Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!bellcore!allegra!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth
From: beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Beth Christy)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.flame
Subject: Re: Discrimination
Message-ID: <591@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 28-May-85 19:53:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.591
Posted: Tue May 28 19:53:15 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 31-May-85 00:50:18 EDT
References: <260@ihlpa.UUCP>
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 59
Xref: linus net.women:4895 net.flame:9307

From: zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck), Message-ID: <260@ihlpa.UUCP>:
>> have an advantage in this society.  They are often unwilling to
>> grant more privileges to females (blacks, Jews, etc.) because it
>> means giving up their privileges.  Of course they don't often
>> phrase it in these terms, but it is a fact.
>> 
>> critic was "But if you raise wages of women, then everyone else [i.e.
>> men] will suffer."  This is not an isolated case.  Many men are very
>> afraid that by giving women more rights, they will lose some of their
>> rights.
>> 
>> 	marie desjardins
>
>WHY - (am I naive or something?) - does anyone have to give up something
>,or anything for that matter, to allow equality to a minority be it women
>blacks, jews, all of the above or other than the above?

We live in an economy with a(n essentially) fixed number of jobs relative
to the population (i.e., the unemployment rate typically does not fluc-
tuate widely *over the long run*).  Currently there is a group A that
holds proportionately more of the (fixed number of) jobs compared to all
other groups.  Furthermore, there is an overwhelming domination of group
A in the higher paying jobs.  If other groups are going to increase their
representation in all levels of the job market (to the point of propor-
tionate equality) then, since the number of jobs is (essentially) fixed,
group A will in fact hold fewer of the total jobs, and will hold signi-
ficantly fewer of the higher paying jobs.  (Note that "proportionate
equality" means that group A will now hold their *fair share* of the jobs.)

>This view brings discrimination down to a simpler descriptive
> 
>	SELFISHNESS

I think selfishness is a part of it, but I think there's more to discri-
mination.  I think there's also a large dose of ignorance (of the true
nature/potential of the other individual), along with a fair amount of
the fear and distrust (of the other's motives) which often accompanies
ignorance.  Note that the more one discriminates, the more justified the
fear and distrust become ('cause the other folks are getting pretty d*mn
irate by now).  This gives discrimination some of the characterisitics of
a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Which makes it pretty tough to eradicate,
'cause by the time you get around to ending it, parts of it may well have
validated themselves.  (NOTE: I nevertheless believe it *must* be ended!!!)

>This is a trait best observed in children.
>
>I wonder  - If the human race ever grows out of its childhood phase if
>this type of behavior will be either eliminated or controlled by a 
>deliberate act of will?

I sure hope so.  I think we all hope so.  I think that's why we're
discussing it here - to try to combine our wills to make a difference.

>jeanette zobjeck

-- 

--JB                                          Life is just a bowl.