Inbalance in discrimination
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-01-2012, 07:55 PM
Inbalance in discrimination
This is a little one hour piece I wrote on something that came into my head a few days ago, I have sat on it for about three days so I could wait to read it back with a clear head to make sure my sentence structure made sense and it said what I wanted it to say.

This is not EXACTLY psychology, but if you can think of a better place to post this, by all means let me know! A little pre-warning is that this is written as a video script so change words such as ''video'' to essay, piece, article...what ever word you desire.

Inbalance of discrimination within society
<<Intro with this displayed>>
Discrimination is defined as ''The 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: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.''
<<End of Intro with this displayed>>

In this video I intend to initiate a discussion on the issue of discrimination. To anyone who will possibly get the wrong idea of this video, I do not condone unfair discrimination. What I mean by this is discrimination against groups that have been proven time and time again to be false accusations of asscociation to that particular group.

What do I mean by ''unfair'' discrimination? The most prevelant example I could give for unfair discrimination would be to say that black people have less right than white people such as not having the right to work, to have kids, to adopt kids with the list going on. The point I am trying to illistrate is that there is no tangable link between black people being inferior to white people as skin colour does not dictate or determine muscle build and brain development (as examples) in any tangable way.

When I say unfair discrimination, am I leading to suggest that it is sometimes okay to discriminate? Well, surprisingly as a matter of fact, yes, infact all of us do it all the time without realising. I feel confident in saying that rape and torture is and always will be wrong regardless of what previous or current societies believe. I would say it was in good judgement to say that it is fair to discriminate against rapists and torturers by taking away their right to freedom, the exact perpose that jail was made for. By this I do not mean they have NO rights, but that they lose the right to interact with others infear that they may be in harms way.

When it comes to discrimination there is a big of lack of understanding. Maybe lack of understanding is too harsh a term, but a definate ignorance of the subject at best with the old joke, ''Shout bigot and you automatically win the argument'' somehow ringing true. This whole idea started when I saw a video posted on facebook with a girl stating that she hates black people (using the N term) which envoked a massive response to label her a racist. I do not disagree that she was being incredibly derogatory and offencive to black people and white people alike who find this equally offencive in the context of how it was used; but the deeper question I wanted to ask is why does white against black racism have such a stranglehold when it comes to level of offenciveness within western society.

I am well aware of the history of the slave trade and this does not justify it's levels of priotisation over any other form of discrimination. I would agree the slave trade was entirely unjustified and immoral but I want you to think and reflect on this scenario for one second. You go into work, being a large, but not obese person. Upon walking through the door a colleague turns and talks to you saying, ''You need to lose some weight, I can feel your flab''. This is pretty obscene right? An unjustified comment that would guarentee a gasp or two from people external to the situation. Now interpret this scenario differently. ''You go into work, being an underweight, but not critically slim person, You walk into work and at this point a colleague turns and talks to you and says, ''You need to gain some weight, I can feel your ribs''. The latter scenario somehow feels less significant when faced with the same issue but in a altered scenario.

Watch the original video (Link Below) and replace every black or racist comment with ''fat person''. Are you anywhere near offended compared to the original video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuhRDITMo...ata_player

Let me know your thoughts, Comment Below.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-01-2012, 11:30 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
(15-01-2012 07:55 PM)Phenakist Wrote:  When I say unfair discrimination, am I leading to suggest that it is sometimes okay to discriminate? Well, surprisingly as a matter of fact, yes, infact all of us do it all the time without realising. I feel confident in saying that rape and torture is and always will be wrong regardless of what previous or current societies believe. I would say it was in good judgement to say that it is fair to discriminate against rapists and torturers by taking away their right to freedom, the exact perpose that jail was made for. By this I do not mean they have NO rights, but that they lose the right to interact with others infear that they may be in harms way.

How does arresting rapists and torturers fit the definition of discrimination?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ben's post
16-01-2012, 10:34 AM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
(15-01-2012 11:30 PM)Ben Wrote:  How does arresting rapists and torturers fit the definition of discrimination?

Discrimination is only defined as something that opposes a certain group. I would consider rapists and torturers to be defined as a group that step over the boundaries of others unjustly. In order for a jail system to work you need a set of rules to divide or discriminate against certain groups of people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2012, 07:56 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
I was hoping I could receive more feedback on this whether or not it was criticism so I could get more of an idea what you guys think on the subject.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2012, 08:59 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
Imbalance versus Discrimination No one doubts that the criminal justice system reflects an imbalance in terms of the types of people caught in its web.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2012, 09:41 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
I don't really get the whole premise. Saying that arresting rapists is discrimination is a gross misuse of the word discrimination.

Quote:Discrimination is defined as ''The 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: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.''

I don't think we arrest rapists because they are part of the collective group "rapists." It is indeed based on individual merit: the actions of whatever particular rapist you're arresting.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2012, 10:12 AM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
(18-01-2012 09:41 PM)Ben Wrote:  I don't really get the whole premise. Saying that arresting rapists is discrimination is a gross misuse of the word discrimination.

Quote:Discrimination is defined as ''The 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: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.''

I don't think we arrest rapists because they are part of the collective group "rapists." It is indeed based on individual merit: the actions of whatever particular rapist you're arresting.

I wouldn't say it was a gross misuse of the word at all as Discrimination is the bi-product of choice. It has two dictionary definitions, one that, as you say, is based on individual merit; but also a meaning that can be as broad as choosing one colour of paint over another purely because you don't like the former colour.

The second paragraph I would have to disagree with. Of course you arrest rapists because they are raping people. They all have different motives and situations which goes without saying, however you would still say that you are arresting them due to the offense they have committed.

What I wrote had two meanings, and I did think long and hard about defining discrimination. The first was to try and get rid of this idea that discrimination is always a bad thing because it isn't, only when it is used unfairly is when we should make a stand.

Secondly the idea that one method of discrimination is superior to another which was my focal point, although maybe forgive my writing as I did not focus on that until I was in the last half of what I had wrote.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2012, 03:59 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
Well if you want to define discrimination so broadly that it includes any choice at all feel free to do so, but it doesn't seem very productive to do that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ben's post
19-01-2012, 06:43 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
(19-01-2012 03:59 PM)Ben Wrote:  Well if you want to define discrimination so broadly that it includes any choice at all feel free to do so, but it doesn't seem very productive to do that.

I'm not sure I understand why it is counter productive.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2012, 08:45 PM
RE: Inbalance in discrimination
(19-01-2012 06:43 PM)Phenakist Wrote:  
(19-01-2012 03:59 PM)Ben Wrote:  Well if you want to define discrimination so broadly that it includes any choice at all feel free to do so, but it doesn't seem very productive to do that.

I'm not sure I understand why it is counter productive.

Because it doesn't conform to the most commonly understood meaning of "discrimination" and is likely to be confusing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: