of philosophers like Aristotle; for example, Aristotle believed in the concept of "natural slaves".[26] This concept focuses on the necessity of hierarchies and how some people are bound to be on the bottom of the pyramid. Though racism has been a prominent topic in history, there is still debate over whether race actually exists,[citation needed] making the discussion of race a controversial topic. Even though the concept of race is still being debated, the effects of racism are apparent. Racism and other forms of prejudice can affect a person's behavior, thoughts, and feelings, and social psychologists strive to study these effects.
Religious discrimination[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination
While various religions teach their members to be tolerant of those who are different and to have compassion, throughout history there have also been instances where religion has been used to promote hate.[27] Researchers have done various studies explore the relationship between religion and prejudice; thus far, they have received mixed results. A study done with US college students found that those who reported religion to be very influential in their lives seem to have a higher rate of prejudice than those who reported not being religious.[27] Other studies found that religion has a positive effect on people as far as prejudice is concerned.[27] This difference in results may be attributed to the differences in religious practices or religious interpretations amongst the individuals. Those who practice "institutionalized religion", which focuses more on social and political aspects of religious events, are more likely to have an increase in prejudice.[28] Those who practice "interiorized religion", in which believers devote themselves to their beliefs, are most likely to have a decrease in prejudice.[28]
Linguistic discrimination[edit]
Main article: Linguistic discrimination
Individuals or groups may be treated unfairly based solely on their use of language. This use of language may include the individual's native language or other characteristics of the person's speech, such as an accent, the size of vocabulary (whether the person uses complex and varied words), and syntax. It may also involve a person's ability or inability to use one language instead of another. In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas captured this idea of discrimination based on language as the concept of linguicism. Kangas defined linguicism as the ideologies and structures used to "legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources (both material and non-material) between groups which are defined on the basis of language."[29]
Multiculturalism[edit]
Main article: Multiculturalism
Humans have an evolved propensity to think categorically about social groups, manifested in cognitive processes with broad implications for public and political endorsement of multicultural policy, according to psychologists Richard J. Crisp and Rose Meleady.[30] They postulated a cognitive-evolutionary account of human adaptation to social diversity that explains general resistance to multiculturalism, and offer a reorienting call for scholars and policy-makers who seek intervention-based solutions to the problem of prejudice.
Reducing prejudice[edit]
The contact hypothesis[edit]
The contact hypothesis predicts that prejudice can only be reduced when in-group and out-group members are brought together.[31] In particular, there are six conditions that must be met to reduce prejudice, as were cultivated in Elliot Aronson's "jigsaw" teaching technique.[31] First, the in- and out-groups must have a degree of mutual interdependence. Second, both groups need to share a common goal. Third, the two groups must have equal status. Fourth, there must be frequent opportunities for informal and interpersonal contact between groups. Fifth, there should be multiple contacts between the in- and the out-groups. Finally, social norms of equality must exist and be present to foster prejudice reduction.
Empirical research[edit]
Academics Thomas Pettigrew and Linda Tropp conducted a meta-analysis of 515 studies involving a quarter of a million participants in 38 nations to examine how intergroup contact reduces prejudice. They found that three mediators are of particular importance: Intergroup contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about intergroup contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective-taking. While all three of these mediators had mediational effects, the mediational value of increased knowledge was less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy.[32] In addition, some individuals confront discrimination when they see it happen, with research finding that individuals are more likely to confront when they perceive benefits to themselves, and are less likely to confront when concerned about others' reactions.[33]
See also[edit]
Ambivalent prejudice
Benevolent prejudice
Bigotry
Common ingroup identity
Hostile prejudice
Idée fixe (psychology)
Stigma management
Suspension of judgment
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner. S. L. (2010). "Intergroup bias". In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
2.Jump up ^ William James wrote: "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." Quotable Quotes – Courtesy of The Freeman Institute
3.Jump up ^ Rosnow, Ralph L. (March 1972). "Poultry and Prejudice". Psychologist Today 5 (10): 53–6.
4.Jump up ^ Allport, Gordon (1979). The Nature of Prejudice. Perseus Books Publishing. p. 6. ISBN 0-201-00179-9.
5.Jump up ^ Garth, T. Rooster. (1930). "A review of race psychology". Psychological Bulletin 27 (5): 329–56. doi:10.1037/h0075064.
6.^ Jump up to: a b Plous, S. "The Psychology of Prejudice". Understanding Prejudice.org. Web. 07 Apr. 2011.[verification needed]
7.Jump up ^ Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.[page needed]
8.Jump up ^ Brewer, Marilynn B. (1999). "The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?". Journal of Social Issues 55 (3): 429–44. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126.
9.Jump up ^ Quattrone, George A.; Jones, Edward E. (1980). "The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38: 141–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141.
10.Jump up ^ Crandall, Christian S.; Eshleman, Amy (2003). "A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice". Psychological Bulletin 129 (3): 414–46. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414. PMID 12784937.
11.Jump up ^ Sherif, Muzafer; Harvey, O. J.; White, B. Jack; Hood, William R.; Sherif, Carolyn W. (1988). The Robbers Cave Experiment: Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press. ISBN 978-0-8195-6194-7.[page needed]
12.Jump up ^ Stephan, Cookie White; Stephan, Walter C.; Demitrakis, Katherine M.; Yamada, Ann Marie; Clason, Dennis L. (2000). "Women's Attitudes Toward Men: an Integrated Threat Theory Approach". Psychology of Women Quarterly 24: 63–73. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01022.x.
13.Jump up ^ Riek, Blake M.; Mania, Eric W.; Gaertner, Samuel L. (2006). "Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review". Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (4): 336–53. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4. PMID 17201592.
14.Jump up ^ Sidanius, Jim; Pratto, Felicia; Bobo, Lawrence (1996). "Racism, conservatism, Affirmative Action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 476–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.476.
15.Jump up ^ Cox, William T. L.; Abramson, Lyn Y.; Devine, Patricia G.; Hollon, Steven D. (2012). "Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Depression: The Integrated Perspective". Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (5): 427–49. doi:10.1177/1745691612455204.
16.^ Jump up to: a b c d Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 108. Print.
17.Jump up ^ "Nationalism", dictionary.com
18.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Blackwell, Judith; Smith, Murray; Sorenson, John (2003). Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press. pp. 31–2.
19.Jump up ^ "Classism", dictionary.com
20.Jump up ^ Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 145. Print.
21.^ Jump up to: a b c Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 146. Print.
22.Jump up ^ "Sexual Orientation", dictionary.com
23.^ Jump up to: a b Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 198. Print.
24.Jump up ^ Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 200. Print.
25.Jump up ^ Tilcsik, A (2011). "Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States". American Journal of Sociology 117 (2): 586–626. PMID 22268247.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 37–38. Print.
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 413. Print.
28.^ Jump up to: a b Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 414. Print.
29.Jump up ^ Quoted in Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Phillipson, Robert, "'Mother Tongue': The Theoretical and Sociopolitical Construction of a Concept". In Ammon, Ulrich (ed.) (1989), Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties, p. 455. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co. ISBN 3-11-011299-X.
30.Jump up ^ Crisp, Richard J.; Meleady, Rose (2012). "Adapting to a Multicultural Future". Science 336 (6083): 853–5. doi:10.1126/science.1219009. PMID 22605761.
31.^ Jump up to: a b Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social Psychology (7th edition). New York: Pearson.
32.Jump up ^ Pettigrew, Thomas F.; Tropp, Linda R. (2008). "How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators". European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (6): 922–934. doi:10.1002/ejsp.504.
33.Jump up ^ Good, J. J.; Moss-Racusin, C. A.; Sanchez, D. T. (2012). "When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others". Psychology of Women Quarterly 36: 210–226. doi:10.1177/0361684312440958.
Further reading[edit]
Adorno, Th. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J. and Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Dorschel, A., Rethinking prejudice. Aldershot, Hampshire – Burlington, Vermont – Singapore – Sydney: Ashgate, 2000 (New Critical Thinking in Philosophy, ed. Ernest Sosa, Alan H. Goldman, Alan Musgrave et alii)
MacRae, C. Neil; Bodenhausen, Galen V. (2001). "Social cognition: Categorical person perception". British Journal of Psychology 92: 239–55. doi:10.1348/000712601162059.
Sherman, Jeffrey W.; Lee, Angela Y.; Bessenoff, Gayle R.; Frost, Leigh A. (1998). "Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: Encoding flexibility under cognitive load". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75 (3): 589–606. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.589. PMID 9781404.
Kinder, Donald R.; Sanders, Lynn M. (1997). "Subtle Prejudice for Modern Times". Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. American Politics and Political Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 92–160. ISBN 978-0-226-43574-9.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Prejudice.
Look up prejudice or prejudgment in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Abuse
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
Categories: Abuse
Discrimination
Prejudices
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Български
Català
Čeština
Corsu
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Magyar
Македонски
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Vèneto
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 7 April 2015, at 11:49.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice
Hatred
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Hate" redirects here. For other uses, see Hate (disambiguation).
"Hates" redirects here. For the German singer, see Adrian Hates.
For the video game, see Hatred (video game).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2014)
Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike. It can be directed against individuals, groups, entities, objects, or ideas. Hatred is often associated with feelings of anger, disgust and a disposition towards hostility.
Contents [hide]
1 Ethnolinguistics
2 Psychoanalytic views
3 Neurological research
4 Legal issues
5 Religious Perspectives 5.1 Christianity
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
Ethnolinguistics[edit]
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article needs additional citations for verification. (August 2014)
This article possibly contains original research. (July 2014)
James W. Underhill, in his Ethnolinguistics and Cultural Concepts: truth, love, hate & war, (2012) discusses the origin and the metaphoric representations of hate in various languages. He stresses that love and hate are social, and culturally constructed. For this reason, hate is historically situated. Although it is fair to say that one single emotion exists in English, French (haine), and German (Hass), hate varies in the forms in which it is manifested. A certain relationless hatred is expressed in the French expression J'ai la haine, which has no equivalent in English. While for English-speakers, loving and hating invariably involve an object, or a person, and therefore, a relationship with something or someone, J'ai la haine (literally, I have hate) precludes the idea of an emotion directed at a person. This is a form of frustration, apathy and animosity which churns within the subject but establishes no relationship with the world, other than an aimless desire for destruction. Underhill (following Philippe Roger) also considers French forms of anti-Americanism as a specific form of cultural resentment. At the same time, he analyses the hatred promoted by Ronald Reagan in his rhetoric directed against the "evil empire". In addition, Underhill suggests it is worrying that foreign languages (French, German, Spanish, Czech) are uncritically assimilating forms of hatred exported by neoconservative discourse which permeate these languages via the translation of political journalism and the rhetoric of the "war on terrorism" and the promotion of "security".
Psychoanalytic views[edit]
In psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud defined hate as an ego state that wishes to destroy the source of its unhappiness.[1] More recently, the Penguin Dictionary of Psychology defines hate as a "deep, enduring, intense emotion expressing animosity, anger, and hostility towards a person, group, or object."[2] Because hatred is believed to be long-lasting, many psychologists[who?] consider it to be more of an attitude or disposition than a temporary emotional state.[citation needed]
Neurological research[edit]
The neural correlates of hate have been investigated with an fMRI procedure. In this experiment, people had their brains scanned while viewing pictures of people they hated. The results showed increased activity in the middle frontal gyrus, right putamen, bilaterally in the premotor cortex, in the frontal pole, and bilaterally in the medial insular cortex of the human brain.[3]
Legal issues[edit]
In the English language, a hate crime (also known as a "bias-motivated crime") generally refers to criminal acts which are seen to have been motivated by hate. Those who commit hate crimes target victims because of their perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender identity, or political affiliation.[4] Incidents may involve physical assault, destruction of property, bullying, harassment, verbal abuse or insults, or offensive graffiti or letters (hate mail).[5]
Hate speech is speech perceived to disparage a person or group of people based on their social or ethnic group,[6] such as race, sex, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, ideology, social class, occupation, appearance (height, weight, skin color, etc.), mental capacity, and any other distinction that might be considered by some[who?] as a liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society. In many countries, deliberate use of hate speech is a criminal offence prohibited under incitement to hatred legislation. It is often alleged that the criminalization of hate speech is sometimes used to discourage legitimate discussion of negative aspects of voluntary behavior (such as political persuasion, religious adherence and philosophical allegiance). There is also some question as to whether or not hate speech falls under the protection of freedom of speech in some countries.
Both of these classifications have sparked debate, with counter-arguments such as, but not limited to, a difficulty in distinguishing motive and intent for crimes, as well as philosophical debate on the validity of valuing targeted hatred as a greater crime than general misanthropy and contempt for humanity being a potentially equal crime in and of itself.
Religious Perspectives[edit]
Christianity[edit]
Both the Old and the New Testaments deal with hatred. Ecclesiastes 3:8 teaches that there is a "time to love, and a time to hate;".[7] However, the Old Testament (also known as the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh) also contains condemnations of hatred. For example, "thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart".[8] The New Testament emphasizes that evil intentions can be as serious as evil actions.[9] Thus John counted hatred as serious as murder: "whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer and you know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in himself".[10]
It is popularly assumed that one can’t “hate” and “love” the same person at the same time. But Psalm 139[11] says there is a kind of “perfect hatred” which is consistent with love, and is different from the “cruel hatred” shown by God’s enemies.[12] The Hebrew word describing David’s “perfect hatred” (KJV) means that it “brings a process to completion”.[13] In other words, goal oriented opposition. The ultimate opposition to those who oppose God would be to get them to love God. Or, failing that, to at least stop them from destroying others. The New Testament describes a similar, if not the same, process: “to deliver...unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved....”[14]
Today’s popular characterization of good hatred is to “hate the sin, but love the sinner”. Examples of this concept can be found in the Old Testament through David's actions. It is not recorded that David ever physically punished or fought anybody for merely hating or denying God, but only for acts of aggression. He responded to evil proportionately. He defended himself and his nation from violence, but when people merely turned from God in their hearts, without physical violence, he composed Psalms. Presumably this was the kind of “hatred” in David’s mind when he and his son wrote the only five verses in the Old Testament that suggest God “hates” not just the sin but the sinner.[15] The New Testament unambiguously aligns with the modern concept: it never says God or Jesus hates any person, or that anyone else should.[16] Accordingly, Jesus hated the “doctrines”[17] and “deeds”[18] of the Nicolaitans, but not the Nicolaitans themselves. While Jesus hates sin, He inspires us to love our enemies[19] by pointing out that God equally blesses “the evil and the good”.[20]
Leviticus 19:17 provides one illustration of how popular concepts of love and hate today have departed from biblical concepts. The verse says “thou shalt not hate”, but the rest of the verse explains what that means: “thou shalt...rebuke thy brother, and not [tolerate] sin upon him.” Today’s culture often agrees, calling that “tough love”. While contemporary culture and the Bible agree on this notion, they are in conflict over the definition of which behaviors deserve admonishment. At the most extreme points of difference, contemporary culture may consider the rebuking endorsed by the Bible to be hatred, especially if the behavior is permissible in secular society.[4][5][6]
See also[edit]
Look up hatred or hate in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Hatred
Discrimination
Gossip
Misanthropy
Revenge
Self-loathing
Two Minutes Hate
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Freud, S. (1915). The instincts and their vicissitudes.
2.Jump up ^ Reber, A.S., & Reber, E. (2002). The Penguin dictionary of psychology. New York: Penguin Books.
3.Jump up ^ Zeki, S.; Romaya, J.P. (October 2008). Lauwereyns, Jan, ed. "Neural Correlates of Hate". PLoS ONE 3 (10): e3556. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003556. PMC 2569212. PMID 18958169.
4.^ Jump up to: a b Stotzer, R.: Comparison of Hate Crime Rates Across Protected and Unprotected Groups, Williams Institute, 2007–06. Retrieved on 2007-08-09.
5.^ Jump up to: a b Hate crime, Home Office
6.^ Jump up to: a b "Dictionary.com: Hate speech". Dictionary.reference.com. Retrieved 2012-12-07.
7.Jump up ^ "Ecclesiastes 3:8". Bible Hub.
8.Jump up ^ "Leviticus 19:17". Bible Hub.
9.Jump up ^ "1 Corinthians 4:5". Bible Hub.
10.Jump up ^ "1 John 3". Bible Hub.
11.Jump up ^ "Psalm 139:22". Bible Hub.
12.Jump up ^ "Psalm 25:19". Bible Hub.
13.Jump up ^ Harris, R Laird (10/01/2003). Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. Moody Publishers; New Edition. ISBN 0802486495. Check date values in: |date= (help)
14.Jump up ^ "1 Corinthians 5:5". Bible hub.
15.Jump up ^ "Psalm 5". Bible Hub.
16.Jump up ^ "Luke 14:26". Bible Hub.
17.Jump up ^ "Revelations 2:15". Bible Hub.
18.Jump up ^ "Revelations 2:6". Bible Hub.
19.Jump up ^ "Matthew 5:44". Bible Hub.
20.Jump up ^ "Matthew 5:45". Bible Hub.
Further reading[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Hate crimes.
The Psychology of Hate by Robert Sternberg (Ed.)
Hatred: The Psychological Descent into Violence by Willard Gaylin
Why We Hate by Jack Levin
The Psychology of Good and Evil: Why Children, Adults, and Groups Help and Harm Others by Ervin Staub
Prisoners of Hate: The Cognitive Basis of Anger, Hostility, and Violence by Aaron T. Beck
Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing by James Waller
Ethnolinguistics and Cultural Concepts: truth, love, hate & war, by James W. Underhill, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Emotions (list)
Plutchik-wheel.svg
Categories: Hatred
Love
Discrimination
Issues in ethics
Emotions
Vices
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Avañe'ẽ
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ/inuktitut
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Kreyòl ayisyen
Lietuvių
Magyar
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Occitan
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Українська
ייִדיש
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 April 2015, at 15:43.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatred
Hatred
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Hate" redirects here. For other uses, see Hate (disambiguation).
"Hates" redirects here. For the German singer, see Adrian Hates.
For the video game, see Hatred (video game).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2014)
Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike. It can be directed against individuals, groups, entities, objects, or ideas. Hatred is often associated with feelings of anger, disgust and a disposition towards hostility.
Contents [hide]
1 Ethnolinguistics
2 Psychoanalytic views
3 Neurological research
4 Legal issues
5 Religious Perspectives 5.1 Christianity
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
Ethnolinguistics[edit]
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article needs additional citations for verification. (August 2014)
This article possibly contains original research. (July 2014)
James W. Underhill, in his Ethnolinguistics and Cultural Concepts: truth, love, hate & war, (2012) discusses the origin and the metaphoric representations of hate in various languages. He stresses that love and hate are social, and culturally constructed. For this reason, hate is historically situated. Although it is fair to say that one single emotion exists in English, French (haine), and German (Hass), hate varies in the forms in which it is manifested. A certain relationless hatred is expressed in the French expression J'ai la haine, which has no equivalent in English. While for English-speakers, loving and hating invariably involve an object, or a person, and therefore, a relationship with something or someone, J'ai la haine (literally, I have hate) precludes the idea of an emotion directed at a person. This is a form of frustration, apathy and animosity which churns within the subject but establishes no relationship with the world, other than an aimless desire for destruction. Underhill (following Philippe Roger) also considers French forms of anti-Americanism as a specific form of cultural resentment. At the same time, he analyses the hatred promoted by Ronald Reagan in his rhetoric directed against the "evil empire". In addition, Underhill suggests it is worrying that foreign languages (French, German, Spanish, Czech) are uncritically assimilating forms of hatred exported by neoconservative discourse which permeate these languages via the translation of political journalism and the rhetoric of the "war on terrorism" and the promotion of "security".
Psychoanalytic views[edit]
In psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud defined hate as an ego state that wishes to destroy the source of its unhappiness.[1] More recently, the Penguin Dictionary of Psychology defines hate as a "deep, enduring, intense emotion expressing animosity, anger, and hostility towards a person, group, or object."[2] Because hatred is believed to be long-lasting, many psychologists[who?] consider it to be more of an attitude or disposition than a temporary emotional state.[citation needed]
Neurological research[edit]
The neural correlates of hate have been investigated with an fMRI procedure. In this experiment, people had their brains scanned while viewing pictures of people they hated. The results showed increased activity in the middle frontal gyrus, right putamen, bilaterally in the premotor cortex, in the frontal pole, and bilaterally in the medial insular cortex of the human brain.[3]
Legal issues[edit]
In the English language, a hate crime (also known as a "bias-motivated crime") generally refers to criminal acts which are seen to have been motivated by hate. Those who commit hate crimes target victims because of their perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender identity, or political affiliation.[4] Incidents may involve physical assault, destruction of property, bullying, harassment, verbal abuse or insults, or offensive graffiti or letters (hate mail).[5]
Hate speech is speech perceived to disparage a person or group of people based on their social or ethnic group,[6] such as race, sex, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, ideology, social class, occupation, appearance (height, weight, skin color, etc.), mental capacity, and any other distinction that might be considered by some[who?] as a liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society. In many countries, deliberate use of hate speech is a criminal offence prohibited under incitement to hatred legislation. It is often alleged that the criminalization of hate speech is sometimes used to discourage legitimate discussion of negative aspects of voluntary behavior (such as political persuasion, religious adherence and philosophical allegiance). There is also some question as to whether or not hate speech falls under the protection of freedom of speech in some countries.
Both of these classifications have sparked debate, with counter-arguments such as, but not limited to, a difficulty in distinguishing motive and intent for crimes, as well as philosophical debate on the validity of valuing targeted hatred as a greater crime than general misanthropy and contempt for humanity being a potentially equal crime in and of itself.
Religious Perspectives[edit]
Christianity[edit]
Both the Old and the New Testaments deal with hatred. Ecclesiastes 3:8 teaches that there is a "time to love, and a time to hate;".[7] However, the Old Testament (also known as the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh) also contains condemnations of hatred. For example, "thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart".[8] The New Testament emphasizes that evil intentions can be as serious as evil actions.[9] Thus John counted hatred as serious as murder: "whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer and you know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in himself".[10]
It is popularly assumed that one can’t “hate” and “love” the same person at the same time. But Psalm 139[11] says there is a kind of “perfect hatred” which is consistent with love, and is different from the “cruel hatred” shown by God’s enemies.[12] The Hebrew word describing David’s “perfect hatred” (KJV) means that it “brings a process to completion”.[13] In other words, goal oriented opposition. The ultimate opposition to those who oppose God would be to get them to love God. Or, failing that, to at least stop them from destroying others. The New Testament describes a similar, if not the same, process: “to deliver...unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved....”[14]
Today’s popular characterization of good hatred is to “hate the sin, but love the sinner”. Examples of this concept can be found in the Old Testament through David's actions. It is not recorded that David ever physically punished or fought anybody for merely hating or denying God, but only for acts of aggression. He responded to evil proportionately. He defended himself and his nation from violence, but when people merely turned from God in their hearts, without physical violence, he composed Psalms. Presumably this was the kind of “hatred” in David’s mind when he and his son wrote the only five verses in the Old Testament that suggest God “hates” not just the sin but the sinner.[15] The New Testament unambiguously aligns with the modern concept: it never says God or Jesus hates any person, or that anyone else should.[16] Accordingly, Jesus hated the “doctrines”[17] and “deeds”[18] of the Nicolaitans, but not the Nicolaitans themselves. While Jesus hates sin, He inspires us to love our enemies[19] by pointing out that God equally blesses “the evil and the good”.[20]
Leviticus 19:17 provides one illustration of how popular concepts of love and hate today have departed from biblical concepts. The verse says “thou shalt not hate”, but the rest of the verse explains what that means: “thou shalt...rebuke thy brother, and not [tolerate] sin upon him.” Today’s culture often agrees, calling that “tough love”. While contemporary culture and the Bible agree on this notion, they are in conflict over the definition of which behaviors deserve admonishment. At the most extreme points of difference, contemporary culture may consider the rebuking endorsed by the Bible to be hatred, especially if the behavior is permissible in secular society.[4][5][6]
See also[edit]
Look up hatred or hate in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Hatred
Discrimination
Gossip
Misanthropy
Revenge
Self-loathing
Two Minutes Hate
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Freud, S. (1915). The instincts and their vicissitudes.
2.Jump up ^ Reber, A.S., & Reber, E. (2002). The Penguin dictionary of psychology. New York: Penguin Books.
3.Jump up ^ Zeki, S.; Romaya, J.P. (October 2008). Lauwereyns, Jan, ed. "Neural Correlates of Hate". PLoS ONE 3 (10): e3556. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003556. PMC 2569212. PMID 18958169.
4.^ Jump up to: a b Stotzer, R.: Comparison of Hate Crime Rates Across Protected and Unprotected Groups, Williams Institute, 2007–06. Retrieved on 2007-08-09.
5.^ Jump up to: a b Hate crime, Home Office
6.^ Jump up to: a b "Dictionary.com: Hate speech". Dictionary.reference.com. Retrieved 2012-12-07.
7.Jump up ^ "Ecclesiastes 3:8". Bible Hub.
8.Jump up ^ "Leviticus 19:17". Bible Hub.
9.Jump up ^ "1 Corinthians 4:5". Bible Hub.
10.Jump up ^ "1 John 3". Bible Hub.
11.Jump up ^ "Psalm 139:22". Bible Hub.
12.Jump up ^ "Psalm 25:19". Bible Hub.
13.Jump up ^ Harris, R Laird (10/01/2003). Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. Moody Publishers; New Edition. ISBN 0802486495. Check date values in: |date= (help)
14.Jump up ^ "1 Corinthians 5:5". Bible hub.
15.Jump up ^ "Psalm 5". Bible Hub.
16.Jump up ^ "Luke 14:26". Bible Hub.
17.Jump up ^ "Revelations 2:15". Bible Hub.
18.Jump up ^ "Revelations 2:6". Bible Hub.
19.Jump up ^ "Matthew 5:44". Bible Hub.
20.Jump up ^ "Matthew 5:45". Bible Hub.
Further reading[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Hate crimes.
The Psychology of Hate by Robert Sternberg (Ed.)
Hatred: The Psychological Descent into Violence by Willard Gaylin
Why We Hate by Jack Levin
The Psychology of Good and Evil: Why Children, Adults, and Groups Help and Harm Others by Ervin Staub
Prisoners of Hate: The Cognitive Basis of Anger, Hostility, and Violence by Aaron T. Beck
Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing by James Waller
Ethnolinguistics and Cultural Concepts: truth, love, hate & war, by James W. Underhill, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Emotions (list)
Plutchik-wheel.svg
Categories: Hatred
Love
Discrimination
Issues in ethics
Emotions
Vices
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Avañe'ẽ
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ/inuktitut
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Kreyòl ayisyen
Lietuvių
Magyar
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Occitan
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Українська
ייִדיש
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 April 2015, at 15:43.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatred
Bigotry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Not to be confused with Bigamy.
"Bigot" redirects here. For people named Bigot and other meanings, see Bigot (disambiguation).
Bigotry is a state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly or intolerantly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.[1][2] Some examples include personal beliefs, race, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or other group characteristics.
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 See also
3 References
4 External links
Etymology[edit]
The origin of the word bigot and bigoterie (bigotry) in English dates back to at least 1598, via Middle French, and started with the sense of "religious hypocrite". This meaning still survives in Italian (bigotto) and French ( bigot). The exact origin of the word is unknown, but it may have come from the German bei and Gott, or the English by God.[3]
William Camden wrote that the Normans were first called bigots, when their Duke Rollo, who when receiving Gisla, daughter of King Charles, in marriage, and with her the investiture of the dukedom, refused to kiss the king's foot in token of subjection – unless the king would hold it out for that specific purpose. When being urged to do it by those present, Rollo answered hastily "No, by God", whereupon the King, turning about, called him bigot, which then passed from him to his people.[4] This is quite probably fictional,[citation needed] as Gisla is unknown in Frankish sources. It is true, however, that the French used the term bigot to abuse the Normans.[5]
The twelfth-century Norman author Wace claimed that bigot was an insult which the French used against the Normans, but it is unclear whether or not this is how it entered the English language.[6]
The French used to call the English les goddams after their favorite curse; Clément Janequin's "La Guerre",[7] which is about the Battle of Marignano, similarly uses the Swiss German curse 'bigot', i.e. "by god!", in a context about the Protestant Swiss.
According to Henry Bradley, the meaning of bigot in the Old French was "detested foreigner", "heretic", and it is supposed that the word was a corruption of Visigot. To the Catholic Franks, the Arian Visigoths of Southern France and Spain were the objects of bitter hatred, both on religious and worldly grounds.[8]
See also[edit]
Prejudice
Purist
Yobaz
Liberal elite
Chattering classes
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "Merriam Webster Dictionary". An Encyclopedia Britannica Company.
2.Jump up ^ Webster's New International Dictionary, 2nd edition, G & C Merriam Co., 1952
3.Jump up ^ "bigot". Online Etymology Dictionary.
4.Jump up ^ This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chambers, Ephraim, ed. (1728). "Bigot". Cyclopædia, or an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences (first ed.). James and John Knapton, et al.
5.Jump up ^ Word Histories And Mysteries: From Abracadabra to Zeus. Houghton Mifflin Company. 2004. p. 24. ISBN 0-618-45450-0.
6.Jump up ^ Ayto, John (1990). Dictionary of Word Origins: The Histories of More Than 8,000 English-Language Words. Arcade Publishing.
7.Jump up ^ "La Guerre (La Bataille de Marignan) de Clément Janequin" (in French). Tard Bourrichon.
8.Jump up ^ Bradley, Henry, The Story of the Goths, XXXI, 329. G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1891.
External links[edit]
Media related to Bigotry at Wikimedia Commons
The dictionary definition of bigotry at Wiktionary
Quotations related to Bigotry at Wikiquote
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
General forms
Ageism ·
Caste ·
Class ·
Skin color ·
Gender ·
Genetic ·
Height ·
Linguistic ·
Lookism ·
Mentalism ·
Racism ·
Rankism ·
Religious ·
Sexism ·
Sexualism ·
Sizeism ·
Speciesism ·
Supremacism ·
Weightism
Social
AIDS stigma ·
Ableism ·
Adultism ·
Anti-albinism ·
Anthropocentrism ·
Anti-communism ·
Anti-homelessness ·
Anti-intellectualism ·
Anti-intersex ·
Anti-left handedness ·
Anti-Masonry ·
Anti-Semitism ·
Audism ·
Binarism ·
Biphobia ·
Black supremacy ·
Elitism (academic) ·
Ephebiphobia ·
Ethnic hatred ·
Fatism ·
Genderism ·
Gerontophobia ·
Handicapism ·
Heteronormativity ·
Heterosexism ·
Homonegativity ·
Homophobia ·
Islamophobia ·
Leprosy stigma ·
Lesbophobia ·
Misandry ·
Misogyny ·
Nepotism ·
Pedophobia ·
Pregnancy ·
Reverse discrimination ·
Sectarianism ·
Shadism ·
Surdophobia ·
Transphobia ·
White supremacy ·
Xenophobia
Manifestations
Blood libel ·
Compulsory sterilization ·
Cultural genocide ·
Disability hate crime ·
Economic ·
Eliminationism ·
Employment ·
Ethnic cleansing ·
Ethnic joke ·
Ethnocide ·
Forced conversion ·
Freak show ·
Gay bashing ·
Gendercide ·
Genocide (examples) ·
Glass ceiling ·
Group libel ·
Hate crime ·
Hate group ·
Hate speech ·
Homeless dumping ·
Housing ·
Indian rolling ·
Violence against LGBT people ·
Lynching ·
Mortgage ·
Murder Music ·
Occupational segregation ·
Pogrom ·
Purge ·
Race war ·
Religious persecution ·
Scapegoating ·
Segregation academies ·
Slavery ·
Slut-shaming ·
Trans bashing ·
Victimization ·
White power music ·
Wife selling ·
Witch-hunt
Discriminatory policies
Segregation (age ·
desegregation ·
racial ·
religious ·
sex)
·
Age of candidacy ·
Blood quantum ·
Cleanliness of blood ·
Apartheid ·
Gerrymandering ·
Ethnocracy ·
MSM blood donor controversy ·
Gender pay gap ·
Gender roles ·
Gerontocracy ·
Ghetto benches ·
Internment ·
Jewish quota ·
Jim Crow laws ·
Jizya ·
Male privilege ·
Numerus clausus (as religious or racial quota) ·
Nuremberg Laws ·
One-drop rule ·
Racial quota ·
Redlining ·
Same-sex marriage (laws and issues prohibiting) ·
Sodomy law ·
Ugly law ·
Voter suppression
Countermeasures
Affirmative action ·
Animal Rights ·
Cultural assimilation ·
Cultural pluralism ·
Desegregation ·
Diversity training ·
Empowerment ·
Ethnopluralism ·
Feminism ·
Fighting Discrimination ·
Human rights ·
Multiculturalism ·
Racial integration ·
Self-determination ·
Social integration ·
Toleration
Related topics
Allophilia ·
Anthropocentrism ·
Assimilation ·
Bigotry ·
Diversity ·
Ethnic penalty ·
Eugenics ·
Intersectionality ·
Multiculturalism ·
Neurodiversity ·
Oppression ·
Pluralism ·
Police brutality ·
Political correctness ·
Prejudice ·
Racism by country ·
Religious intolerance ·
Speciesism ·
Stereotypes ·
White privilege
Category Category ·
Portal Portal
Categories: Prejudices
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Čeština
Deutsch
Emiliàn e rumagnòl
Esperanto
Français
Ido
עברית
Polski
Română
Русский
Simple English
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 14 April 2015, at 13:29.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry
Bigotry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Not to be confused with Bigamy.
"Bigot" redirects here. For people named Bigot and other meanings, see Bigot (disambiguation).
Bigotry is a state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly or intolerantly dislikes other people, ideas, etc.[1][2] Some examples include personal beliefs, race, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or other group characteristics.
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 See also
3 References
4 External links
Etymology[edit]
The origin of the word bigot and bigoterie (bigotry) in English dates back to at least 1598, via Middle French, and started with the sense of "religious hypocrite". This meaning still survives in Italian (bigotto) and French ( bigot). The exact origin of the word is unknown, but it may have come from the German bei and Gott, or the English by God.[3]
William Camden wrote that the Normans were first called bigots, when their Duke Rollo, who when receiving Gisla, daughter of King Charles, in marriage, and with her the investiture of the dukedom, refused to kiss the king's foot in token of subjection – unless the king would hold it out for that specific purpose. When being urged to do it by those present, Rollo answered hastily "No, by God", whereupon the King, turning about, called him bigot, which then passed from him to his people.[4] This is quite probably fictional,[citation needed] as Gisla is unknown in Frankish sources. It is true, however, that the French used the term bigot to abuse the Normans.[5]
The twelfth-century Norman author Wace claimed that bigot was an insult which the French used against the Normans, but it is unclear whether or not this is how it entered the English language.[6]
The French used to call the English les goddams after their favorite curse; Clément Janequin's "La Guerre",[7] which is about the Battle of Marignano, similarly uses the Swiss German curse 'bigot', i.e. "by god!", in a context about the Protestant Swiss.
According to Henry Bradley, the meaning of bigot in the Old French was "detested foreigner", "heretic", and it is supposed that the word was a corruption of Visigot. To the Catholic Franks, the Arian Visigoths of Southern France and Spain were the objects of bitter hatred, both on religious and worldly grounds.[8]
See also[edit]
Prejudice
Purist
Yobaz
Liberal elite
Chattering classes
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "Merriam Webster Dictionary". An Encyclopedia Britannica Company.
2.Jump up ^ Webster's New International Dictionary, 2nd edition, G & C Merriam Co., 1952
3.Jump up ^ "bigot". Online Etymology Dictionary.
4.Jump up ^ This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chambers, Ephraim, ed. (1728). "Bigot". Cyclopædia, or an Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences (first ed.). James and John Knapton, et al.
5.Jump up ^ Word Histories And Mysteries: From Abracadabra to Zeus. Houghton Mifflin Company. 2004. p. 24. ISBN 0-618-45450-0.
6.Jump up ^ Ayto, John (1990). Dictionary of Word Origins: The Histories of More Than 8,000 English-Language Words. Arcade Publishing.
7.Jump up ^ "La Guerre (La Bataille de Marignan) de Clément Janequin" (in French). Tard Bourrichon.
8.Jump up ^ Bradley, Henry, The Story of the Goths, XXXI, 329. G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1891.
External links[edit]
Media related to Bigotry at Wikimedia Commons
The dictionary definition of bigotry at Wiktionary
Quotations related to Bigotry at Wikiquote
[hide]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
General forms
Ageism ·
Caste ·
Class ·
Skin color ·
Gender ·
Genetic ·
Height ·
Linguistic ·
Lookism ·
Mentalism ·
Racism ·
Rankism ·
Religious ·
Sexism ·
Sexualism ·
Sizeism ·
Speciesism ·
Supremacism ·
Weightism
Social
AIDS stigma ·
Ableism ·
Adultism ·
Anti-albinism ·
Anthropocentrism ·
Anti-communism ·
Anti-homelessness ·
Anti-intellectualism ·
Anti-intersex ·
Anti-left handedness ·
Anti-Masonry ·
Anti-Semitism ·
Audism ·
Binarism ·
Biphobia ·
Black supremacy ·
Elitism (academic) ·
Ephebiphobia ·
Ethnic hatred ·
Fatism ·
Genderism ·
Gerontophobia ·
Handicapism ·
Heteronormativity ·
Heterosexism ·
Homonegativity ·
Homophobia ·
Islamophobia ·
Leprosy stigma ·
Lesbophobia ·
Misandry ·
Misogyny ·
Nepotism ·
Pedophobia ·
Pregnancy ·
Reverse discrimination ·
Sectarianism ·
Shadism ·
Surdophobia ·
Transphobia ·
White supremacy ·
Xenophobia
Manifestations
Blood libel ·
Compulsory sterilization ·
Cultural genocide ·
Disability hate crime ·
Economic ·
Eliminationism ·
Employment ·
Ethnic cleansing ·
Ethnic joke ·
Ethnocide ·
Forced conversion ·
Freak show ·
Gay bashing ·
Gendercide ·
Genocide (examples) ·
Glass ceiling ·
Group libel ·
Hate crime ·
Hate group ·
Hate speech ·
Homeless dumping ·
Housing ·
Indian rolling ·
Violence against LGBT people ·
Lynching ·
Mortgage ·
Murder Music ·
Occupational segregation ·
Pogrom ·
Purge ·
Race war ·
Religious persecution ·
Scapegoating ·
Segregation academies ·
Slavery ·
Slut-shaming ·
Trans bashing ·
Victimization ·
White power music ·
Wife selling ·
Witch-hunt
Discriminatory policies
Segregation (age ·
desegregation ·
racial ·
religious ·
sex)
·
Age of candidacy ·
Blood quantum ·
Cleanliness of blood ·
Apartheid ·
Gerrymandering ·
Ethnocracy ·
MSM blood donor controversy ·
Gender pay gap ·
Gender roles ·
Gerontocracy ·
Ghetto benches ·
Internment ·
Jewish quota ·
Jim Crow laws ·
Jizya ·
Male privilege ·
Numerus clausus (as religious or racial quota) ·
Nuremberg Laws ·
One-drop rule ·
Racial quota ·
Redlining ·
Same-sex marriage (laws and issues prohibiting) ·
Sodomy law ·
Ugly law ·
Voter suppression
Countermeasures
Affirmative action ·
Animal Rights ·
Cultural assimilation ·
Cultural pluralism ·
Desegregation ·
Diversity training ·
Empowerment ·
Ethnopluralism ·
Feminism ·
Fighting Discrimination ·
Human rights ·
Multiculturalism ·
Racial integration ·
Self-determination ·
Social integration ·
Toleration
Related topics
Allophilia ·
Anthropocentrism ·
Assimilation ·
Bigotry ·
Diversity ·
Ethnic penalty ·
Eugenics ·
Intersectionality ·
Multiculturalism ·
Neurodiversity ·
Oppression ·
Pluralism ·
Police brutality ·
Political correctness ·
Prejudice ·
Racism by country ·
Religious intolerance ·
Speciesism ·
Stereotypes ·
White privilege
Category Category ·
Portal Portal
Categories: Prejudices
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Čeština
Deutsch
Emiliàn e rumagnòl
Esperanto
Français
Ido
עברית
Polski
Română
Русский
Simple English
Svenska
Edit links
This page was last modified on 14 April 2015, at 13:29.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry
Discrimination
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Discrimination (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.[1] This includes treatment of an individual or group based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or social category, "in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated".[2] It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction, influencing the individual's actual behavior towards the group or the group leader, restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on logical or irrational decision making.[3]
Not all discrimination is based on prejudice, however. In the U.S., government policy known as affirmative action was instituted to encourage employers and universities to seek out and accept groups such as African-Americans and women, who have been subject to the opposite kind of discrimination for a long time.[4] Discriminatory traditions, policies, ideas, practices, and laws exist in many countries and institutions in every part of the world, even in ones where discrimination is generally looked down upon. In some places, controversial attempts such as quotas have been used to benefit those believed to be current or past victims of discrimination—but have sometimes been called reverse discrimination
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Definitions
3 United Nations documents
4 Types 4.1 Age
4.2 Caste
4.3 Disability
4.4 Employment
4.5 Language
4.6 Nationality
4.7 Race or Ethnicity
4.8 Region
4.9 Religious Beliefs
4.10 Sex, gender, and gender identity
4.11 Sexual orientation
4.12 Othering
4.13 Reverse Discrimination
5 Legislation
6 Theories 6.1 Labeling theory
6.2 Game theory
7 State vs. free market 7.1 State discrimination
7.2 Markets punish the discriminator
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Etymology[edit]
The term discriminate appeared in the early 17th century in the English language. It is from the Latin discriminat- 'distinguished between', from the verb discriminare, from discrimen 'distinction', from the verb discernere.[5] Since the American Civil War the term "discrimination" generally evolved in American English usage as an understanding of prejudicial treatment of an individual based solely on their race, later generalized as membership in a certain socially undesirable group or social category.[6] "Discrimination" derives from Latin, where the verb discrimire means "to separate, to distinguish, to make a distinction".
