This is what I wrote and posted under the original article, might as well repost it here, as well.
.......
Let's discuss the study and agree that the title of the article sucks.
Here are the facts as I know them.
An article in Medical News Today summarized a study out of the UK, not the USA.
The article summarized a paper, that was given on 16th January 2009, at the British Psychological Society's Division of Occupational Psychology annual conference in Blackpool.
“In the study, carried out by Occupational Psychology consultancy Shire Professional, 60 people ranging in age from 18 to 65 years were tested on their attitudes towards six areas of diversity - age, ethnic origin, gender, religion, disability and sexual orientation.”
They found, in this study, that attitudes as tested in 60 people in the UK, regarding diversity, showed:
The main prejudice that was revealed related to sexual orientation.
Results from the tests classified:
seven per cent of the participants as being strongly anti-gay
three percent as being anti-Lesbian,
35 per cent displayed some anti-gay predilection
41 per cent some anti-lesbian prejudice
I am not at all certain in the difference between “prediliction”, I suppose it means tendency, versus, “prejudice” which means a pre-formed judgment, hence, a bias.
The authors further stated, that:
These negative implicit attitudes were stronger than those for age, gender, religion, disability or even ethnic origin.
28 per cent of the sample showed some prejudice towards Asian people
25 per cent against Black people
18 per cent against South East Asian people.
Dr Jones said: "Without detracting from the seriousness of the prejudice that still exists against people because of their ethnic origin, the results of our study suggest that being gay or lesbian could be 'the new black' when it comes to being a victim of prejudice."
That’s the problem. The choice of some British researcher, who while claiming not to be flippant, came off editorializing and flippant. His statement became the unfortunate title to the OP, which, may or may not have the same offensive tone in the UK as in the USA, but here, in the USA, with our specific history, it is clearly offensive in that it appears to make light of racial prejudice, and also, has a distasteful, wink and nod feel to it, as if “being the new black,” was somehow a clever turn of phrase by half and dismissive of unresolved racial issues in the US and also implied a kind of back handed prize for being the most discriminated against. Hence, the title blows.
The following is important because it sheds some light on the particular emotional mind set that may be triggered to commit hate crimes:
“The four or five per cent with strong prejudices would find their attitudes often affect their behaviour.”
That four or five percent with strong prejudices is troubling, as it is a high percentage of negative feelings for one segment of the population to harbor against another.
The 15 to 20 per cent with 'mid-range' prejudices are probably unaware of their attitude, but their thoughts and feelings towards gay or lesbian people will probably surface when they are emotional, stressed, frustrated or threatened.”
Even more alarming is the 15-20% who could be provoked into expressing anti-gay sentiments, of which they were not even aware.
Finally two important bits:
"Our prejudices are the result of our experiences with other people and exposure to the media.”
Bingo! Culturally reinforced bigotry is dangerous.
To some extent outreach, if that is what is meant by: experiences with other people, is futile. Ditto bingo.
“This categorisation is a shortcut, which takes place automatically and at great speed.”
That is also what Malcom Gladwell wrote about in his book, Blink, about how we form decisions about others in about 15-30 seconds of meeting them.
Gladwell, BTW, used the tragic story of the police over reaction and shooting of Amadu Dialu in his book and how it worked on a racial level, in a negative way. Dialu, a man from Caribbean African heritage, was shot in a gang way something like 28 times, as the officers swore he was reaching for his gun. There was no gun. It was his wallet.
“However, very strong negative associations often influence our behaviour towards other people formed mainly on their group membership.”
Here, they state the obvious, when we decide someone is part of a “group” we don’t like, negative associations follow and we pre-judge.
Now for the good news. People can outgrow prejudice, they can take responsibility for their attitudes and of course, the on-going work in society to NOT tolerate hate speech and bigotted speech. It is not as the right wing would have us believe, a nanny State and hyper-PC-ism, it is the basis of a smoothly functioning, cohesive society.
"Once people are aware that they have certain prejudices it's important that they 'break the prejudice habit'- taking control of them so that they don't impact on their behaviour. You can do this by examining your thoughts or actions to make sure that your prejudices aren't driving them", Dr Jones continued.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/135773.php 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
