Thinking About Issues--Judith Lewis

No one wants to think that they are racist, prejudiced or sexist.* But numerous research studies have demonstrated that these kinds of distinctions and pre-judgments are wired into our brain processing.  We subconsciously prefer people "like us." Most of us are unconsciously prejudiced--and, unfortunately, we make decisions and judgments based on those unconscious biases. It doesn't make us bad people, just human. Unconscious bias is more insidious and difficult to deal with than overt racism or prejudice. So we need to be careful and more thoughtful in our generalizations about individuals or groups "not like us."

For example, some political pundits daily make offhand offensive and even over-the-top statements about race, ethnicity and gender. Then they deny that they are prejudiced--and claim anyone who thinks they are is obviously over-sensitive. "I didn't say that, I didn't mean that, I'm not a racist--or a sexist." People want to believe that we are "past that." That there is no need for affirmative action or monitoring to see if equal opportunity is a reality--or a myth.

The backlash against diversity and sensitivity training has come to be called "political correctness" because of the erroneous notion that it's silly, unnecessary and that discrimination in employment, housing and opportunities and prejudice and bias against certain groups in the United States is part of our past, but not in our present.

A recent example is the furor over the tragic murders committed at Ford Hood by Nisal Hasan, a Muslim. People have asserted that he's a terrorist and the reason he wasn't investigated was because of "political correctness." By definition a terrorist "is a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism." It's possible that what he committed was a premeditated act of terrorism and he may have been associated with a group of radicalized Muslims. However, we don't yet have all the facts, so we shouldn't make that presumption "just because" his religion was Muslim.

It is a prejudgment, "prejudice" to automatically associate Muslim and terrorist. It's true some percentage of Muslims are terrorists, however, the label should not automatically apply to every member of the Muslim religion. If we do, then we should equally apply the label "terrorist" to the radicalized Christians who kill abortion doctors, and then by extension apply it to "all Christians." 

*Someone just sent me an article entitled 'Don't call people bigots just because you disagree with them'

 

One of the problems in this whole arena of tolerance is a failure to distinguish between the various terms. People use them interchangeably but they mean different things.

 

From dictionary definitions:

 

A "bigot" is a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

 

A "racist" believes that there are inherent differences among the various human races that determine or limit cultural or individual achievement and usually has the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule and dominate others.

 

A person with a "prejudice" has a usually unfavorable preconceived opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without specific knowledge, thought, or reason.

 

Most of us fall in the last category of being "prejudiced" because we make generalizations about individuals in groups "not like us" without specific knowledge. And most of us do it unconsciously because it is prewired in our brains.

 

Some folks fall into the bigot or racist category--but that is a much smaller group and we shouldn't throw those words around carelessly. The correct title to the article below should have been “How Prejudiced are You,” having a prejudice or a preference for your own race does not necessarily make you a racist.

 We all have biases whether we are willing to admit it or not. The goal in life, however, should be to recognize our biases when making decisions and vanquish them accordingly.

The below article addresses one research project that examines the issue. I've shared this with some of you before. Take the test(s). You may be surprised by the results. Hopefully you may even become enlightened and more thoughtful in your snap judgments about people "not like you."

 

How Racist Are You?

Posted by Jeff Mays on Oct 28th 2009 9:20AM
Filed under: News, Race and Civil Rights

Are you racially biased? Harvard University has been trying to find out with its racism test, Project Implicit. The less than 10-minute test throws different races at you and has you identify the images as "bad" or "good" as quickly as you can. The idea is that your first reaction is usually the most honest.

You can try the test out for yourself. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ 

Simply click on the "Demonstration" button and then click the "Race IAT" button.

Project Implicit, started 11 years ago by Harvard, the University of Washington and the University of Virginia, is a joint investigation into our subconscious biases. Most people would say that they are not biased against those with darker skin, obese people or women, but researchers say that we often harbor biases that we are unaware of.

Ask the average person whether he or she has a bias toward male executives over female executives and the answer might be no.

That's what I said when Anthony Greenwald of Project Implicit asked whether I thought of men and women differently when it came to leadership in business, math and science. He quickly informed me that I was probably like a majority of Americans who incorrectly think they don't have a bias toward male leadership.

"Eighty percent of Americans, black and white and Asian, have associations that associate women less than men with leadership in business, science and math. You may be aware of some biases you have but less aware of others," Greenwald, a principal investigator for Project Implicit and professor of psychology at the University of Washington, told Black Voices in an interview.

According to the Project Implicit Web site:

Psychologists understand that people may not say what's on their minds either because they are unwilling or because they are unable to do so. For example, if asked "How much do you smoke?" a smoker who smokes four packs a day may purposely report smoking only two packs a day, because they are embarrassed to admit the correct number. Or the smoker may simply not answer the question, regarding it as a private matter. ... But it is also possible that a smoker who smokes four packs a day may report smoking only two packs because they honestly believe they only smoke about two packs a day. (Unknowingly giving an incorrect answer is sometimes called self-deception; this illustrates being unable to give the desired answer). The unwilling-unable distinction is like the difference between purposely hiding something from others and unconsciously hiding something from yourself. The Implicit Association Test makes it possible to penetrate both of these types of hiding. The IAT measures implicit attitudes and beliefs that people are either unwilling or unable to report.

You can take several tests at the Project Implicit site to examine your biases against things such as age, gender and weight.

"The main value of the test is that it allows people to see an inventory of things in our heads that are out of sight," said Greenwald. "A lot of people are aware of some biases and quite comfy with them--anti-Semitic, anti-black and overweight--but some of the greatest interest is [in] ones they are not aware of."

Americans love having scientific proof for stuff we already know. Topics such as whether eating too much junk food can cause you to gain weight, how driving 65 mph on the freeway while texting isn't safe and why global warning threatens our future have all been the subject of intense study.

After hundreds of years of racial and gender discrimination, people are unable to admit that those biases still exist. We live in a media-saturated environment, where we are constantly bombarded with images that enforce and even prop up our biases. When we look at issues such as why African Americans are more likely to receive the death sentence for similar crimes as whites, the disparity between sentences for crack and cocaine, and even health disparities when it comes to cancer or HIV deaths, how can we not say that our biases have some part to play in those situations?

Some think the implicit biases research field has too many issues to form the conclusions that it draws.

I wouldn't use the test in a court of law, but it might awaken some people to their biases. Let's judge people by their actions. If you say that you value diversity, then what is the makeup of your company?

It would be great if we didn't need these tests to help people face their biases. No one likes to think he or she is a bad person, but common sense should prevail. I don't need a test to show me that there are biases against women when it comes to leadership in business, math and science. All I have to do is look at a list of Fortune 500 CEOs.

But maybe the test can help some.

"It's the first step in deciding you may need to do something on your own to change," said Greenwald. "People might think they are part of solution and not the problem, but we are all part of the problem."