Definitions[edit]
Moral philosophers have defined discrimination as disadvantageous treatment or consideration. This is a comparative definition. An individual need not be actually harmed in order to be discriminated against. They just need to be treated worse than others for some arbitrary reason. If someone decides to donate to help orphan children, but decides to donate less, say, to black children out of a racist attitude, then they would be acting in a discriminatory way even though the people they discriminate against are actually benefitted by having some money donated to them.[7]
Based on realistic-conflict theory[8] and social-identity theory,[9] Rubin and Hewstone[10] have highlighted a distinction among three types of discrimination:
1.Realistic competition is driven by self-interest and is aimed at obtaining material resources (e.g., food, territory, customers) for the in-group (e.g., favouring an in-group in order to obtain more resources for its members, including the self).
2.Social competition is driven by the need for self-esteem and is aimed at achieving a positive social status for the in-group relative to comparable out-groups (e.g., favouring an in-group in order to make it better than an out-group).
3.Consensual discrimination is driven by the need for accuracy[clarification needed] and reflects stable and legitimate intergroup status hierarchies (e.g., favouring a high-status in-group because it is high status).
The United Nations stance on discrimination includes the statement: "Discriminatory behaviors take many forms, but they all involve some form of exclusion or rejection."[11] International bodies United Nations Human Rights Council work towards helping ending discrimination around the world.
United Nations documents[edit]
Important UN documents addressing discrimination include:
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948. It states that:" Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."[12]
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a United Nations convention. The Convention commits its members to the elimination of racial discrimination. The convention was adopted and opened for signature by the United Nations General Assembly on 21 December 1965, and entered into force on 4 January 1969.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) is an international treaty adopted in 1979 by the United Nations General Assembly. Described as an international bill of rights for women, it came into force on 3 September 1981.
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an international human rights instrument treaty of the United Nations. Parties to the Convention are required to promote, protect, and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities and ensure that they enjoy full equality under the law. The text was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 13 December 2006, and opened for signature on 30 March 2007. Following ratification by the 20th party, it came into force on 3 May 2008.
Types[edit]
Age[edit]
Main article: Ageism
Ageism or age discrimination is discrimination and stereotyping based on the grounds of someone's age.[13] It is a set of beliefs, norms, and values which used to justify discrimination or subordination based on a person's age.[14] Ageism is most often directed towards old people, or adolescents and children.[15][16]
Age discrimination in hiring has been shown to exist in the United States. Joanna Lahey, professor at The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M, found that firms are more than 40% more likely to interview a young adult job applicant than an older job applicant.[17]
In a survey for the University of Kent, England, 29% of respondents stated that they had suffered from age discrimination. This is a higher proportion than for gender or racial discrimination. Dominic Abrams, social psychology professor at the university, concluded that Ageism is the most pervasive form of prejudice experienced in the UK population.[18]
Caste[edit]
See also: Caste
According to UNICEF and Human Rights Watch, caste discrimination affects an estimated 250 million people worldwide.[19][20][21] Discrimination based on caste, as perceived by UNICEF, is prevalent mainly in parts of Asia, (India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, China, Pakistan, Nepal, Japan), Africa and others.[19] As of 2011, there were 200 million Dalits or Scheduled Castes (formerly known as "untouchables") in India.[22]
Disability[edit]
Main article: Disability discrimination
Discrimination against people with disabilities in favor of people who are not is called ableism or disablism. Disability discrimination, which treats non-disabled individuals as the standard of ‘normal living’, results in public and private places and services, education, and social work that are built to serve 'standard' people, thereby excluding those with various disabilities. Studies have shown, employment is needed to not only provide a living but to sustain mental health and well being. Work fulfils a number of basic needs for an individual such as collective purpose, social contact, status, and activity.[23] A person with a disability is often found to be socially isolated and work is one way to reduce isolation.
In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act mandates the provision of equality of access to both buildings and services and is paralleled by similar acts in other countries, such as the Equality Act 2010 in the UK.[citation needed]
Employment[edit]
Ethiopian Jews protest in Israel over non-employment of Ethiopian academics.
Main article: Employment discrimination
Denying someone employment, or disallowing one from applying for a job, is often recognized as employment discrimination when the grounds for such an exclusion is not related to the requirements of the position, and protected characteristics may include age, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, height, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, skin color, and weight.
The United States federal laws that protect against:
Race, color and national origin discrimination include the [1] Civil Rights Act of 1964, [2] Executive Order Number 11478 among other numerous laws that protect people from race, color and national origin discrimination.
Sex and gender discrimination include the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and [3] Equal Pay Act of 1963.
Age discrimination include the [4] Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967.
Physical and mental disability discrimination include the [5] Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Religious discrimination include the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Military status discrimination include the [6] Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974
Most other western nations have similar laws protecting these groups.
Still unrelated to the requirements of the position, only 9% of Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) are women while they are over 60% among accountants and auditors. And yet those who reach a high responsibility position are paid on average 16% lower than their male colleagues. (According to a recent report, 2013) [24]
Language[edit]
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2012)
Main article: Linguistic discrimination
Nationalists on Corsica sometimes spray-paint or shoot traffic signs in French.
Diversity of language is protected and respected by most nations who value cultural diversity.[dubious – discuss] However, people are sometimes subjected to different treatment because their preferred language is associated with a particular group, class or category. Commonly, the preferred language is just another attribute of separate ethnic groups.[dubious – discuss] Discrimination exists if there is prejudicial treatment against a person or a group of people who speak a particular language or dialect.
Language discrimination is suggested to be labeled linguicism or logocism.[by whom?] Anti-discriminatory and inclusive efforts to accommodate persons who speak different languages or cannot have fluency in the country's predominant or "official" language, is bilingualism such as official documents in two languages, and multiculturalism in more than two languages.[citation needed]
Nationality[edit]
Discrimination on the basis of nationality is usually included in employment laws[25] (see below section for employment discrimination specifically). It is sometimes referred to as bound together with racial discrimination[26] although it can be separate. It may vary from laws that stop refusals of hiring based on nationality, asking questions regarding origin, to prohibitions of firing, forced retirement, compensation and pay, etc., based on nationality.[26]
Discrimination on the basis of nationality may show as a "level of acceptance" in a sport or work team regarding new team members and employees who differ from the nationality of the majority of team members.[27]
In the UAE and other GCC states, for instance, nationality is not frequently given to residents and expatriates. In the workplace, preferential treatment is given to full citizens, even though many of them lack experience or motivation to do the job. State benefits are also generally available for citizens only.[28]
Race or Ethnicity[edit]
Main articles: Racism, Discrimination based on skin color and Ethnic Penalty
Anti-Arab sign in Pattaya Beach, Thailand
German warning in Germany-occupied Poland 1939 - "No entrance for Poles!"
Antisemitic graffiti in Lithuania. The signs read "Jews out" and "Hate"
An African-American child at a segregated drinking fountain on a courthouse lawn, North Carolina, US 1938.
Anti-Japanese poster outside of a restaurant in Guangzhou, China
Racial discrimination differentiates individuals on the basis of real and perceived racial differences and has been official government policy in several countries, such as South Africa in the apartheid era. Discriminatory policies towards ethnic minorities include the race-based discrimination of ethnic Indians and Chinese in Malaysia[29] or discrimination of ethnic Uighurs in China.[30] After the Vietnam War, many Vietnamese refugees moved to the United States, where they face discrimination.[31]
As of 2013, aboriginal people (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) comprise 4 percent of Canada's population, but account for 23.2 percent of the federal prison population.[32] According to the Australian government's June 2006 publication of prison statistics, Aborigines make up 24% of the overall prison population in Australia.[33]
In 2004, Māori made up just 15% of the total population of New Zealand but 49.5% of prisoners. Māori were entering prison at eight times the rate of non-Māori.[34] A quarter of the people in England's prisons are from an ethnic minority. The Equality and Human Rights Commission found that in England and Wales as of 2010, a black person was five times more likely to be imprisoned than a white person. The discrepancy was attributed to "decades of racial prejudice in the criminal justice system".[35]
In the United States, racial profiling of minorities by law-enforcement officials has been called racial discrimination.[36]
Within the criminal justice system in the United States, minorities are convicted and imprisoned disproportionately when compared to the majority.[37][38] As early as 1866, the Civil Rights Act and Civil Rights Act of 1871 provided a remedy for intentional racism in employment by private employers and state and local public employers. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 expanded the damages available in Title VII cases and granted Title VII plaintiffs the right to a jury trial.
Region[edit]
See also: Regional discrimination in China
Regional or geographic discrimination is discrimination based on the region in which a person lives or was born. It differs from national discrimination in that it may not be based on national borders or the country the victim lives in, but is instead based on prejudices against a specific region of one or more countries. Examples include discrimination against mainland Chinese within China, or discrimination against Americans from the south in the United States. It is often accompanied by discrimination based on accent, dialect, or cultural differences.[citation needed]
Religious Beliefs[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination
Freedom of religion
Concepts[show]
Status by country[show]
Religious persecution[show]
Religion portal
v ·
t ·
e
Religious discrimination is valuing or treating a person or group differently because of what they do or do not believe or because of their feelings towards a given religion. For instance, the indigenous Christian population of Balkans (known as "rayah" or "protected flock") lived under the Ottoman Kanun–i–Rayah. The word is sometimes translated as 'cattle' rather than 'flock' or 'subjects' to emphasize the inferior status of the rayah.[39]
Restrictions upon Jewish occupations were imposed by Christian authorities. Local rulers and church officials closed many professions to Jews, pushing them into marginal roles considered socially inferior, such as tax and rent collecting and moneylending, occupations only tolerated as a "necessary evil".[40] The number of Jews permitted to reside in different places was limited; they were concentrated in ghettos and were not allowed to own land.
In a 1979 consultation on the issue, the United States commission on civil rights defined religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Whereas religious civil liberties, such as the right to hold or not to hold a religious belief, are essential for Freedom of Religion (in the United States secured by the First Amendment), religious discrimination occurs when someone is denied " the equal protection of the laws, equality of status under the law, equal treatment in the administration of justice, and equality of opportunity and access to employment, education, housing, public services and facilities, and public accommodation because of their exercise of their right to religious freedom."[41]
Sex, gender, and gender identity[edit]
Main article: Sexism
See also: Misogyny, Misandry, Transphobia and Discrimination towards non-binary gender persons
Though gender discrimination and sexism refers to beliefs and attitudes in relation to the gender of a person, such beliefs and attitudes are of a social nature and do not, normally, carry any legal consequences. Sex discrimination, on the other hand, may have legal consequences.
Though what constitutes sex discrimination varies between countries, the essence is that it is an adverse action taken by one person against another person that would not have occurred had the person been of another sex. Discrimination of that nature is considered a form of prejudice and in certain enumerated circumstances is illegal in many countries.
Sexual discrimination can arise in different contexts. For instance an employee may be discriminated against by being asked discriminatory questions during a job interview, or by an employer not hiring or promoting, unequally paying, or wrongfully terminating, an employee based on their gender.
The gender gap in median earnings of full-time employees according to the OECD 2008.[42]
Sexual discrimination in the workplace can also arise when the dominant group holds a bias against the minority group. One such example is Wikipedia. In the Wikipedian community, around 13 percent of registered users are women.[43] This creates gender imbalances, and leaves room for systemic bias. Women are not only more harshly scrutinized, but the representation of women authors are also overlooked. Relative to men, across all source lists, women have a 2.6 greater odds of omission in Wikipedia.[44]
In an educational setting there could be claims that a student was excluded from an educational institution, program, opportunity, loan, student group, or scholarship because of their gender. In the housing setting there could be claims that a person was refused negotiations on seeking a house, contracting/leasing a house or getting a loan based on their gender. Another setting where there have been claims of gender discrimination is banking; for example if one is refused credit or is offered unequal loan terms based on one’s gender.[45] As with other forms of unlawful discrimination there are two types of sex discrimination – direct discrimination and indirect discrimination. Direct sex discrimination is fairly easy to spot – ‘Barmaid wanted’, but indirect sex discrimination, where an unnecessary requirement puts one sex at a disproportionate disadvantage compared to the opposite sex, is sometimes less easy to spot, although some are obvious – ‘Bar person wanted – must look good in a mini skirt’.[46]
Another setting where there is usually gender discrimination is when one is refused to extend their credit, refused approval of credit/loan process, and if there is a burden of unequal loan terms based on one’s gender.
Socially, sexual differences have been used to justify different roles for men and women, in some cases giving rise to claims of primary and secondary roles.[47]
While there are alleged non-physical differences between men and women, major reviews of the academic literature on gender difference find only a tiny minority of characteristics where there are consistent psychological differences between men and women, and these relate directly to experiences grounded in biological difference.[48] However, there are also some psychological differences in regard to how problems are dealt with and emotional perceptions and reactions that may relate to hormones and the successful characteristics of each gender during longstanding roles in past primitive lifestyles.
Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers, by sex, race, and ethnicity, U.S., 2009.[49]
Unfair discrimination usually follows the gender stereotyping held by a society.[50]
The United Nations had concluded that women often experience a "glass ceiling" and that there are no societies in which women enjoy the same opportunities as men.[51] The term "glass ceiling" is used to describe a perceived barrier to advancement in employment based on discrimination, especially sex discrimination.[52]
In the United States in 1995, the Glass Ceiling Commission, a government-funded group, stated: "Over half of all Master’s degrees are now awarded to women, yet 95% of senior-level managers, of the top Fortune 1000 industrial and 500 service companies are men. Of them, 97% are white." In its report, it recommended affirmative action, which is the consideration of an employee's gender and race in hiring and promotion decisions, as a means to end this form of discrimination.[53] As of 2010, women accounted for 51% of workers in high-paying management, professional, and related occupations. They outnumbered men in such occupations as public relations managers, financial managers, and human resource managers.[54]
Transgender individuals, whether male-to-female, female-to-male, or Genderqueer, often experience transphobic problems that often lead to dismissals, underachievement, difficulty in finding a job, social isolation, and, occasionally, violent attacks against them. Nevertheless, the problem of gender discrimination does not stop at transgender individuals or with women. Men are often the victim in certain areas of employment as men begin to seek work in office and childcare settings traditionally perceived as "women's jobs". One such situation seems to be evident in a recent case concerning alleged YMCA discrimination and a Federal Court Case in Texas.[55] The case actually involves alleged discrimination against both men and black people in childcare, even when they pass the same strict background tests and other standards of employment. It is currently being contended in federal court, as of fall 2009.
Discrimination in slasher films is relevant. Gloria Cowan had a research group study on 57 different slasher films. Their results showed that the non-surviving females were more frequently sexual than the surviving females and the non-surviving males. Surviving as a female slasher victim was strongly associated with the absence of sexual behavior. In slasher films, the message appears to be that sexual women get killed and only the pure women survive. Slasher films reinforce the idea that female sexuality can be costly.[56]
Sexual orientation[edit]
Protests in New York City against Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill.
See also: Heterosexism, Heteronormativity, Biphobia and Homophobia
One’s sexual orientation is a “predilection for homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality”.[57] Like most minority groups, homosexuals and bisexuals are not immune to prejudice and discrimination from the majority group. They may experience hatred from others because of their sexual preferences; a term for such hatred based upon one’s sexual orientation is often called homophobia. Many continue to hold negative feelings towards those with non-heterosexual orientations and will discriminate against people who have them or are thought to have them.
People of other uncommon sexual orientations also experience discrimination. One study found its sample of heterosexuals to be more prejudiced against asexuals than to homosexuals or bisexuals.[58]
In 2009, ILGA published a report based on research carried out by Daniel Ottosson at Södertörn University College, Stockholm, Sweden. This research found that of the 80 countries around the world that continue to consider homosexuality illegal, five carry the death penalty for homosexual activity, and two do in some regions of the country.[59] In the report, this is described as "State sponsored homophobia".[60] This happens in Islamic states, or in two cases regions under Islamic authority.[61][62]
On February 5, 2005 the IRIN issued a reported titled "Iraq: Male homosexuality still a taboo." The article stated, among other things that honor killings by Iraqis against a gay family member are common and given some legal protection.[63] In August 2009 Human Rights Watch published an extensive report detailing torture of men accused of being gay in Iraq, including the blocking of men's anuses with glue and then giving the men laxatives.[64] Although gay marriage has been legal in South Africa since 2006, same-sex unions are often condemned as "un-African."[65] Research conducted in 2009 shows 86% of black lesbians from the Western Cape live in fear of sexual assault.[66]
Further information: LGBT rights by country or territory
A number of countries, especially those in the Western world, have passed measures to alleviate discrimination against sexual minorities, including laws against anti-gay hate crimes and workplace discrimination. Some have also legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions in order to grant same-sex couples the same protections and benefits as opposite-sex couples. In 2011, the United Nations passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights.
Othering[edit]
Othering is the process by which a person or a group is placed outside of the norm, into the margins. It is a system of discrimination whereby the characteristics of a group are used to distinguish them as separate from the norm.[67] Othering plays a fundamental role in the history and continuance of racism and other forms of discrimination. For example, by objectifying culture as something different, exotic or underdeveloped is to generalise that it is not the same as ‘normal’ society. Europe’s colonial attitude towards the Orient exemplifies through the attitude that the East was the opposite of the West; feminine where the West was masculine, weak where the West was strong and traditional where the West was progressive.[68] By making these generalisations and othering the East, Europe was simultaneously defining herself as the norm, further entrenching the perceived gap.[69] Much of the process of othering relies on imagined difference, or the expectation of difference. Spatial difference can be enough to conclude that 'we' are 'here’ and the 'others' are over 'there', making 'here' normal and 'there' foreign.[68] Imagined differences serve to categorise people into groups and assign them characteristics that suit the imaginer’s expectations and desires.[70]
Reverse Discrimination[edit]
Main articles: Reverse discrimination and Bumiputera (Malaysia)
Students protesting against racial quotas in Brazil: "Quer uma vaga? Passe no vestibular!" ("Do you want a university place? Be successful in the entrance exam!")
Some attempts at antidiscrimination have been criticized as reverse discrimination. In particular, minority quotas (for example, affirmative action) may discriminate against members of a dominant or majority group or other minority groups. In its opposition to race preferences, the American Civil Rights Institute's Ward Connerly stated, "There is nothing positive, affirmative, or equal about 'affirmative action' programs that give preference to some groups based on race."[71]
Legislation[edit]
Globe icon.
The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (May 2010)
Main article: List of anti-discrimination acts
Australia
Sex Discrimination Act 1984
Canada
Ontario Human Rights Code 1962
Canadian Human Rights Act 1977
Hong Kong
Sex Discrimination Ordinance (1996)
Israel
Prohibition of Discrimination in Products, Services and Entry into Places of Entertainment and Public Places Law, 2000
Employment (Equal Opportunities) Law, 1988
Prohibition of libel law 1965.[72]
Netherlands
Article 137c, part 1 of Wetboek van Strafrecht prohibits insults towards a group because of its race, religion, sexual orientation (straight or gay), handicap (somatically, mental or psychiatric) in public or by speech, by writing or by a picture. Maximum imprisonment one year of imprisonment or a fine of the third category.[73][74]
Part 2 increases the maximum imprisonment to two years and the maximum fine category to 4,[75] when the crime is committed as a habit or is committed by two or more persons.
Article 137d prohibits provoking to discrimination or hate against the group described above. Same penalties apply as in artickle 137c.[76]
Article 137e part 1 prohibits publishing a discriminatory statement, other than in formal message, or hands over an object (that contains discriminatory information) otherwise than on his request. Maximum imprisonment is 6 months or a fine of the third category.[73][77]
Part 2 increases the maximum imprisonment to one year and the maximum fine category to 4,[75] when the crime is committed as a habit or committed by two or more persons.
Article 137f prohibits supporting discriminatory activities by giving money or goods. Maximum imprisonment is 3 months or a fine of the second category.[78][79]
United Kingdom
Equal Pay Act 1970 – provides for equal pay for comparable work
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 – makes discrimination against women or men, including discrimination on the grounds of marital status, illegal in the workplace.
Human Rights Act 1998 – provides more scope for redressing all forms of discriminatory imbalances
United States
Equal Pay Act of 1963[80] – (part of the Fair Labor Standards Act) – prohibits wage discrimination by employers and labor organizations based on sex
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964[81] – broadly prohibits discrimination in the workplace including hiring, firing, workforce reduction, benefits, and sexually harassing conduct
Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibited discrimination in the sale or rental of housing based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing the Act.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – covers discrimination based upon pregnancy in the workplace[82]
Violence Against Women Act
Theories[edit]
Social theories such as egalitarianism assert that social equality should prevail. In some societies, including most developed countries, each individual's civil rights include the right to be free from government sponsored social discrimination.[83] Due to a belief in the capacity to perceive pain or suffering shared by all animals, "abolitionist" or "vegan" egalitarianism maintains that the interests of every individual (regardless its species), warrant equal consideration with the interests of humans, and that not doing so is "speciesist".[84]
Labeling theory[edit]
Discrimination, in labeling theory, takes form as mental categorization of minorities and the use of stereotype. This theory describes difference as deviance from the norm, which results in internal devaluation and social stigma[85] that may be seen as discrimination. It is started by describing a "natural" social order. It is distinguished between the fundamental principle of fascism and social democracy.[clarification needed] The Nazis in 1930s-era Germany and the pre-1990 Apartheid government of South Africa used racially discriminatory agendas for their political ends. This practice continues with some present day governments.[citation needed]
Game theory[edit]
Economist Yanis Varoufakis (2013) argues that that "discrimination based on utterly arbitrary characteristics evolves quickly and systematically in the experimental laboratory", and that neither classical game theory nor neoclassical economics can explain this. [86] Varoufakis and Shaun Hargreaves-Heap (2002) ran an experiment where volunteers played a computer-mediated, multiround hawk-dove game (HD game). At the start of each session, each participant was assigned a color at random, either red or blue. At each round, each player learned the color assigned to his or her opponent, but nothing else about the opponent. Hargreaves-Heap and Varoufakis found that the players' behavior within a session frequently developed a discriminatory convention, giving a Nash equilibrium where players of one color (the "advantaged" color) consistently played the aggressive "hawk" strategy against players of the other, "disadvantaged" color, who played the acquiescent "dove" strategy against the advantaged color. Players of both colors used a mixed strategy when playing against players assigned the same color as their own.
The experimenters then added a cooperation option to the game, and found that disadvantaged players usually cooperated with each other, while advantaged players usually did not. They state that while the equilibria reached in the original HD game are predicted by evolutionary game theory, game theory does not explain the emergence of cooperation in the disadvantaged group. Citing earlier psychological work of Matthew Rabin, they hypothesize that a norm of differing entitlements emerges across the two groups, and that this norm could define a "fairness" equilibrium within the disadvantaged group.[87]
State vs. free market[edit]
This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (December 2011)
It has been suggested that Ethnic Penalty be merged into this article. (Discuss) Proposed since March 2013.
State discrimination[edit]
In the 1990s, Bhutan expelled or forced to leave its Hindu population in the name of preserving its Buddhist culture and identity.
In politics, the dominating part of the population rules. Some believe the anti-semitic practices of the Nazi-Germany would not have happened in free markets, because they would have caused losses.[88]
However, government officials and politicians need not care about losses as much as companies, which decreases their incentive not to discriminate. In the U.S. for example, around 1900 African-Americans started to compete for jobs that had previously been all-white. Officials, voted in by white majorities, changed the hiring rules for the federal civil service. Photographs of applicants were made obligatory in civil service job applications, and hiring officials were given discretion to choose between the three top scoring applicants. The number of blacks in federal employment was kept artificially low for decades.[89]
In early 20th century South Africa mine owners preferred hiring black workers because they were cheaper. Then the whites successfully persuaded the government to enact laws that highly restricted the black's rights to work (see Apartheid).[89]
Similarly, to make more profits, producers secretly hired screenwriters who were on Senator Joseph McCarthy's blacklist, which mitigated the effects of the list.[89]
When the "Jim Crow" racial segregation laws were enacted in the U.S., many companies disobeyed them for years, because the market automatically punishes companies that discriminate: they lose customers and get additional expenses. It took 15 years for the government to break down the resistance of the companies.[90]
Markets punish the discriminator[edit]
In his book The Economics of Discrimination (University of Chicago Press, 1957) the Nobel Prize–winning economist Gary Becker asserts that markets automatically punish the companies that discriminate.[88] According to Becker, the profitability of the company that discriminates is decreased, and the loss is "directly proportional to how much the employer's decision was based on prejudice, rather than on merit." Indeed, choosing a worker with lower performance (in comparison to salary) causes losses proportional to the difference in performance. Similarly, the customers who discriminate against certain kinds of workers in favor of less effective ones have to pay more for their services, on average.[88]
If a company discriminates, it typically loses profitability and market share to the companies that do not discriminate, unless the state limits free competition protecting the discriminators.[89]
In The Welfare Implications of Becker’s Discrimination Coefficient Richard S. Toikka disagrees, citing the ambivalent relations between discrimination and economic efficiency, as shown by the literature. According to Toikka the “discriminatory tastes,” in Becker’s explanation, was shown to be problematic because it implies discrimination is efficient.[91] Further, the very aim of the markets is to cater efficiently for the different "tastes" of all individuals, including customers, employees, employers, and firm owners (and discrimination happens within and between all these groups). If discrimination were just another "taste" then the markets were not to punish for it. Second, microeconomic theory turns to unusual method - explicit treatment of production functions - when it analyzes discrimination. And third, the very existence of discrimination in employment (defined as wages which differ from marginal product of the discriminated employees) at the long run, contradicts perfect competition and efficiency (which imply equality of wages and the said marginal product). Hence, the very existence of discrimination at the long run, contradicts the claim that the markets function well and punish the discriminators.[92]
See also[edit]
Ableism
Adultism
Affirmative action
Ageism
Allport's Scale
Anti-discrimination law
Apartheid
Antiziganism
Colorism
Cultural assimilation
Dignity
Employment discrimination
Egalitarianism
Equal opportunity
Equal rights
Ethnic penalty
Genetic discrimination
Genocide
Heightism
Homophobia
Institutionalized discrimination
List of countries by discrimination and violence against minorities
Microaggression theory
Persecution
Racial segregation
Realistic conflict theory
Racism
Reverse discrimination
Second-class citizen
Sexism
Social conflict
Speciesism
Slavery
State racism
Statistical discrimination (economics)
Stereotype
Structural violence
Stigma management
Transphobia
Xenophobia
Portal icon Discrimination portal
Portal icon Sociology portal
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "discrimination, definition". March 2015.
2.Jump up ^ "discrimination, definition". Cambridge Dictionaries Online. Cambridge University. Retrieved 29 March 2013.
3.Jump up ^ Introduction to sociology. 7th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc, 2009. page 334. Print.
4.Jump up ^ "Bibliography on Race, Gender and Affirmative Action". Race, Gender, and Affirmative Action. University of Michigan. Retrieved 28 September 2014.
5.Jump up ^ "Definition of discrimination; Origin". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University. Retrieved 14 January 2013.
6.Jump up ^ Introduction to sociology. 7th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc, 2009. page 324. Print.
7.Jump up ^ Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen, "Private Discrimination: A Prioritarian, Desert-Accommodating Account", San Diego Law Review, 43, 817-856 (2006); Oscar Horta, "Discrimination in Terms of Moral Exclusion", Theoria: Swedish Journal of Philosophy, 76, 346-364 (2010).
8.Jump up ^ Sherif, M. (1967). Group conflict and co-operation. London: Routledge.
9.Jump up ^ Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
10.Jump up ^ Rubin, M.; Hewstone, M. et al. (2004). "Social identity, system justification, and social dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al". Political Psychology 25 (6): 823–844. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00400.x.
11.Jump up ^ United Nations CyberSchoolBus: What is discrimination? PDF
12.Jump up ^ The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
13.Jump up ^ "Definition of Ageism". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 4 December 2012.
14.Jump up ^ Kirkpatrick, George R.; Katsiaficas, George N.; Kirkpatrick, Robert George; Mary Lou Emery (1987). Introduction to critical sociology. Ardent Media. p. 261. ISBN 978-0-8290-1595-9. Retrieved 28 January 2011.
15.Jump up ^ Wilkinson J and Ferraro K, Thirty Years of Ageism Research. In Nelson T (ed). Ageism: Stereotyping and Prejudice Against Older Persons. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2002
16.Jump up ^ "Young and Oppressed"[dead link]. youthrights.org. Retrieved on 11 April 2012.
17.Jump up ^ Lahey, J. (2005) Do Older Workers Face Discrimination?[dead link] Boston College.
18.Jump up ^ (2006) How Ageist is Britain?[dead link] London: Age Concern.
19.^ Jump up to: a b Discrimination, UNICEF
20.Jump up ^ Global Caste Discrimination
21.Jump up ^ Caste - The Facts[dead link]
22.Jump up ^ "India: Official Dalit population exceeds 200 million". International Dalit Solidarity Network. 29 May 2013. Retrieved 30 July 2014.
23.Jump up ^ Vornholt, Katharina; Sjir Uitdewilligen; Frans J.N. Nijhuis (December 2013). "Factors Affecting the Acceptance of People with Disabilities at Work: A Literature Review". Journal Of Occupational Rehabilitation 23 (4): 464. doi:10.1007/s10926-013-9426-0. Retrieved 2014-03-17.
24.Jump up ^ Frankfurt Business Media
25.Jump up ^ Race, Color, National Origin and Ancestry[dead link], State of Wisconsin
26.^ Jump up to: a b Ken LaMance, Prohibitions Against Race and Nationality
27.Jump up ^ Christiane Schwieren, Mechanisms Underlying Nationality-Based Discrimination in Teams. A Quasi-Experiment Testing Predictions From Social Psychology and Microeconomics, Maastricht University
28.Jump up ^ Emiratisation won't work if people don't want to learn | The National
29.Jump up ^ "Malaysia's lingering ethnic divide". March 4, 2008. BBC News.
30.Jump up ^ "Uighurs in China Say Bias Is Growing". The New York Times. October 7, 2013
31.Jump up ^ Levine, Bertram. (2005). "Not All Black and White". J. Cropp (Ed.), Resolving Racial Conflict, 193-218. London: University of Missouri Press.
32.Jump up ^ "Aboriginal Offenders: A Critical Situation". Office of the Correctional Investigator, Government of Canada. February 2013.
33.Jump up ^ "Prisoners in Australia, 2006". Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2006-12-14. Retrieved 2007-05-04.
34.Jump up ^ New Zealand's Prison Population
35.Jump up ^ Ramesh, Randeep. "More black people jailed in England and Wales proportionally than in US". The Guardian. October 11, 2010
36.Jump up ^ Callahan, Gene; Anderson, William (August–September 2001). "The Roots of Racial Profiling". Reason Online (Reason Foundation).
37.Jump up ^ How is the Criminal Justice System Racist?
38.Jump up ^ Blacks Hardest Hit by Incarceration Policy. Human Rights Watch. June 5, 2008.
39.Jump up ^ Maan Z. Madina, Arabic-English Dictionary of the Modern Literary Language, 1973.
40.Jump up ^ "Did Discrimination Enhance Intelligence of Jews?". National Geographic News. July 18, 2005
41.Jump up ^ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979: Religious discrimination. A neglected issue. A consultation sponsored by the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Washington. D.C., April 9–10, 1979
42.Jump up ^ OECD. OECD Employment Outlook 2008 – Statistical Annex. OECD, Paris, 2008, p. 358.
43.Jump up ^ Glott, R., Schmidt, P., & Ghosh, R. A. (2010, March). Wikipedia survey—Overview of results. Retrieved from UNI-MERIT at http://www.wikipediasurvey.org/docs/Wikipedia_Overview_15March2010- FINAL.pdf
44.Jump up ^ Reagle, J., & Rhue, L. (2011). Gender Bias in Wikipedia and Britannica. http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/777/631
45.Jump up ^ Wilson, F. (2003) Organizational Behaviour and Gender (2nd Edition), Aldershot: Ashgate.
46.Jump up ^ Sex Discrimination | Employment Law | Citation.co.uk
47.Jump up ^ Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2008) "Gendering, Courtship and Pay Equity: Developing Attraction Theory to Understand Work-Life Balance and Entrepreneurial Behaviour", paper to the 31st ISBE Conference, 5th–7th November, Belfast
48.Jump up ^ Hyde, J. S. (2005). "The Gender Similarities Hypothesis". American Psychologist 60 (6): 581–592. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.60.6.581.
49.Jump up ^ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2009. Report 1025, June 2010.
50.Jump up ^ Raymond F. Gregory, Women and Workplace Discrimination: Overcoming Barriers to Gender Equality, Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003
51.Jump up ^ Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Glass Ceilings and Open Doors, Fordham Law Review, 64.2, 1995, pp.291-449; Carol Hymowitz and Timothy Schellhardt, The Glass Ceiling: Why Women Can’t Seem to Break the Invisible Barrier that Blocks them from the Top Jobs, The Wall Street Journal, 4, March 24, 1986, pp.10-40
52.Jump up ^ Kenneth Bolton, Joe R. Feagin Black in Blue: African-American Police Officers and Racism, Routledge, 2004
53.Jump up ^ "A Solid Investment: Making Full Use of the Nation's Human Capital". November 1995. Retrieved 2008-05-23.
54.Jump up ^ "Quick Stats on Women Workers, 2010". U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings, 2010 Annual Averages and the Monthly Labor Review.
55.Jump up ^ Noack v YMCA of Greater Houston Area,132,S. Ct.425 (US, 2011)
56.Jump up ^ Cowan, Glora; O'Brien, Margaret (1990). "Gender and Survival vs. Death in Slasher Films: A Content Analysis". Sex Roles 23 (3–4): 187–196. doi:10.1007/BF00289865.
57.Jump up ^ World English Dictionary, "Sexual Orientation"
58.Jump up ^ MacInnis, Cara C.; Hodson, Gordon (2012). "Intergroup bias toward "Group X": Evidence of prejudice, dehumanization, avoidance, and discrimination against asexuals". Group Processes Intergroup Relations 15 (6): 725–743. doi:10.1177/1368430212442419.
59.Jump up ^ "New Benefits for Same-Sex Couples May Be Hard to Implement Abroad". ABC News. June 22, 2009.
60.Jump up ^ ILGA: 2009 Report on State Sponsored Homophobia (2009)[dead link]
61.Jump up ^ ILGA:7 countries still put people to death for same-sex acts[dead link]
62.Jump up ^ Homosexuality and Islam - ReligionFacts
63.Jump up ^ IRIN Middle East | Middle East | Iraq | IRAQ: Male homosexuality still a taboo | Human Rights |Feature
64.Jump up ^ "They Want Us Exterminated". Human Rights Watch. August 16, 2009.
65.Jump up ^ Harrison, Rebecca. "South African gangs use rape to "cure" lesbians". Reuters. March 13, 2009.
66.Jump up ^ Kelly, Annie. "Raped and killed for being a lesbian: South Africa ignores 'corrective' attacks". The Guardian. March 12, 2009.
67.Jump up ^ Mountz, Alison. (2009) Key Concepts in Political Geography. SAGE. pp.328
68.^ Jump up to: a b Said, Edward. (1978) Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books. pp.357
69.Jump up ^ Gregory, Derek. (2004) The Colonial Present. Blackwell Publishers. pp. 4
70.Jump up ^ Said, Edward. (1978) Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books. pp.360
71.Jump up ^ American Civil Rights Institute | Press Release[dead link]
72.Jump up ^ "Section 1 of the Israeli 'Libel Law 1965'". "Defines libel as a publication that may humiliate a person (individual or corporation) in the eyes of people, or to deem him/her/it object of hatred, contempt or ridicule their part; degrade a person for the acts, conduct or attributed qualities; damage ones job, whether public office or another job, damage ones business, trade, profession; degrade a person because of race, national origin, religion, place of residence, gender or sexual orientation."
73.^ Jump up to: a b € 7,800
74.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
75.^ Jump up to: a b € 19,500
76.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
77.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
78.Jump up ^ € 3,900
79.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
80.Jump up ^ Finduslaw.com
81.Jump up ^ Finduslaw.com
82.Jump up ^ "Pregnancy Discrimination Act". Retrieved 2008-05-14.
83.Jump up ^ "Civil rights". Retrieved 2006.
84.Jump up ^ Singer, Peter (1999) [1993]. "Equality for Animals?". Practical Ethics (Second ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 57–58. ISBN 0-521-43971-X. "If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. ... This is why the limit of sentience ... is the only defensible boundary of concern for the interests of others. ... Similarly those I would call 'speciesists' give greater weight to their own species when there is a clash between their interests and the interests of those of other species."
85.Jump up ^ Slattery, M. (2002). Key Ideas in Sociology. Nelson Thornes. pp. 134–137. ISBN 978-0-7487-6565-2.
86.Jump up ^ Yanis Varoufakis (2013). "Chapter 11: Evolving domination in the laboratory" (PDF). Economic Indeterminacy: A personal encounter with the economists' peculiar nemesis. Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy. Routledge. p. 13. ISBN 0415668492.
87.Jump up ^ Shaun Hargreaves-Heap; Yanis Varoufakis (July 2002), "Some experimental evidence on the evolution of discrimination, co-operation and perceptions of fairness" (PDF), The Economic Journal (Royal Economic Society) 112: 679–703, doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00735
88.^ Jump up to: a b c The Economics of Discrimination, Robert P. Murphy, Library of Economics, AUGUST 2, 2010
89.^ Jump up to: a b c d Discrimination, The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, Library of Economics
90.Jump up ^ Jennifer Roback, "The Political Economy of Segregation: The Case of Segregated Streetcars." Journal of Economic History 56, no. 4 (December 1986): 893–917.
91.Jump up ^ Richard S. Toikka, The Welfare Implications of Becker’s Discrimination Coefficient, 13 J. ECON. THEORY 472, 472 (1976); Glen G. Cain, The Economic Analysis of Labor Market Discrimination: A Survey, in 1 HANDBOOK OF LABOR ECONOMICS 693, 774 (Orley Ashenfelter & Richard Layard eds., 1986).
92.Jump up ^ For review of the literature in regard to the last two points see Menahem Pasternak, Employment Discrimination: Some Economic Definitions, Critique and Legal Implications, 33 N. C. Cent. L. Rev. (2011) 163
Further reading[edit]
Gorman, Linda (2008). "Discrimination". In David R. Henderson (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Economics (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Library of Economics and Liberty. ISBN 978-0865976658. OCLC 237794267.
External links[edit]
Topics.law.cornell.edu
Legal definitions Australia
Canada[dead link]
Russia
US
Employment Discrimination Laws in the United States
Discrimination Laws in Europe[dead link]
Behavioral Biology and Racism
Anti-Racism and Hate
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Abuse
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
Categories: Discrimination
Social justice
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Беларуская
Български
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
Malagasy
Bahasa Melayu
Монгол
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Romani
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
West-Vlams
ייִדיש
粵語
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 April 2015, at 19:58.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination
Discrimination
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Discrimination (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.[1] This includes treatment of an individual or group based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or social category, "in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated".[2] It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction, influencing the individual's actual behavior towards the group or the group leader, restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on logical or irrational decision making.[3]
Not all discrimination is based on prejudice, however. In the U.S., government policy known as affirmative action was instituted to encourage employers and universities to seek out and accept groups such as African-Americans and women, who have been subject to the opposite kind of discrimination for a long time.[4] Discriminatory traditions, policies, ideas, practices, and laws exist in many countries and institutions in every part of the world, even in ones where discrimination is generally looked down upon. In some places, controversial attempts such as quotas have been used to benefit those believed to be current or past victims of discrimination—but have sometimes been called reverse discrimination
Contents [hide]
1 Etymology
2 Definitions
3 United Nations documents
4 Types 4.1 Age
4.2 Caste
4.3 Disability
4.4 Employment
4.5 Language
4.6 Nationality
4.7 Race or Ethnicity
4.8 Region
4.9 Religious Beliefs
4.10 Sex, gender, and gender identity
4.11 Sexual orientation
4.12 Othering
4.13 Reverse Discrimination
5 Legislation
6 Theories 6.1 Labeling theory
6.2 Game theory
7 State vs. free market 7.1 State discrimination
7.2 Markets punish the discriminator
8 See also
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links
Etymology[edit]
The term discriminate appeared in the early 17th century in the English language. It is from the Latin discriminat- 'distinguished between', from the verb discriminare, from discrimen 'distinction', from the verb discernere.[5] Since the American Civil War the term "discrimination" generally evolved in American English usage as an understanding of prejudicial treatment of an individual based solely on their race, later generalized as membership in a certain socially undesirable group or social category.[6] "Discrimination" derives from Latin, where the verb discrimire means "to separate, to distinguish, to make a distinction".
Definitions[edit]
Moral philosophers have defined discrimination as disadvantageous treatment or consideration. This is a comparative definition. An individual need not be actually harmed in order to be discriminated against. They just need to be treated worse than others for some arbitrary reason. If someone decides to donate to help orphan children, but decides to donate less, say, to black children out of a racist attitude, then they would be acting in a discriminatory way even though the people they discriminate against are actually benefitted by having some money donated to them.[7]
Based on realistic-conflict theory[8] and social-identity theory,[9] Rubin and Hewstone[10] have highlighted a distinction among three types of discrimination:
1.Realistic competition is driven by self-interest and is aimed at obtaining material resources (e.g., food, territory, customers) for the in-group (e.g., favouring an in-group in order to obtain more resources for its members, including the self).
2.Social competition is driven by the need for self-esteem and is aimed at achieving a positive social status for the in-group relative to comparable out-groups (e.g., favouring an in-group in order to make it better than an out-group).
3.Consensual discrimination is driven by the need for accuracy[clarification needed] and reflects stable and legitimate intergroup status hierarchies (e.g., favouring a high-status in-group because it is high status).
The United Nations stance on discrimination includes the statement: "Discriminatory behaviors take many forms, but they all involve some form of exclusion or rejection."[11] International bodies United Nations Human Rights Council work towards helping ending discrimination around the world.
United Nations documents[edit]
Important UN documents addressing discrimination include:
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948. It states that:" Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."[12]
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a United Nations convention. The Convention commits its members to the elimination of racial discrimination. The convention was adopted and opened for signature by the United Nations General Assembly on 21 December 1965, and entered into force on 4 January 1969.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) is an international treaty adopted in 1979 by the United Nations General Assembly. Described as an international bill of rights for women, it came into force on 3 September 1981.
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an international human rights instrument treaty of the United Nations. Parties to the Convention are required to promote, protect, and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities and ensure that they enjoy full equality under the law. The text was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 13 December 2006, and opened for signature on 30 March 2007. Following ratification by the 20th party, it came into force on 3 May 2008.
Types[edit]
Age[edit]
Main article: Ageism
Ageism or age discrimination is discrimination and stereotyping based on the grounds of someone's age.[13] It is a set of beliefs, norms, and values which used to justify discrimination or subordination based on a person's age.[14] Ageism is most often directed towards old people, or adolescents and children.[15][16]
Age discrimination in hiring has been shown to exist in the United States. Joanna Lahey, professor at The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M, found that firms are more than 40% more likely to interview a young adult job applicant than an older job applicant.[17]
In a survey for the University of Kent, England, 29% of respondents stated that they had suffered from age discrimination. This is a higher proportion than for gender or racial discrimination. Dominic Abrams, social psychology professor at the university, concluded that Ageism is the most pervasive form of prejudice experienced in the UK population.[18]
Caste[edit]
See also: Caste
According to UNICEF and Human Rights Watch, caste discrimination affects an estimated 250 million people worldwide.[19][20][21] Discrimination based on caste, as perceived by UNICEF, is prevalent mainly in parts of Asia, (India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, China, Pakistan, Nepal, Japan), Africa and others.[19] As of 2011, there were 200 million Dalits or Scheduled Castes (formerly known as "untouchables") in India.[22]
Disability[edit]
Main article: Disability discrimination
Discrimination against people with disabilities in favor of people who are not is called ableism or disablism. Disability discrimination, which treats non-disabled individuals as the standard of ‘normal living’, results in public and private places and services, education, and social work that are built to serve 'standard' people, thereby excluding those with various disabilities. Studies have shown, employment is needed to not only provide a living but to sustain mental health and well being. Work fulfils a number of basic needs for an individual such as collective purpose, social contact, status, and activity.[23] A person with a disability is often found to be socially isolated and work is one way to reduce isolation.
In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act mandates the provision of equality of access to both buildings and services and is paralleled by similar acts in other countries, such as the Equality Act 2010 in the UK.[citation needed]
Employment[edit]
Ethiopian Jews protest in Israel over non-employment of Ethiopian academics.
Main article: Employment discrimination
Denying someone employment, or disallowing one from applying for a job, is often recognized as employment discrimination when the grounds for such an exclusion is not related to the requirements of the position, and protected characteristics may include age, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, height, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, skin color, and weight.
The United States federal laws that protect against:
Race, color and national origin discrimination include the [1] Civil Rights Act of 1964, [2] Executive Order Number 11478 among other numerous laws that protect people from race, color and national origin discrimination.
Sex and gender discrimination include the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and [3] Equal Pay Act of 1963.
Age discrimination include the [4] Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967.
Physical and mental disability discrimination include the [5] Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Religious discrimination include the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Military status discrimination include the [6] Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974
Most other western nations have similar laws protecting these groups.
Still unrelated to the requirements of the position, only 9% of Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) are women while they are over 60% among accountants and auditors. And yet those who reach a high responsibility position are paid on average 16% lower than their male colleagues. (According to a recent report, 2013) [24]
Language[edit]
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2012)
Main article: Linguistic discrimination
Nationalists on Corsica sometimes spray-paint or shoot traffic signs in French.
Diversity of language is protected and respected by most nations who value cultural diversity.[dubious – discuss] However, people are sometimes subjected to different treatment because their preferred language is associated with a particular group, class or category. Commonly, the preferred language is just another attribute of separate ethnic groups.[dubious – discuss] Discrimination exists if there is prejudicial treatment against a person or a group of people who speak a particular language or dialect.
Language discrimination is suggested to be labeled linguicism or logocism.[by whom?] Anti-discriminatory and inclusive efforts to accommodate persons who speak different languages or cannot have fluency in the country's predominant or "official" language, is bilingualism such as official documents in two languages, and multiculturalism in more than two languages.[citation needed]
Nationality[edit]
Discrimination on the basis of nationality is usually included in employment laws[25] (see below section for employment discrimination specifically). It is sometimes referred to as bound together with racial discrimination[26] although it can be separate. It may vary from laws that stop refusals of hiring based on nationality, asking questions regarding origin, to prohibitions of firing, forced retirement, compensation and pay, etc., based on nationality.[26]
Discrimination on the basis of nationality may show as a "level of acceptance" in a sport or work team regarding new team members and employees who differ from the nationality of the majority of team members.[27]
In the UAE and other GCC states, for instance, nationality is not frequently given to residents and expatriates. In the workplace, preferential treatment is given to full citizens, even though many of them lack experience or motivation to do the job. State benefits are also generally available for citizens only.[28]
Race or Ethnicity[edit]
Main articles: Racism, Discrimination based on skin color and Ethnic Penalty
Anti-Arab sign in Pattaya Beach, Thailand
German warning in Germany-occupied Poland 1939 - "No entrance for Poles!"
Antisemitic graffiti in Lithuania. The signs read "Jews out" and "Hate"
An African-American child at a segregated drinking fountain on a courthouse lawn, North Carolina, US 1938.
Anti-Japanese poster outside of a restaurant in Guangzhou, China
Racial discrimination differentiates individuals on the basis of real and perceived racial differences and has been official government policy in several countries, such as South Africa in the apartheid era. Discriminatory policies towards ethnic minorities include the race-based discrimination of ethnic Indians and Chinese in Malaysia[29] or discrimination of ethnic Uighurs in China.[30] After the Vietnam War, many Vietnamese refugees moved to the United States, where they face discrimination.[31]
As of 2013, aboriginal people (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) comprise 4 percent of Canada's population, but account for 23.2 percent of the federal prison population.[32] According to the Australian government's June 2006 publication of prison statistics, Aborigines make up 24% of the overall prison population in Australia.[33]
In 2004, Māori made up just 15% of the total population of New Zealand but 49.5% of prisoners. Māori were entering prison at eight times the rate of non-Māori.[34] A quarter of the people in England's prisons are from an ethnic minority. The Equality and Human Rights Commission found that in England and Wales as of 2010, a black person was five times more likely to be imprisoned than a white person. The discrepancy was attributed to "decades of racial prejudice in the criminal justice system".[35]
In the United States, racial profiling of minorities by law-enforcement officials has been called racial discrimination.[36]
Within the criminal justice system in the United States, minorities are convicted and imprisoned disproportionately when compared to the majority.[37][38] As early as 1866, the Civil Rights Act and Civil Rights Act of 1871 provided a remedy for intentional racism in employment by private employers and state and local public employers. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 expanded the damages available in Title VII cases and granted Title VII plaintiffs the right to a jury trial.
Region[edit]
See also: Regional discrimination in China
Regional or geographic discrimination is discrimination based on the region in which a person lives or was born. It differs from national discrimination in that it may not be based on national borders or the country the victim lives in, but is instead based on prejudices against a specific region of one or more countries. Examples include discrimination against mainland Chinese within China, or discrimination against Americans from the south in the United States. It is often accompanied by discrimination based on accent, dialect, or cultural differences.[citation needed]
Religious Beliefs[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination
Freedom of religion
Concepts[show]
Status by country[show]
Religious persecution[show]
Religion portal
v ·
t ·
e
Religious discrimination is valuing or treating a person or group differently because of what they do or do not believe or because of their feelings towards a given religion. For instance, the indigenous Christian population of Balkans (known as "rayah" or "protected flock") lived under the Ottoman Kanun–i–Rayah. The word is sometimes translated as 'cattle' rather than 'flock' or 'subjects' to emphasize the inferior status of the rayah.[39]
Restrictions upon Jewish occupations were imposed by Christian authorities. Local rulers and church officials closed many professions to Jews, pushing them into marginal roles considered socially inferior, such as tax and rent collecting and moneylending, occupations only tolerated as a "necessary evil".[40] The number of Jews permitted to reside in different places was limited; they were concentrated in ghettos and were not allowed to own land.
In a 1979 consultation on the issue, the United States commission on civil rights defined religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Whereas religious civil liberties, such as the right to hold or not to hold a religious belief, are essential for Freedom of Religion (in the United States secured by the First Amendment), religious discrimination occurs when someone is denied " the equal protection of the laws, equality of status under the law, equal treatment in the administration of justice, and equality of opportunity and access to employment, education, housing, public services and facilities, and public accommodation because of their exercise of their right to religious freedom."[41]
Sex, gender, and gender identity[edit]
Main article: Sexism
See also: Misogyny, Misandry, Transphobia and Discrimination towards non-binary gender persons
Though gender discrimination and sexism refers to beliefs and attitudes in relation to the gender of a person, such beliefs and attitudes are of a social nature and do not, normally, carry any legal consequences. Sex discrimination, on the other hand, may have legal consequences.
Though what constitutes sex discrimination varies between countries, the essence is that it is an adverse action taken by one person against another person that would not have occurred had the person been of another sex. Discrimination of that nature is considered a form of prejudice and in certain enumerated circumstances is illegal in many countries.
Sexual discrimination can arise in different contexts. For instance an employee may be discriminated against by being asked discriminatory questions during a job interview, or by an employer not hiring or promoting, unequally paying, or wrongfully terminating, an employee based on their gender.
The gender gap in median earnings of full-time employees according to the OECD 2008.[42]
Sexual discrimination in the workplace can also arise when the dominant group holds a bias against the minority group. One such example is Wikipedia. In the Wikipedian community, around 13 percent of registered users are women.[43] This creates gender imbalances, and leaves room for systemic bias. Women are not only more harshly scrutinized, but the representation of women authors are also overlooked. Relative to men, across all source lists, women have a 2.6 greater odds of omission in Wikipedia.[44]
In an educational setting there could be claims that a student was excluded from an educational institution, program, opportunity, loan, student group, or scholarship because of their gender. In the housing setting there could be claims that a person was refused negotiations on seeking a house, contracting/leasing a house or getting a loan based on their gender. Another setting where there have been claims of gender discrimination is banking; for example if one is refused credit or is offered unequal loan terms based on one’s gender.[45] As with other forms of unlawful discrimination there are two types of sex discrimination – direct discrimination and indirect discrimination. Direct sex discrimination is fairly easy to spot – ‘Barmaid wanted’, but indirect sex discrimination, where an unnecessary requirement puts one sex at a disproportionate disadvantage compared to the opposite sex, is sometimes less easy to spot, although some are obvious – ‘Bar person wanted – must look good in a mini skirt’.[46]
Another setting where there is usually gender discrimination is when one is refused to extend their credit, refused approval of credit/loan process, and if there is a burden of unequal loan terms based on one’s gender.
Socially, sexual differences have been used to justify different roles for men and women, in some cases giving rise to claims of primary and secondary roles.[47]
While there are alleged non-physical differences between men and women, major reviews of the academic literature on gender difference find only a tiny minority of characteristics where there are consistent psychological differences between men and women, and these relate directly to experiences grounded in biological difference.[48] However, there are also some psychological differences in regard to how problems are dealt with and emotional perceptions and reactions that may relate to hormones and the successful characteristics of each gender during longstanding roles in past primitive lifestyles.
Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers, by sex, race, and ethnicity, U.S., 2009.[49]
Unfair discrimination usually follows the gender stereotyping held by a society.[50]
The United Nations had concluded that women often experience a "glass ceiling" and that there are no societies in which women enjoy the same opportunities as men.[51] The term "glass ceiling" is used to describe a perceived barrier to advancement in employment based on discrimination, especially sex discrimination.[52]
In the United States in 1995, the Glass Ceiling Commission, a government-funded group, stated: "Over half of all Master’s degrees are now awarded to women, yet 95% of senior-level managers, of the top Fortune 1000 industrial and 500 service companies are men. Of them, 97% are white." In its report, it recommended affirmative action, which is the consideration of an employee's gender and race in hiring and promotion decisions, as a means to end this form of discrimination.[53] As of 2010, women accounted for 51% of workers in high-paying management, professional, and related occupations. They outnumbered men in such occupations as public relations managers, financial managers, and human resource managers.[54]
Transgender individuals, whether male-to-female, female-to-male, or Genderqueer, often experience transphobic problems that often lead to dismissals, underachievement, difficulty in finding a job, social isolation, and, occasionally, violent attacks against them. Nevertheless, the problem of gender discrimination does not stop at transgender individuals or with women. Men are often the victim in certain areas of employment as men begin to seek work in office and childcare settings traditionally perceived as "women's jobs". One such situation seems to be evident in a recent case concerning alleged YMCA discrimination and a Federal Court Case in Texas.[55] The case actually involves alleged discrimination against both men and black people in childcare, even when they pass the same strict background tests and other standards of employment. It is currently being contended in federal court, as of fall 2009.
Discrimination in slasher films is relevant. Gloria Cowan had a research group study on 57 different slasher films. Their results showed that the non-surviving females were more frequently sexual than the surviving females and the non-surviving males. Surviving as a female slasher victim was strongly associated with the absence of sexual behavior. In slasher films, the message appears to be that sexual women get killed and only the pure women survive. Slasher films reinforce the idea that female sexuality can be costly.[56]
Sexual orientation[edit]
Protests in New York City against Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill.
See also: Heterosexism, Heteronormativity, Biphobia and Homophobia
One’s sexual orientation is a “predilection for homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality”.[57] Like most minority groups, homosexuals and bisexuals are not immune to prejudice and discrimination from the majority group. They may experience hatred from others because of their sexual preferences; a term for such hatred based upon one’s sexual orientation is often called homophobia. Many continue to hold negative feelings towards those with non-heterosexual orientations and will discriminate against people who have them or are thought to have them.
People of other uncommon sexual orientations also experience discrimination. One study found its sample of heterosexuals to be more prejudiced against asexuals than to homosexuals or bisexuals.[58]
In 2009, ILGA published a report based on research carried out by Daniel Ottosson at Södertörn University College, Stockholm, Sweden. This research found that of the 80 countries around the world that continue to consider homosexuality illegal, five carry the death penalty for homosexual activity, and two do in some regions of the country.[59] In the report, this is described as "State sponsored homophobia".[60] This happens in Islamic states, or in two cases regions under Islamic authority.[61][62]
On February 5, 2005 the IRIN issued a reported titled "Iraq: Male homosexuality still a taboo." The article stated, among other things that honor killings by Iraqis against a gay family member are common and given some legal protection.[63] In August 2009 Human Rights Watch published an extensive report detailing torture of men accused of being gay in Iraq, including the blocking of men's anuses with glue and then giving the men laxatives.[64] Although gay marriage has been legal in South Africa since 2006, same-sex unions are often condemned as "un-African."[65] Research conducted in 2009 shows 86% of black lesbians from the Western Cape live in fear of sexual assault.[66]
Further information: LGBT rights by country or territory
A number of countries, especially those in the Western world, have passed measures to alleviate discrimination against sexual minorities, including laws against anti-gay hate crimes and workplace discrimination. Some have also legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions in order to grant same-sex couples the same protections and benefits as opposite-sex couples. In 2011, the United Nations passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights.
Othering[edit]
Othering is the process by which a person or a group is placed outside of the norm, into the margins. It is a system of discrimination whereby the characteristics of a group are used to distinguish them as separate from the norm.[67] Othering plays a fundamental role in the history and continuance of racism and other forms of discrimination. For example, by objectifying culture as something different, exotic or underdeveloped is to generalise that it is not the same as ‘normal’ society. Europe’s colonial attitude towards the Orient exemplifies through the attitude that the East was the opposite of the West; feminine where the West was masculine, weak where the West was strong and traditional where the West was progressive.[68] By making these generalisations and othering the East, Europe was simultaneously defining herself as the norm, further entrenching the perceived gap.[69] Much of the process of othering relies on imagined difference, or the expectation of difference. Spatial difference can be enough to conclude that 'we' are 'here’ and the 'others' are over 'there', making 'here' normal and 'there' foreign.[68] Imagined differences serve to categorise people into groups and assign them characteristics that suit the imaginer’s expectations and desires.[70]
Reverse Discrimination[edit]
Main articles: Reverse discrimination and Bumiputera (Malaysia)
Students protesting against racial quotas in Brazil: "Quer uma vaga? Passe no vestibular!" ("Do you want a university place? Be successful in the entrance exam!")
Some attempts at antidiscrimination have been criticized as reverse discrimination. In particular, minority quotas (for example, affirmative action) may discriminate against members of a dominant or majority group or other minority groups. In its opposition to race preferences, the American Civil Rights Institute's Ward Connerly stated, "There is nothing positive, affirmative, or equal about 'affirmative action' programs that give preference to some groups based on race."[71]
Legislation[edit]
Globe icon.
The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (May 2010)
Main article: List of anti-discrimination acts
Australia
Sex Discrimination Act 1984
Canada
Ontario Human Rights Code 1962
Canadian Human Rights Act 1977
Hong Kong
Sex Discrimination Ordinance (1996)
Israel
Prohibition of Discrimination in Products, Services and Entry into Places of Entertainment and Public Places Law, 2000
Employment (Equal Opportunities) Law, 1988
Prohibition of libel law 1965.[72]
Netherlands
Article 137c, part 1 of Wetboek van Strafrecht prohibits insults towards a group because of its race, religion, sexual orientation (straight or gay), handicap (somatically, mental or psychiatric) in public or by speech, by writing or by a picture. Maximum imprisonment one year of imprisonment or a fine of the third category.[73][74]
Part 2 increases the maximum imprisonment to two years and the maximum fine category to 4,[75] when the crime is committed as a habit or is committed by two or more persons.
Article 137d prohibits provoking to discrimination or hate against the group described above. Same penalties apply as in artickle 137c.[76]
Article 137e part 1 prohibits publishing a discriminatory statement, other than in formal message, or hands over an object (that contains discriminatory information) otherwise than on his request. Maximum imprisonment is 6 months or a fine of the third category.[73][77]
Part 2 increases the maximum imprisonment to one year and the maximum fine category to 4,[75] when the crime is committed as a habit or committed by two or more persons.
Article 137f prohibits supporting discriminatory activities by giving money or goods. Maximum imprisonment is 3 months or a fine of the second category.[78][79]
United Kingdom
Equal Pay Act 1970 – provides for equal pay for comparable work
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 – makes discrimination against women or men, including discrimination on the grounds of marital status, illegal in the workplace.
Human Rights Act 1998 – provides more scope for redressing all forms of discriminatory imbalances
United States
Equal Pay Act of 1963[80] – (part of the Fair Labor Standards Act) – prohibits wage discrimination by employers and labor organizations based on sex
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964[81] – broadly prohibits discrimination in the workplace including hiring, firing, workforce reduction, benefits, and sexually harassing conduct
Fair Housing Act of 1968 prohibited discrimination in the sale or rental of housing based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity is charged with administering and enforcing the Act.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – covers discrimination based upon pregnancy in the workplace[82]
Violence Against Women Act
Theories[edit]
Social theories such as egalitarianism assert that social equality should prevail. In some societies, including most developed countries, each individual's civil rights include the right to be free from government sponsored social discrimination.[83] Due to a belief in the capacity to perceive pain or suffering shared by all animals, "abolitionist" or "vegan" egalitarianism maintains that the interests of every individual (regardless its species), warrant equal consideration with the interests of humans, and that not doing so is "speciesist".[84]
Labeling theory[edit]
Discrimination, in labeling theory, takes form as mental categorization of minorities and the use of stereotype. This theory describes difference as deviance from the norm, which results in internal devaluation and social stigma[85] that may be seen as discrimination. It is started by describing a "natural" social order. It is distinguished between the fundamental principle of fascism and social democracy.[clarification needed] The Nazis in 1930s-era Germany and the pre-1990 Apartheid government of South Africa used racially discriminatory agendas for their political ends. This practice continues with some present day governments.[citation needed]
Game theory[edit]
Economist Yanis Varoufakis (2013) argues that that "discrimination based on utterly arbitrary characteristics evolves quickly and systematically in the experimental laboratory", and that neither classical game theory nor neoclassical economics can explain this. [86] Varoufakis and Shaun Hargreaves-Heap (2002) ran an experiment where volunteers played a computer-mediated, multiround hawk-dove game (HD game). At the start of each session, each participant was assigned a color at random, either red or blue. At each round, each player learned the color assigned to his or her opponent, but nothing else about the opponent. Hargreaves-Heap and Varoufakis found that the players' behavior within a session frequently developed a discriminatory convention, giving a Nash equilibrium where players of one color (the "advantaged" color) consistently played the aggressive "hawk" strategy against players of the other, "disadvantaged" color, who played the acquiescent "dove" strategy against the advantaged color. Players of both colors used a mixed strategy when playing against players assigned the same color as their own.
The experimenters then added a cooperation option to the game, and found that disadvantaged players usually cooperated with each other, while advantaged players usually did not. They state that while the equilibria reached in the original HD game are predicted by evolutionary game theory, game theory does not explain the emergence of cooperation in the disadvantaged group. Citing earlier psychological work of Matthew Rabin, they hypothesize that a norm of differing entitlements emerges across the two groups, and that this norm could define a "fairness" equilibrium within the disadvantaged group.[87]
State vs. free market[edit]
This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (December 2011)
It has been suggested that Ethnic Penalty be merged into this article. (Discuss) Proposed since March 2013.
State discrimination[edit]
In the 1990s, Bhutan expelled or forced to leave its Hindu population in the name of preserving its Buddhist culture and identity.
In politics, the dominating part of the population rules. Some believe the anti-semitic practices of the Nazi-Germany would not have happened in free markets, because they would have caused losses.[88]
However, government officials and politicians need not care about losses as much as companies, which decreases their incentive not to discriminate. In the U.S. for example, around 1900 African-Americans started to compete for jobs that had previously been all-white. Officials, voted in by white majorities, changed the hiring rules for the federal civil service. Photographs of applicants were made obligatory in civil service job applications, and hiring officials were given discretion to choose between the three top scoring applicants. The number of blacks in federal employment was kept artificially low for decades.[89]
In early 20th century South Africa mine owners preferred hiring black workers because they were cheaper. Then the whites successfully persuaded the government to enact laws that highly restricted the black's rights to work (see Apartheid).[89]
Similarly, to make more profits, producers secretly hired screenwriters who were on Senator Joseph McCarthy's blacklist, which mitigated the effects of the list.[89]
When the "Jim Crow" racial segregation laws were enacted in the U.S., many companies disobeyed them for years, because the market automatically punishes companies that discriminate: they lose customers and get additional expenses. It took 15 years for the government to break down the resistance of the companies.[90]
Markets punish the discriminator[edit]
In his book The Economics of Discrimination (University of Chicago Press, 1957) the Nobel Prize–winning economist Gary Becker asserts that markets automatically punish the companies that discriminate.[88] According to Becker, the profitability of the company that discriminates is decreased, and the loss is "directly proportional to how much the employer's decision was based on prejudice, rather than on merit." Indeed, choosing a worker with lower performance (in comparison to salary) causes losses proportional to the difference in performance. Similarly, the customers who discriminate against certain kinds of workers in favor of less effective ones have to pay more for their services, on average.[88]
If a company discriminates, it typically loses profitability and market share to the companies that do not discriminate, unless the state limits free competition protecting the discriminators.[89]
In The Welfare Implications of Becker’s Discrimination Coefficient Richard S. Toikka disagrees, citing the ambivalent relations between discrimination and economic efficiency, as shown by the literature. According to Toikka the “discriminatory tastes,” in Becker’s explanation, was shown to be problematic because it implies discrimination is efficient.[91] Further, the very aim of the markets is to cater efficiently for the different "tastes" of all individuals, including customers, employees, employers, and firm owners (and discrimination happens within and between all these groups). If discrimination were just another "taste" then the markets were not to punish for it. Second, microeconomic theory turns to unusual method - explicit treatment of production functions - when it analyzes discrimination. And third, the very existence of discrimination in employment (defined as wages which differ from marginal product of the discriminated employees) at the long run, contradicts perfect competition and efficiency (which imply equality of wages and the said marginal product). Hence, the very existence of discrimination at the long run, contradicts the claim that the markets function well and punish the discriminators.[92]
See also[edit]
Ableism
Adultism
Affirmative action
Ageism
Allport's Scale
Anti-discrimination law
Apartheid
Antiziganism
Colorism
Cultural assimilation
Dignity
Employment discrimination
Egalitarianism
Equal opportunity
Equal rights
Ethnic penalty
Genetic discrimination
Genocide
Heightism
Homophobia
Institutionalized discrimination
List of countries by discrimination and violence against minorities
Microaggression theory
Persecution
Racial segregation
Realistic conflict theory
Racism
Reverse discrimination
Second-class citizen
Sexism
Social conflict
Speciesism
Slavery
State racism
Statistical discrimination (economics)
Stereotype
Structural violence
Stigma management
Transphobia
Xenophobia
Portal icon Discrimination portal
Portal icon Sociology portal
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "discrimination, definition". March 2015.
2.Jump up ^ "discrimination, definition". Cambridge Dictionaries Online. Cambridge University. Retrieved 29 March 2013.
3.Jump up ^ Introduction to sociology. 7th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc, 2009. page 334. Print.
4.Jump up ^ "Bibliography on Race, Gender and Affirmative Action". Race, Gender, and Affirmative Action. University of Michigan. Retrieved 28 September 2014.
5.Jump up ^ "Definition of discrimination; Origin". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University. Retrieved 14 January 2013.
6.Jump up ^ Introduction to sociology. 7th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc, 2009. page 324. Print.
7.Jump up ^ Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen, "Private Discrimination: A Prioritarian, Desert-Accommodating Account", San Diego Law Review, 43, 817-856 (2006); Oscar Horta, "Discrimination in Terms of Moral Exclusion", Theoria: Swedish Journal of Philosophy, 76, 346-364 (2010).
8.Jump up ^ Sherif, M. (1967). Group conflict and co-operation. London: Routledge.
9.Jump up ^ Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
10.Jump up ^ Rubin, M.; Hewstone, M. et al. (2004). "Social identity, system justification, and social dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al". Political Psychology 25 (6): 823–844. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00400.x.
11.Jump up ^ United Nations CyberSchoolBus: What is discrimination? PDF
12.Jump up ^ The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
13.Jump up ^ "Definition of Ageism". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 4 December 2012.
14.Jump up ^ Kirkpatrick, George R.; Katsiaficas, George N.; Kirkpatrick, Robert George; Mary Lou Emery (1987). Introduction to critical sociology. Ardent Media. p. 261. ISBN 978-0-8290-1595-9. Retrieved 28 January 2011.
15.Jump up ^ Wilkinson J and Ferraro K, Thirty Years of Ageism Research. In Nelson T (ed). Ageism: Stereotyping and Prejudice Against Older Persons. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2002
16.Jump up ^ "Young and Oppressed"[dead link]. youthrights.org. Retrieved on 11 April 2012.
17.Jump up ^ Lahey, J. (2005) Do Older Workers Face Discrimination?[dead link] Boston College.
18.Jump up ^ (2006) How Ageist is Britain?[dead link] London: Age Concern.
19.^ Jump up to: a b Discrimination, UNICEF
20.Jump up ^ Global Caste Discrimination
21.Jump up ^ Caste - The Facts[dead link]
22.Jump up ^ "India: Official Dalit population exceeds 200 million". International Dalit Solidarity Network. 29 May 2013. Retrieved 30 July 2014.
23.Jump up ^ Vornholt, Katharina; Sjir Uitdewilligen; Frans J.N. Nijhuis (December 2013). "Factors Affecting the Acceptance of People with Disabilities at Work: A Literature Review". Journal Of Occupational Rehabilitation 23 (4): 464. doi:10.1007/s10926-013-9426-0. Retrieved 2014-03-17.
24.Jump up ^ Frankfurt Business Media
25.Jump up ^ Race, Color, National Origin and Ancestry[dead link], State of Wisconsin
26.^ Jump up to: a b Ken LaMance, Prohibitions Against Race and Nationality
27.Jump up ^ Christiane Schwieren, Mechanisms Underlying Nationality-Based Discrimination in Teams. A Quasi-Experiment Testing Predictions From Social Psychology and Microeconomics, Maastricht University
28.Jump up ^ Emiratisation won't work if people don't want to learn | The National
29.Jump up ^ "Malaysia's lingering ethnic divide". March 4, 2008. BBC News.
30.Jump up ^ "Uighurs in China Say Bias Is Growing". The New York Times. October 7, 2013
31.Jump up ^ Levine, Bertram. (2005). "Not All Black and White". J. Cropp (Ed.), Resolving Racial Conflict, 193-218. London: University of Missouri Press.
32.Jump up ^ "Aboriginal Offenders: A Critical Situation". Office of the Correctional Investigator, Government of Canada. February 2013.
33.Jump up ^ "Prisoners in Australia, 2006". Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2006-12-14. Retrieved 2007-05-04.
34.Jump up ^ New Zealand's Prison Population
35.Jump up ^ Ramesh, Randeep. "More black people jailed in England and Wales proportionally than in US". The Guardian. October 11, 2010
36.Jump up ^ Callahan, Gene; Anderson, William (August–September 2001). "The Roots of Racial Profiling". Reason Online (Reason Foundation).
37.Jump up ^ How is the Criminal Justice System Racist?
38.Jump up ^ Blacks Hardest Hit by Incarceration Policy. Human Rights Watch. June 5, 2008.
39.Jump up ^ Maan Z. Madina, Arabic-English Dictionary of the Modern Literary Language, 1973.
40.Jump up ^ "Did Discrimination Enhance Intelligence of Jews?". National Geographic News. July 18, 2005
41.Jump up ^ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979: Religious discrimination. A neglected issue. A consultation sponsored by the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Washington. D.C., April 9–10, 1979
42.Jump up ^ OECD. OECD Employment Outlook 2008 – Statistical Annex. OECD, Paris, 2008, p. 358.
43.Jump up ^ Glott, R., Schmidt, P., & Ghosh, R. A. (2010, March). Wikipedia survey—Overview of results. Retrieved from UNI-MERIT at http://www.wikipediasurvey.org/docs/Wikipedia_Overview_15March2010- FINAL.pdf
44.Jump up ^ Reagle, J., & Rhue, L. (2011). Gender Bias in Wikipedia and Britannica. http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/777/631
45.Jump up ^ Wilson, F. (2003) Organizational Behaviour and Gender (2nd Edition), Aldershot: Ashgate.
46.Jump up ^ Sex Discrimination | Employment Law | Citation.co.uk
47.Jump up ^ Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2008) "Gendering, Courtship and Pay Equity: Developing Attraction Theory to Understand Work-Life Balance and Entrepreneurial Behaviour", paper to the 31st ISBE Conference, 5th–7th November, Belfast
48.Jump up ^ Hyde, J. S. (2005). "The Gender Similarities Hypothesis". American Psychologist 60 (6): 581–592. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.60.6.581.
49.Jump up ^ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2009. Report 1025, June 2010.
50.Jump up ^ Raymond F. Gregory, Women and Workplace Discrimination: Overcoming Barriers to Gender Equality, Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003
51.Jump up ^ Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Glass Ceilings and Open Doors, Fordham Law Review, 64.2, 1995, pp.291-449; Carol Hymowitz and Timothy Schellhardt, The Glass Ceiling: Why Women Can’t Seem to Break the Invisible Barrier that Blocks them from the Top Jobs, The Wall Street Journal, 4, March 24, 1986, pp.10-40
52.Jump up ^ Kenneth Bolton, Joe R. Feagin Black in Blue: African-American Police Officers and Racism, Routledge, 2004
53.Jump up ^ "A Solid Investment: Making Full Use of the Nation's Human Capital". November 1995. Retrieved 2008-05-23.
54.Jump up ^ "Quick Stats on Women Workers, 2010". U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings, 2010 Annual Averages and the Monthly Labor Review.
55.Jump up ^ Noack v YMCA of Greater Houston Area,132,S. Ct.425 (US, 2011)
56.Jump up ^ Cowan, Glora; O'Brien, Margaret (1990). "Gender and Survival vs. Death in Slasher Films: A Content Analysis". Sex Roles 23 (3–4): 187–196. doi:10.1007/BF00289865.
57.Jump up ^ World English Dictionary, "Sexual Orientation"
58.Jump up ^ MacInnis, Cara C.; Hodson, Gordon (2012). "Intergroup bias toward "Group X": Evidence of prejudice, dehumanization, avoidance, and discrimination against asexuals". Group Processes Intergroup Relations 15 (6): 725–743. doi:10.1177/1368430212442419.
59.Jump up ^ "New Benefits for Same-Sex Couples May Be Hard to Implement Abroad". ABC News. June 22, 2009.
60.Jump up ^ ILGA: 2009 Report on State Sponsored Homophobia (2009)[dead link]
61.Jump up ^ ILGA:7 countries still put people to death for same-sex acts[dead link]
62.Jump up ^ Homosexuality and Islam - ReligionFacts
63.Jump up ^ IRIN Middle East | Middle East | Iraq | IRAQ: Male homosexuality still a taboo | Human Rights |Feature
64.Jump up ^ "They Want Us Exterminated". Human Rights Watch. August 16, 2009.
65.Jump up ^ Harrison, Rebecca. "South African gangs use rape to "cure" lesbians". Reuters. March 13, 2009.
66.Jump up ^ Kelly, Annie. "Raped and killed for being a lesbian: South Africa ignores 'corrective' attacks". The Guardian. March 12, 2009.
67.Jump up ^ Mountz, Alison. (2009) Key Concepts in Political Geography. SAGE. pp.328
68.^ Jump up to: a b Said, Edward. (1978) Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books. pp.357
69.Jump up ^ Gregory, Derek. (2004) The Colonial Present. Blackwell Publishers. pp. 4
70.Jump up ^ Said, Edward. (1978) Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books. pp.360
71.Jump up ^ American Civil Rights Institute | Press Release[dead link]
72.Jump up ^ "Section 1 of the Israeli 'Libel Law 1965'". "Defines libel as a publication that may humiliate a person (individual or corporation) in the eyes of people, or to deem him/her/it object of hatred, contempt or ridicule their part; degrade a person for the acts, conduct or attributed qualities; damage ones job, whether public office or another job, damage ones business, trade, profession; degrade a person because of race, national origin, religion, place of residence, gender or sexual orientation."
73.^ Jump up to: a b € 7,800
74.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
75.^ Jump up to: a b € 19,500
76.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
77.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
78.Jump up ^ € 3,900
79.Jump up ^ wetten.nl - Wet- en regelgeving - Wetboek van Strafrecht - BWBR0001854
80.Jump up ^ Finduslaw.com
81.Jump up ^ Finduslaw.com
82.Jump up ^ "Pregnancy Discrimination Act". Retrieved 2008-05-14.
83.Jump up ^ "Civil rights". Retrieved 2006.
84.Jump up ^ Singer, Peter (1999) [1993]. "Equality for Animals?". Practical Ethics (Second ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 57–58. ISBN 0-521-43971-X. "If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. ... This is why the limit of sentience ... is the only defensible boundary of concern for the interests of others. ... Similarly those I would call 'speciesists' give greater weight to their own species when there is a clash between their interests and the interests of those of other species."
85.Jump up ^ Slattery, M. (2002). Key Ideas in Sociology. Nelson Thornes. pp. 134–137. ISBN 978-0-7487-6565-2.
86.Jump up ^ Yanis Varoufakis (2013). "Chapter 11: Evolving domination in the laboratory" (PDF). Economic Indeterminacy: A personal encounter with the economists' peculiar nemesis. Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy. Routledge. p. 13. ISBN 0415668492.
87.Jump up ^ Shaun Hargreaves-Heap; Yanis Varoufakis (July 2002), "Some experimental evidence on the evolution of discrimination, co-operation and perceptions of fairness" (PDF), The Economic Journal (Royal Economic Society) 112: 679–703, doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00735
88.^ Jump up to: a b c The Economics of Discrimination, Robert P. Murphy, Library of Economics, AUGUST 2, 2010
89.^ Jump up to: a b c d Discrimination, The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, Library of Economics
90.Jump up ^ Jennifer Roback, "The Political Economy of Segregation: The Case of Segregated Streetcars." Journal of Economic History 56, no. 4 (December 1986): 893–917.
91.Jump up ^ Richard S. Toikka, The Welfare Implications of Becker’s Discrimination Coefficient, 13 J. ECON. THEORY 472, 472 (1976); Glen G. Cain, The Economic Analysis of Labor Market Discrimination: A Survey, in 1 HANDBOOK OF LABOR ECONOMICS 693, 774 (Orley Ashenfelter & Richard Layard eds., 1986).
92.Jump up ^ For review of the literature in regard to the last two points see Menahem Pasternak, Employment Discrimination: Some Economic Definitions, Critique and Legal Implications, 33 N. C. Cent. L. Rev. (2011) 163
Further reading[edit]
Gorman, Linda (2008). "Discrimination". In David R. Henderson (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Economics (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Library of Economics and Liberty. ISBN 978-0865976658. OCLC 237794267.
External links[edit]
Topics.law.cornell.edu
Legal definitions Australia
Canada[dead link]
Russia
US
Employment Discrimination Laws in the United States
Discrimination Laws in Europe[dead link]
Behavioral Biology and Racism
Anti-Racism and Hate
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Abuse
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
Categories: Discrimination
Social justice
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Беларуская
Български
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
Malagasy
Bahasa Melayu
Монгол
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Romani
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
West-Vlams
ייִדיש
粵語
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 April 2015, at 19:58.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination
Persecution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Persecuted" redirects here. For the film, see Persecuted (film).
Not to be confused with prosecution or Persécution.
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. The most common forms are religious persecution, ethnic persecution and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, isolation, imprisonment, internment, fear, or pain are all factors that may establish persecution. Even so, not all suffering will necessarily establish persecution. The suffering experienced by the victim must be sufficiently severe. The threshold level of severity has been a source of much debate.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 International law
2 Religious persecution 2.1 Atheists
2.2 Bahá'ís
2.3 Christians
2.4 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)
2.5 Jehovah's Witnesses
2.6 Jews
2.7 Muslims
2.8 Hindus
2.9 Sikhs
2.10 Falun Gong
3 Ethnic persecution 3.1 Hazara people
3.2 Roma
3.3 Germans
4 Persecution based on genetics 4.1 People with albinism
5 LGBT persecution
6 Persecution based on army service
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
International law[edit]
As part of the Nuremberg Principles, crimes against humanity are part of international law. Principle VI of the Nuremberg Principles states that
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:...
(c)Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Telford Taylor, who was Counsel for the Prosecution at the Nuremberg Trials wrote "[at] the Nuremberg war crimes trials, the tribunals rebuffed several efforts by the prosecution to bring such 'domestic' atrocities within the scope of international law as 'crimes against humanity'".[2] Several subsequent international treaties incorporate this principle, but some have dropped the restriction "in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime" that is in Nuremberg Principles.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which is binding on 111 states, defines crimes against humanity in Article 7.1. The article criminalises certain acts "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack". These include:
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender[3]...or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph [e.g. murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, sexual violence, apartheid, and other inhumane acts] or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court
Religious persecution[edit]
Main article: Religious persecution
Religious persecution is systematic mistreatment of an individual or group due to their religious affiliation. Not only theorists of secularization (who presume a decline of religiosity in general) would willingly assume that religious persecution is a thing of the past[citation needed]. However, with the rise of fundamentalism and religiously related terrorism, this assumption has become even more controversial[citation needed]. Indeed, in many countries of the world today, religious persecution is a Human Rights problem.
Atheists[edit]
Main article: Persecution of atheists
Atheists have experienced persecution throughout history. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property.
Bahá'ís[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Bahá'ís
The persecution of Bahá'ís refers to the religious persecution of Bahá'ís in various countries, especially in Iran,[4] which has one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. The Bahá'í Faith originated in Iran, and represents the largest religious minority in that country.
Christians[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Christians
A Christian Dirce, by Henryk Siemiradzki. A Christian woman is martyred under Nero in this re-enactment of the myth of Dirce (painting by Henryk Siemiradzki, 1897, National Museum, Warsaw).
The persecution of Christians is religious persecution that Christians sometimes undergo as a consequence of professing their faith, both historically and in the current era. In the two thousand years of the Christian faith, about 70 million believers have been killed for their faith, of whom 45.5 million or 65% were in the twentieth century according to "The New Persecuted" ("I Nuovi Perseguitati").[5] 200 million Christians are vulnerable to persecution in the world, especially in wartorn Iraq & other middle Eastern countries and parts of Asia.
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)[edit]
Main article: Anti-Mormonism
With the Missouri extermination order Mormons became the only religious group to have a state of the United States legalize the extermination of their religion. This was after a speech given by Sideny Rigdon called the July 4th Oration which while meant to state that Mormons would defend their lives and property was taken as inflammatory. Their forcible expulsion from the state caused the death of over a hundred due to exposure, starvation, and resulting illnesses. The Mormons suffered through tarring and feathering, their lands and possessions being repeatedly taken from them, mob attacks, false imprisonments, and the US sending an army to Utah to deal with the "Mormon problem" in the Utah War which resulted in the Mormons massacring settlers at the Mountain Meadows Massacre. A government militia slaughtered Mormons in what is now known as the Haun's Mill massacre. The founder of the church, Joseph Smith, was killed in Carthage, Illinois by a mob of about 200 men, almost all of whom were members of the Illinois state militia including some of the militia assigned to guard him.
Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses
Throughout the history of Jehovah's Witnesses, their beliefs, doctrines and practices have engendered controversy and opposition from the local governments, communities, or mainstream Christian groups.
Jews[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jews
Persecution of Jews is a recurring phenomenon throughout history. It has occurred on numerous occasions and at widely different geographical locations. It may include pogroms, looting and demolishing of private and public Jewish property (e.g., Kristallnacht), unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, torture, killing, or even mass execution (in World War II alone, approximately 6 million people were deliberately killed for the sole reason of being a Jew). They have been expelled from their hometowns/countries, hoping to find havens in other polities. In recent times antisemitism has often been manifested as Anti-Zionism,[6][7][8] despite the fact that there are various Jewish groups who themselves oppose the idea of Zionism.[9]
Muslims[edit]
Mass grave where events of the Srebrenica massacre of Bosnian Muslims unfolded
Main articles: Persecution of Muslims and Persecution of Ahmadis
Persecution of Muslims is a recurring phenomenon from the beginning and throughout the history of Islam. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property, or incitement to hate Muslims.
Persecution can extend beyond those who perceive themselves as Muslims to include those who are perceived by others as Muslims, or to Muslims which are considered by fellow Muslims as non-Muslims. The Ahmadiyya regard themselves as Muslims, but are seen by many other Muslims as non-Muslims and "heretics". In 1984, the Government of Pakistan, under General Zia-ul-Haq, passed Ordinance XX,[10] which banned proselytizing by Ahmadis and also banned Ahmadis from referring to themselves as Muslims. According to this ordinance, any Ahmadi who refers to oneself as a Muslim by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, directly or indirectly, or makes the call for prayer as other Muslims do, is punishable by imprisonment of up to 3 years. Because of these difficulties, Mirza Tahir Ahmad migrated to London, UK.
Hindus[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hindus
Persecution of Hindus refers to the religious persecution inflicted upon Hindus. Hindus have been historically persecuted during the Islamic rule of the Indian subcontinent[11] and during Portuguese rule of Goa. In modern times, Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have also suffered persecution. Most recently, thousands of Hindus from Sindh province in Pakistan have been fleeing to India voicing fear for their safety. After the Partition of India in 1947, there were 8.8 million Hindus in Pakistan (excluding Bangladesh) in 1951. In 1951, Hindus constituted 22% of the Pakistani population (including present-day Bangladesh which formed part of Pakistan).[12][13] Today, the Hindu minority amounts to 1.7 percent of Pakistan's population.[14]
The Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) resulted in one of the largest genocides of the 20th century. While estimates of the number of casualties was 3,000,000, it is reasonably certain that Hindus bore a disproportionate brunt of the Pakistan Army's onslaught against the Bengali population of what was East Pakistan. An article in Time magazine dated 2 August 1971, stated "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[15] Senator Edward Kennedy wrote in a report that was part of United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations testimony dated 1 November 1971, "Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked "H". All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad". In the same report, Senator Kennedy reported that 80% of the refugees in India were Hindus and according to numerous international relief agencies such as UNESCO and World Health Organization the number of East Pakistani refugees at their peak in India was close to 10 million. In a syndicated column "The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored", Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Sydney Schanberg wrote about his return to liberated Bangladesh in 1972. "Other reminders were the yellow "H"s the Pakistanis had painted on the homes of Hindus, particular targets of the Muslim army" (by "Muslim army", meaning the Pakistan Army, which had targeted Bengali Muslims as well), (Newsday, 29 April 1994).
In Bangladesh, on 28 February 2013, the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, the Vice President of the Jamaat-e-Islami to death for the war crimes committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the sentence, activists of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked the Hindus in different parts of the country. Hindu properties were looted, Hindu houses were burnt into ashes and Hindu temples were desecrated and set on fire.[16][17] While the government has held the Jamaat-e-Islami responsible for the attacks on the minorities, the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership has denied any involvement. The minority leaders have protested the attacks and appealed for justice. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has directed the law enforcement to start suo motu investigation into the attacks. US Ambassador to Bangladesh express concern about attack of Jamaat on Bengali Hindu community.[18][19] The violence included the looting of Hindu properties and businesses, the burning of Hindu homes, rape of Hindu women and desecration and destruction of Hindu temples.[20] According to community leaders, more than 50 Hindu temples and 1,500 Hindu homes were destroyed in 20 districts.[21]
Sikhs[edit]
Main articles: Sikh holocaust of 1762, Sikh holocaust of 1746 and 1984 anti-Sikh riots
See also: Category:Massacres of Sikhs.
The 1984 anti-Sikhs riots or the 1984 Sikh Massacre were a series of pogroms[22][23][24][25] directed against Sikhs in India, by anti-Sikh mobs, in response to the assassination of Indira Gandhi, on 31 October 1984, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in response to her actions authorising the military operation Operation Blue Star. There were more than 8,000[26] deaths, including 3,000 in Delhi.[24] In June 1984, during Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to attack the Golden Temple and eliminate any insurgents, as it had been occupied by Sikh separatists who were stockpiling weapons. Later operations by Indian paramilitary forces were initiated to clear the separatists from the countryside of Punjab state.[27]
The Indian government reported 2,700 deaths in the ensuing chaos. In the aftermath of the riots, the Indian government reported 20,000 had fled the city, however the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons.[28] The most affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods in Delhi. The Central Bureau of Investigation, the main Indian investigating agency, is of the opinion that the acts of violence were organized with the support from the then Delhi police officials and the central government headed by Indira Gandhi's son, Rajiv Gandhi.[29] Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister after his mother's death and, when asked about the riots, said "when a big tree falls, the earth shakes" thus trying to justify the communal strife.[30]
There are allegations that the government destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. The Asian Age front-page story called the government actions "the Mother of all Cover-ups"[31][32] There are allegations that the violence was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and sympathisers during the riots.[33] The chief weapon used by the mobs, kerosene, was supplied by a group of Indian National Congress Party leaders who owned filling stations.[34]
Falun Gong[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Falun Gong
Falun Gong was introduced to the general public by Li Hongzhi(李洪志) in Changchun, China, in 1992. For the next few years, Falun Gong was the fastest growing qigong practice in Chinese history and, by 1999, there were between 70 and 100 million people practicing Falun Gong in China.[35] Following the seven years of widespread popularity, on July 20, 1999, the government of the People's Republic of China began a nationwide persecution campaign against Falun Gong practitioners, except in the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau.[36][37] In late 1999, legislation was created to outlaw "heterodox religions" and retroactively applied to Falun Gong.[38] Amnesty International states that the persecution is "politically motivated" with "legislation being used retroactively to convict people on politically-driven charges, and new regulations introduced to further restrict fundamental freedoms".[39]
Ethnic persecution[edit]
Main article: Ethnic persecution
Ethnic persecution refers to perceived persecution based on ethnicity. Its meaning is parallel to racism, (based on race). Rwandan genocide remains an atrocity that the indigenous Hutu and Tutsi peoples still believe is unforgivable. The Japanese occupation of China caused the death of millions of people, mostly peasants murdered after the Doolittle Raid in early World War II.
Hazara people[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hazara people
Hazara people of central Afghanistan have been persecuted by Afghan rulers at various times in the history. Since the tragedy of 9/11, Sunni Muslim terrorists have been attacking the Hazara community in southwestern Pakistani town of Quetta, home to some 500000 Hazara who fled persecution in neighbouring Afghanistan. Some 2400 men, women and children have been killed or wounded with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claiming responsibility for most of the attacks against the community. Consequently, many thousands have fled the country seeking asylum in Australia.
Roma[edit]
Along with Jews, Homosexuals and others, the Romani Gypsies were rounded by the Nazi Regime of Germany and sent to the death camps.
Germans[edit]
Main article: Organised persecution of ethnic Germans
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)
The persecution of ethnic Germans refers to systematic activity against groups of ethnic Germans based on their ethnicity.
Historically, this has been due to two causes: the German population were considered, whether factually or not, linked with German nationalist regimes such as those of the Nazis or Kaiser Wilhelm. This was the case in the World War I era persecution of Germans in the United States, and also in Eastern and Central Europe following the end of World War II. While many victims of these persecutions did not, in fact, have any connection to those regimes, cooperation between German minority organisations and Nazi regime did occur, as the example of Selbstschutz shows, which is still used as a pretense of hostilities against those who did not take part in such organisations. After World War II, many such Volksdeutsche were killed or driven from their homes[who?] in acts of vengeance, others in ethnic cleansing of territories prior to populating them with citizens of the annexing country.[where?] In other cases (e.g. in the case of the formerly large German-speaking populations of Russia, Estonia, or the Transylvanian (Siebenbürgen) German minority in Rumania and the Balkans) such persecution was a crime committed against innocent communities who had played no part in the Third Reich.
Persecution based on genetics[edit]
People with albinism[edit]
Main article: Persecution of people with albinism
Persecution on the basis of albinism is frequently based on the belief that albinos are inferior to persons with higher concentration of melanin in their skin. As a result albinos have been persecuted, killed and dismembered, and graves of albinistic people dug up and desecrated. Such people have also been ostracized and even killed because they are presumed to bring bad luck in some areas. Haiti also has a long history of treating albinistic people as accursed, with the highest incidence under the influence of François "Papa Doc" Duvalier.
LGBT persecution[edit]
A number of countries, especially those in the [Western world], have passed measures to alleviate discrimination against sexual minorities, including laws against anti-gay hate crimes and workplace discrimination. Some have also legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions in order to grant same-sex couples the same protections and benefits as opposite-sex couples. In 2011, the United Nations passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights.
Persecution based on army service[edit]
Persecution on the basis of army service, or the lack of it, exists in Israel. In Israel, Jewish citizens who receive an exemption from army service are denied many prestigious career options, especially in the field of security. The root of discrimination on the basis of army service lies in the fact that at age 17, non-Arab citizens (including Druze) are called up to be examined for eligibility to compulsory military service. A record for each potential conscript is created, and those who actually serve in the military are distinguished from those rejected from service, by a Discharge Card, which has additional information on it, including the soldier's rank, military profession, and behavior during army service. Employers are particularly interested in the Discharge Card, since it is a universally available source of information about a potential employee. Citizens rejected from the army are frequently looked down upon by employers, who typically believe that "those who are unfit for army service are also unfit for the work environment", and those who succeeded in the army are also likely to be good employees. It is very frequent in Israel to see job advertisements requiring "Full Army Service", and the main problem is that the decisions taken by the draft board regarding a 17-year-old minor affect their entire life.
See also[edit]
Discrimination
Latter-day Saint martyrs
Persecution complex
Right to asylum
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ S. Rempell, Defining Persecution, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1941006
2.Jump up ^ Telford Taylor "When people kill a people", The New York Times, March 28, 1982.
3.Jump up ^ Article 7.3 of the Rome Statute, which constitutes "compromise text" states that "For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term 'gender' refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term 'gender' does not indicate any meaning different from the above." While under international criminal law persecution based on Gender Identity is also prohibited, during the Rome Diplomatic Conference that adopted the ICC Statute, it was decided to define gender narrowly in order to overcome opposition from the Holy See and other states that were concerned that the ICC could theoretically also look into discriminatory practices of religious institutions. This provision was balanced with that of Article 10, which states that "Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute."
4.Jump up ^ International Federation for Human Rights (2003-08-01). "Discrimination against religious minorities in Iran" (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 2006-10-20.
5.Jump up ^ "20th Century Saw 65% of Christian Martyrs", 10 May 2002 -- Zenit News Agency
6.Jump up ^ New antisemitism
7.Jump up ^ New Anti-Semitism: Disguised As "Anti-Zionism" - Discover the Networks
8.Jump up ^ Anti-zionism as an expression of anti-Semitism in recent years
9.Jump up ^ Anti-Zionism#Jewish anti-Zionism
10.Jump up ^ Ordinance XX
11.Jump up ^ Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage. p. 459. "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within. The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India's boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600–1000 AD) India invited conquest; and at last it came."
12.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan, 1951
13.Jump up ^ Hindu Masjids by Prafull Goradia, 2002 "In 1951, Muslims were 77 percent and Hindus were 22 percent."
14.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan[dead link]
15.Jump up ^ "World: Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal - Printout". TIME. 2 August 1971. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
16.Jump up ^ "Hindus Under Attack in Bangladesh". News Bharati. March 3, 2013. Retrieved March 26, 2013.
17.Jump up ^ "Bagerhat Hindu Temple Set on Fire". bdnews24.com. March 2, 2013. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
18.Jump up ^ "US worried at violence". The Daily Star (Bangladesh). March 12, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
19.Jump up ^ "Mozena: Violence is not the way to resolution". The Daily Ittefaq. March 11, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
20.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh: Wave of violent attacks against Hindu minority". Press releases. Amnesty International. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
21.Jump up ^ Ethirajan, Anbarasan (9 March 2013). "Bangladesh minorities 'terrorised' after mob violence". BBC News (London). Retrieved 17 March 2013.
22.Jump up ^ State pogroms glossed over. The Times of India. 31 December 2005.
23.Jump up ^ "Anti-Sikh riots a pogrom: Khushwant". Rediff.com. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
24.^ Jump up to: a b Bedi, Rahul (1 November 2009). "Indira Gandhi's death remembered". BBC. Archived from the original on 2 November 2009. Retrieved 2 November 2009. "The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi's assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing"
25.Jump up ^ Nugus, Phillip (Spring 2007). "The Assassinations of Indira & Rajiv Gandhi". BBC Active. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
26.Jump up ^ Delhi court to give verdict on re-opening 1984 riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler
27.Jump up ^ Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopaedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
28.Jump up ^ Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984), Who are the Guilty ?, People's Union for Civil Liberties, retrieved 4 November 2010
29.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots backed by Govt, police: CBI". IBN Live. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
30.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots 'wrong', says Rahul Gandhi". Hindustan Times. 18 November 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2012.
31.Jump up ^ Mustafa, Seema (2005-08-09). "1984 Sikhs Massacres: Mother of All Cover-ups". Front page story (The Asian Age). p. 1.
32.Jump up ^ Agal, Renu (2005-08-11). "Justice delayed, justice denied". BBC News.
33.Jump up ^ "Leaders 'incited' anti-Sikh riots". BBC News. August 8, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
34.Jump up ^ Kaur, Jaskaran; Crossette, Barbara (2006). Twenty years of impunity: the November 1984 pogroms of Sikhs in India (PDF) (2nd ed.). Portland, OR: Ensaaf. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-9787073-0-9. Retrieved 4 November 2010.
35.Jump up ^ Source of Statistical Information, Number of Falun Gong practitioners in China in 1999: at least 70 million, Falun Dafa Information Center, accessed 01/01/08
36.Jump up ^ Faison, Seth (April 27, 1999) "In Beijing: A Roar of Silent Protesters" New York Times, retrieved June 10, 2006
37.Jump up ^ Kahn, Joseph (April 27, 1999) "Notoriety Now for Exiled Leader of Chinese Movement" New York Times, retrieved June 14, 2006
38.Jump up ^ Leung, Beatrice (2002) 'China and Falun Gong: Party and society relations in the modern era', Journal of Contemporary China, 11:33, 761 – 784
39.Jump up ^ The crackdown on Falun Gong and other so-called heretical organizations , The Amnesty International
External links[edit]
Look up persecution in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Language alternatives to creating and being persecutors
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Abuse
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
Categories: Abuse
Persecution
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
한국어
Hrvatski
Italiano
Kiswahili
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Simple English
Slovenčina
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 April 2015, at 07:21.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution
Persecution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Persecuted" redirects here. For the film, see Persecuted (film).
Not to be confused with prosecution or Persécution.
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. The most common forms are religious persecution, ethnic persecution and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, isolation, imprisonment, internment, fear, or pain are all factors that may establish persecution. Even so, not all suffering will necessarily establish persecution. The suffering experienced by the victim must be sufficiently severe. The threshold level of severity has been a source of much debate.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 International law
2 Religious persecution 2.1 Atheists
2.2 Bahá'ís
2.3 Christians
2.4 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)
2.5 Jehovah's Witnesses
2.6 Jews
2.7 Muslims
2.8 Hindus
2.9 Sikhs
2.10 Falun Gong
3 Ethnic persecution 3.1 Hazara people
3.2 Roma
3.3 Germans
4 Persecution based on genetics 4.1 People with albinism
5 LGBT persecution
6 Persecution based on army service
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
International law[edit]
As part of the Nuremberg Principles, crimes against humanity are part of international law. Principle VI of the Nuremberg Principles states that
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:...
(c)Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Telford Taylor, who was Counsel for the Prosecution at the Nuremberg Trials wrote "[at] the Nuremberg war crimes trials, the tribunals rebuffed several efforts by the prosecution to bring such 'domestic' atrocities within the scope of international law as 'crimes against humanity'".[2] Several subsequent international treaties incorporate this principle, but some have dropped the restriction "in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime" that is in Nuremberg Principles.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which is binding on 111 states, defines crimes against humanity in Article 7.1. The article criminalises certain acts "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack". These include:
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender[3]...or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph [e.g. murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, sexual violence, apartheid, and other inhumane acts] or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court
Religious persecution[edit]
Main article: Religious persecution
Religious persecution is systematic mistreatment of an individual or group due to their religious affiliation. Not only theorists of secularization (who presume a decline of religiosity in general) would willingly assume that religious persecution is a thing of the past[citation needed]. However, with the rise of fundamentalism and religiously related terrorism, this assumption has become even more controversial[citation needed]. Indeed, in many countries of the world today, religious persecution is a Human Rights problem.
Atheists[edit]
Main article: Persecution of atheists
Atheists have experienced persecution throughout history. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property.
Bahá'ís[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Bahá'ís
The persecution of Bahá'ís refers to the religious persecution of Bahá'ís in various countries, especially in Iran,[4] which has one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. The Bahá'í Faith originated in Iran, and represents the largest religious minority in that country.
Christians[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Christians
A Christian Dirce, by Henryk Siemiradzki. A Christian woman is martyred under Nero in this re-enactment of the myth of Dirce (painting by Henryk Siemiradzki, 1897, National Museum, Warsaw).
The persecution of Christians is religious persecution that Christians sometimes undergo as a consequence of professing their faith, both historically and in the current era. In the two thousand years of the Christian faith, about 70 million believers have been killed for their faith, of whom 45.5 million or 65% were in the twentieth century according to "The New Persecuted" ("I Nuovi Perseguitati").[5] 200 million Christians are vulnerable to persecution in the world, especially in wartorn Iraq & other middle Eastern countries and parts of Asia.
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)[edit]
Main article: Anti-Mormonism
With the Missouri extermination order Mormons became the only religious group to have a state of the United States legalize the extermination of their religion. This was after a speech given by Sideny Rigdon called the July 4th Oration which while meant to state that Mormons would defend their lives and property was taken as inflammatory. Their forcible expulsion from the state caused the death of over a hundred due to exposure, starvation, and resulting illnesses. The Mormons suffered through tarring and feathering, their lands and possessions being repeatedly taken from them, mob attacks, false imprisonments, and the US sending an army to Utah to deal with the "Mormon problem" in the Utah War which resulted in the Mormons massacring settlers at the Mountain Meadows Massacre. A government militia slaughtered Mormons in what is now known as the Haun's Mill massacre. The founder of the church, Joseph Smith, was killed in Carthage, Illinois by a mob of about 200 men, almost all of whom were members of the Illinois state militia including some of the militia assigned to guard him.
Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses
Throughout the history of Jehovah's Witnesses, their beliefs, doctrines and practices have engendered controversy and opposition from the local governments, communities, or mainstream Christian groups.
Jews[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jews
Persecution of Jews is a recurring phenomenon throughout history. It has occurred on numerous occasions and at widely different geographical locations. It may include pogroms, looting and demolishing of private and public Jewish property (e.g., Kristallnacht), unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, torture, killing, or even mass execution (in World War II alone, approximately 6 million people were deliberately killed for the sole reason of being a Jew). They have been expelled from their hometowns/countries, hoping to find havens in other polities. In recent times antisemitism has often been manifested as Anti-Zionism,[6][7][8] despite the fact that there are various Jewish groups who themselves oppose the idea of Zionism.[9]
Muslims[edit]
Mass grave where events of the Srebrenica massacre of Bosnian Muslims unfolded
Main articles: Persecution of Muslims and Persecution of Ahmadis
Persecution of Muslims is a recurring phenomenon from the beginning and throughout the history of Islam. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property, or incitement to hate Muslims.
Persecution can extend beyond those who perceive themselves as Muslims to include those who are perceived by others as Muslims, or to Muslims which are considered by fellow Muslims as non-Muslims. The Ahmadiyya regard themselves as Muslims, but are seen by many other Muslims as non-Muslims and "heretics". In 1984, the Government of Pakistan, under General Zia-ul-Haq, passed Ordinance XX,[10] which banned proselytizing by Ahmadis and also banned Ahmadis from referring to themselves as Muslims. According to this ordinance, any Ahmadi who refers to oneself as a Muslim by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, directly or indirectly, or makes the call for prayer as other Muslims do, is punishable by imprisonment of up to 3 years. Because of these difficulties, Mirza Tahir Ahmad migrated to London, UK.
Hindus[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hindus
Persecution of Hindus refers to the religious persecution inflicted upon Hindus. Hindus have been historically persecuted during the Islamic rule of the Indian subcontinent[11] and during Portuguese rule of Goa. In modern times, Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have also suffered persecution. Most recently, thousands of Hindus from Sindh province in Pakistan have been fleeing to India voicing fear for their safety. After the Partition of India in 1947, there were 8.8 million Hindus in Pakistan (excluding Bangladesh) in 1951. In 1951, Hindus constituted 22% of the Pakistani population (including present-day Bangladesh which formed part of Pakistan).[12][13] Today, the Hindu minority amounts to 1.7 percent of Pakistan's population.[14]
The Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) resulted in one of the largest genocides of the 20th century. While estimates of the number of casualties was 3,000,000, it is reasonably certain that Hindus bore a disproportionate brunt of the Pakistan Army's onslaught against the Bengali population of what was East Pakistan. An article in Time magazine dated 2 August 1971, stated "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[15] Senator Edward Kennedy wrote in a report that was part of United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations testimony dated 1 November 1971, "Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked "H". All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad". In the same report, Senator Kennedy reported that 80% of the refugees in India were Hindus and according to numerous international relief agencies such as UNESCO and World Health Organization the number of East Pakistani refugees at their peak in India was close to 10 million. In a syndicated column "The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored", Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Sydney Schanberg wrote about his return to liberated Bangladesh in 1972. "Other reminders were the yellow "H"s the Pakistanis had painted on the homes of Hindus, particular targets of the Muslim army" (by "Muslim army", meaning the Pakistan Army, which had targeted Bengali Muslims as well), (Newsday, 29 April 1994).
In Bangladesh, on 28 February 2013, the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, the Vice President of the Jamaat-e-Islami to death for the war crimes committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the sentence, activists of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked the Hindus in different parts of the country. Hindu properties were looted, Hindu houses were burnt into ashes and Hindu temples were desecrated and set on fire.[16][17] While the government has held the Jamaat-e-Islami responsible for the attacks on the minorities, the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership has denied any involvement. The minority leaders have protested the attacks and appealed for justice. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has directed the law enforcement to start suo motu investigation into the attacks. US Ambassador to Bangladesh express concern about attack of Jamaat on Bengali Hindu community.[18][19] The violence included the looting of Hindu properties and businesses, the burning of Hindu homes, rape of Hindu women and desecration and destruction of Hindu temples.[20] According to community leaders, more than 50 Hindu temples and 1,500 Hindu homes were destroyed in 20 districts.[21]
Sikhs[edit]
Main articles: Sikh holocaust of 1762, Sikh holocaust of 1746 and 1984 anti-Sikh riots
See also: Category:Massacres of Sikhs.
The 1984 anti-Sikhs riots or the 1984 Sikh Massacre were a series of pogroms[22][23][24][25] directed against Sikhs in India, by anti-Sikh mobs, in response to the assassination of Indira Gandhi, on 31 October 1984, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in response to her actions authorising the military operation Operation Blue Star. There were more than 8,000[26] deaths, including 3,000 in Delhi.[24] In June 1984, during Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to attack the Golden Temple and eliminate any insurgents, as it had been occupied by Sikh separatists who were stockpiling weapons. Later operations by Indian paramilitary forces were initiated to clear the separatists from the countryside of Punjab state.[27]
The Indian government reported 2,700 deaths in the ensuing chaos. In the aftermath of the riots, the Indian government reported 20,000 had fled the city, however the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons.[28] The most affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods in Delhi. The Central Bureau of Investigation, the main Indian investigating agency, is of the opinion that the acts of violence were organized with the support from the then Delhi police officials and the central government headed by Indira Gandhi's son, Rajiv Gandhi.[29] Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister after his mother's death and, when asked about the riots, said "when a big tree falls, the earth shakes" thus trying to justify the communal strife.[30]
There are allegations that the government destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. The Asian Age front-page story called the government actions "the Mother of all Cover-ups"[31][32] There are allegations that the violence was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and sympathisers during the riots.[33] The chief weapon used by the mobs, kerosene, was supplied by a group of Indian National Congress Party leaders who owned filling stations.[34]
Falun Gong[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Falun Gong
Falun Gong was introduced to the general public by Li Hongzhi(李洪志) in Changchun, China, in 1992. For the next few years, Falun Gong was the fastest growing qigong practice in Chinese history and, by 1999, there were between 70 and 100 million people practicing Falun Gong in China.[35] Following the seven years of widespread popularity, on July 20, 1999, the government of the People's Republic of China began a nationwide persecution campaign against Falun Gong practitioners, except in the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau.[36][37] In late 1999, legislation was created to outlaw "heterodox religions" and retroactively applied to Falun Gong.[38] Amnesty International states that the persecution is "politically motivated" with "legislation being used retroactively to convict people on politically-driven charges, and new regulations introduced to further restrict fundamental freedoms".[39]
Ethnic persecution[edit]
Main article: Ethnic persecution
Ethnic persecution refers to perceived persecution based on ethnicity. Its meaning is parallel to racism, (based on race). Rwandan genocide remains an atrocity that the indigenous Hutu and Tutsi peoples still believe is unforgivable. The Japanese occupation of China caused the death of millions of people, mostly peasants murdered after the Doolittle Raid in early World War II.
Hazara people[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hazara people
Hazara people of central Afghanistan have been persecuted by Afghan rulers at various times in the history. Since the tragedy of 9/11, Sunni Muslim terrorists have been attacking the Hazara community in southwestern Pakistani town of Quetta, home to some 500000 Hazara who fled persecution in neighbouring Afghanistan. Some 2400 men, women and children have been killed or wounded with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claiming responsibility for most of the attacks against the community. Consequently, many thousands have fled the country seeking asylum in Australia.
Roma[edit]
Along with Jews, Homosexuals and others, the Romani Gypsies were rounded by the Nazi Regime of Germany and sent to the death camps.
Germans[edit]
Main article: Organised persecution of ethnic Germans
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)
The persecution of ethnic Germans refers to systematic activity against groups of ethnic Germans based on their ethnicity.
Historically, this has been due to two causes: the German population were considered, whether factually or not, linked with German nationalist regimes such as those of the Nazis or Kaiser Wilhelm. This was the case in the World War I era persecution of Germans in the United States, and also in Eastern and Central Europe following the end of World War II. While many victims of these persecutions did not, in fact, have any connection to those regimes, cooperation between German minority organisations and Nazi regime did occur, as the example of Selbstschutz shows, which is still used as a pretense of hostilities against those who did not take part in such organisations. After World War II, many such Volksdeutsche were killed or driven from their homes[who?] in acts of vengeance, others in ethnic cleansing of territories prior to populating them with citizens of the annexing country.[where?] In other cases (e.g. in the case of the formerly large German-speaking populations of Russia, Estonia, or the Transylvanian (Siebenbürgen) German minority in Rumania and the Balkans) such persecution was a crime committed against innocent communities who had played no part in the Third Reich.
Persecution based on genetics[edit]
People with albinism[edit]
Main article: Persecution of people with albinism
Persecution on the basis of albinism is frequently based on the belief that albinos are inferior to persons with higher concentration of melanin in their skin. As a result albinos have been persecuted, killed and dismembered, and graves of albinistic people dug up and desecrated. Such people have also been ostracized and even killed because they are presumed to bring bad luck in some areas. Haiti also has a long history of treating albinistic people as accursed, with the highest incidence under the influence of François "Papa Doc" Duvalier.
LGBT persecution[edit]
A number of countries, especially those in the [Western world], have passed measures to alleviate discrimination against sexual minorities, including laws against anti-gay hate crimes and workplace discrimination. Some have also legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions in order to grant same-sex couples the same protections and benefits as opposite-sex couples. In 2011, the United Nations passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights.
Persecution based on army service[edit]
Persecution on the basis of army service, or the lack of it, exists in Israel. In Israel, Jewish citizens who receive an exemption from army service are denied many prestigious career options, especially in the field of security. The root of discrimination on the basis of army service lies in the fact that at age 17, non-Arab citizens (including Druze) are called up to be examined for eligibility to compulsory military service. A record for each potential conscript is created, and those who actually serve in the military are distinguished from those rejected from service, by a Discharge Card, which has additional information on it, including the soldier's rank, military profession, and behavior during army service. Employers are particularly interested in the Discharge Card, since it is a universally available source of information about a potential employee. Citizens rejected from the army are frequently looked down upon by employers, who typically believe that "those who are unfit for army service are also unfit for the work environment", and those who succeeded in the army are also likely to be good employees. It is very frequent in Israel to see job advertisements requiring "Full Army Service", and the main problem is that the decisions taken by the draft board regarding a 17-year-old minor affect their entire life.
See also[edit]
Discrimination
Latter-day Saint martyrs
Persecution complex
Right to asylum
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ S. Rempell, Defining Persecution, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1941006
2.Jump up ^ Telford Taylor "When people kill a people", The New York Times, March 28, 1982.
3.Jump up ^ Article 7.3 of the Rome Statute, which constitutes "compromise text" states that "For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term 'gender' refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term 'gender' does not indicate any meaning different from the above." While under international criminal law persecution based on Gender Identity is also prohibited, during the Rome Diplomatic Conference that adopted the ICC Statute, it was decided to define gender narrowly in order to overcome opposition from the Holy See and other states that were concerned that the ICC could theoretically also look into discriminatory practices of religious institutions. This provision was balanced with that of Article 10, which states that "Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute."
4.Jump up ^ International Federation for Human Rights (2003-08-01). "Discrimination against religious minorities in Iran" (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 2006-10-20.
5.Jump up ^ "20th Century Saw 65% of Christian Martyrs", 10 May 2002 -- Zenit News Agency
6.Jump up ^ New antisemitism
7.Jump up ^ New Anti-Semitism: Disguised As "Anti-Zionism" - Discover the Networks
8.Jump up ^ Anti-zionism as an expression of anti-Semitism in recent years
9.Jump up ^ Anti-Zionism#Jewish anti-Zionism
10.Jump up ^ Ordinance XX
11.Jump up ^ Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage. p. 459. "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within. The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India's boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600–1000 AD) India invited conquest; and at last it came."
12.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan, 1951
13.Jump up ^ Hindu Masjids by Prafull Goradia, 2002 "In 1951, Muslims were 77 percent and Hindus were 22 percent."
14.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan[dead link]
15.Jump up ^ "World: Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal - Printout". TIME. 2 August 1971. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
16.Jump up ^ "Hindus Under Attack in Bangladesh". News Bharati. March 3, 2013. Retrieved March 26, 2013.
17.Jump up ^ "Bagerhat Hindu Temple Set on Fire". bdnews24.com. March 2, 2013. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
18.Jump up ^ "US worried at violence". The Daily Star (Bangladesh). March 12, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
19.Jump up ^ "Mozena: Violence is not the way to resolution". The Daily Ittefaq. March 11, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
20.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh: Wave of violent attacks against Hindu minority". Press releases. Amnesty International. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
21.Jump up ^ Ethirajan, Anbarasan (9 March 2013). "Bangladesh minorities 'terrorised' after mob violence". BBC News (London). Retrieved 17 March 2013.
22.Jump up ^ State pogroms glossed over. The Times of India. 31 December 2005.
23.Jump up ^ "Anti-Sikh riots a pogrom: Khushwant". Rediff.com. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
24.^ Jump up to: a b Bedi, Rahul (1 November 2009). "Indira Gandhi's death remembered". BBC. Archived from the original on 2 November 2009. Retrieved 2 November 2009. "The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi's assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing"
25.Jump up ^ Nugus, Phillip (Spring 2007). "The Assassinations of Indira & Rajiv Gandhi". BBC Active. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
26.Jump up ^ Delhi court to give verdict on re-opening 1984 riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler
27.Jump up ^ Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopaedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
28.Jump up ^ Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984), Who are the Guilty ?, People's Union for Civil Liberties, retrieved 4 November 2010
29.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots backed by Govt, police: CBI". IBN Live. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
30.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots 'wrong', says Rahul Gandhi". Hindustan Times. 18 November 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2012.
31.Jump up ^ Mustafa, Seema (2005-08-09). "1984 Sikhs Massacres: Mother of All Cover-ups". Front page story (The Asian Age). p. 1.
32.Jump up ^ Agal, Renu (2005-08-11). "Justice delayed, justice denied". BBC News.
33.Jump up ^ "Leaders 'incited' anti-Sikh riots". BBC News. August 8, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
34.Jump up ^ Kaur, Jaskaran; Crossette, Barbara (2006). Twenty years of impunity: the November 1984 pogroms of Sikhs in India (PDF) (2nd ed.). Portland, OR: Ensaaf. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-9787073-0-9. Retrieved 4 November 2010.
35.Jump up ^ Source of Statistical Information, Number of Falun Gong practitioners in China in 1999: at least 70 million, Falun Dafa Information Center, accessed 01/01/08
36.Jump up ^ Faison, Seth (April 27, 1999) "In Beijing: A Roar of Silent Protesters" New York Times, retrieved June 10, 2006
37.Jump up ^ Kahn, Joseph (April 27, 1999) "Notoriety Now for Exiled Leader of Chinese Movement" New York Times, retrieved June 14, 2006
38.Jump up ^ Leung, Beatrice (2002) 'China and Falun Gong: Party and society relations in the modern era', Journal of Contemporary China, 11:33, 761 – 784
39.Jump up ^ The crackdown on Falun Gong and other so-called heretical organizations , The Amnesty International
External links[edit]
Look up persecution in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Language alternatives to creating and being persecutors
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Abuse
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
Categories: Abuse
Persecution
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
한국어
Hrvatski
Italiano
Kiswahili
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Simple English
Slovenčina
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 April 2015, at 07:21.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution
Persecutory delusion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Persecution complex)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs more medical references for verification or relies too heavily on primary sources. Please review the contents of the article and add the appropriate references if you can. Unsourced or poorly sourced material may be removed. (February 2014)
Rod of Asclepius2.svg
Persecutory delusions are a delusional condition in which the affected person believes they are being persecuted. Specifically, they have been defined as containing two central elements:[1]
1.The individual thinks that harm is occurring, or is going to occur.
2.The individual thinks that the perceived persecutor has the intention to cause harm.
According to the DSM-IV-TR, persecutory delusions are the most common form of delusions in schizophrenia, where the person believes "he or she is being tormented, followed, tricked, spied on, or ridiculed."[2] In the DSM-IV-TR, persecutory delusions are the main feature of the persecutory type of delusional disorder.
Contents [hide]
1 Legal aspects
2 Treatment
3 See also
4 References
Legal aspects[edit]
When the focus is to remedy some injustice by legal action, they are sometimes called "querulous paranoia".[3]
In cases where reporters of stalking behavior have been judged to be making false reports, a majority of them were judged to be delusional.[4][5]
If the delusion results in imprisonment or involuntary commitment, the person may feel justified in this belief.
Treatment[edit]
Medications for schizophrenia are often used, especially when positive symptoms are present. Both first-generation antipsychotics and second-generation antipsychotics may be useful.[6] Cognitive behavioral therapy has also been used.[citation needed]
See also[edit]
Grandiose delusions
Paranoia
In Object relations theory see: Splitting (psychology), Paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions, and Paranoid anxiety
Querulant
Social stigma see 3.2
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Freeman, D. & Garety, P.A. (2004) Paranoia: The Psychology of Persecutory Delusions. Hove: PsychoIogy Press. Page 13. ISBN 1-84169-522-X
2.Jump up ^ Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 2000. p. 299. ISBN 0-89042-025-4.
3.Jump up ^ Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 2000. p. 325. ISBN 0-89042-025-4.
4.Jump up ^ "After eight uncertain cases were excluded, the false reporting rate was judged to be 11.5%, with the majority of false victims suffering delusions (70%)." Sheridan, L. P.; Blaauw, E. (2004). "Characteristics of False Stalking Reports". Criminal Justice and Behavior 31: 55. doi:10.1177/0093854803259235. edit
5.Jump up ^ Brown, S. A. (2008). "The Reality of Persecutory Beliefs: Base Rate Information for Clinicians". Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry 10 (3): 163–178. doi:10.1891/1559-4343.10.3.163. "Collapsing across two studies that examined 40 British and 18 Australian false reporters (as determined by evidence overwhelmingly against their claims), these individuals fell into the following categories: delusional (64%), factitious/attention seeking (15%), hypersensitivity due to previous stalking (12%), were the stalker themselves (7%), and malingering individuals (2%) (Purcell, Pathe, & Mullen, 2002; Sheridan & Blaauw, 2004)." edit
6.Jump up ^ Garety, Philippa A.; Freeman, Daniel B.; Bentall, Richard P. (2008). Persecutory delusions: assessment, theory, and treatment. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. p. 313. ISBN 0-19-920631-7.
Stub icon This psychology-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Categories: Psychology stubs
Abnormal psychology
Paranoia
Delusional disorder
Schizophrenia
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
日本語
Русский
Suomi
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 29 January 2015, at 08:01.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutory_delusion
Persecutory delusion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Persecution complex)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs more medical references for verification or relies too heavily on primary sources. Please review the contents of the article and add the appropriate references if you can. Unsourced or poorly sourced material may be removed. (February 2014)
Rod of Asclepius2.svg
Persecutory delusions are a delusional condition in which the affected person believes they are being persecuted. Specifically, they have been defined as containing two central elements:[1]
1.The individual thinks that harm is occurring, or is going to occur.
2.The individual thinks that the perceived persecutor has the intention to cause harm.
According to the DSM-IV-TR, persecutory delusions are the most common form of delusions in schizophrenia, where the person believes "he or she is being tormented, followed, tricked, spied on, or ridiculed."[2] In the DSM-IV-TR, persecutory delusions are the main feature of the persecutory type of delusional disorder.
Contents [hide]
1 Legal aspects
2 Treatment
3 See also
4 References
Legal aspects[edit]
When the focus is to remedy some injustice by legal action, they are sometimes called "querulous paranoia".[3]
In cases where reporters of stalking behavior have been judged to be making false reports, a majority of them were judged to be delusional.[4][5]
If the delusion results in imprisonment or involuntary commitment, the person may feel justified in this belief.
Treatment[edit]
Medications for schizophrenia are often used, especially when positive symptoms are present. Both first-generation antipsychotics and second-generation antipsychotics may be useful.[6] Cognitive behavioral therapy has also been used.[citation needed]
See also[edit]
Grandiose delusions
Paranoia
In Object relations theory see: Splitting (psychology), Paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions, and Paranoid anxiety
Querulant
Social stigma see 3.2
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Freeman, D. & Garety, P.A. (2004) Paranoia: The Psychology of Persecutory Delusions. Hove: PsychoIogy Press. Page 13. ISBN 1-84169-522-X
2.Jump up ^ Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 2000. p. 299. ISBN 0-89042-025-4.
3.Jump up ^ Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 2000. p. 325. ISBN 0-89042-025-4.
4.Jump up ^ "After eight uncertain cases were excluded, the false reporting rate was judged to be 11.5%, with the majority of false victims suffering delusions (70%)." Sheridan, L. P.; Blaauw, E. (2004). "Characteristics of False Stalking Reports". Criminal Justice and Behavior 31: 55. doi:10.1177/0093854803259235. edit
5.Jump up ^ Brown, S. A. (2008). "The Reality of Persecutory Beliefs: Base Rate Information for Clinicians". Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry 10 (3): 163–178. doi:10.1891/1559-4343.10.3.163. "Collapsing across two studies that examined 40 British and 18 Australian false reporters (as determined by evidence overwhelmingly against their claims), these individuals fell into the following categories: delusional (64%), factitious/attention seeking (15%), hypersensitivity due to previous stalking (12%), were the stalker themselves (7%), and malingering individuals (2%) (Purcell, Pathe, & Mullen, 2002; Sheridan & Blaauw, 2004)." edit
6.Jump up ^ Garety, Philippa A.; Freeman, Daniel B.; Bentall, Richard P. (2008). Persecutory delusions: assessment, theory, and treatment. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. p. 313. ISBN 0-19-920631-7.
Stub icon This psychology-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Categories: Psychology stubs
Abnormal psychology
Paranoia
Delusional disorder
Schizophrenia
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
日本語
Русский
Suomi
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 29 January 2015, at 08:01.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutory_delusion
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment