"Perfunctory" doesn't seem to be quite the right word. I think "reflexive" would be a better choice.
Definition I get online is "carried out with a minimum of effort or reflection"; I think of this as a applying more to "perfunctory courtesies" as in "how are you" or "good morning," insincere well-wishes that serve as phatic communicatio…
"Perfunctory" doesn't seem to be quite the right word. I think "reflexive" would be a better choice.
Definition I get online is "carried out with a minimum of effort or reflection"; I think of this as a applying more to "perfunctory courtesies" as in "how are you" or "good morning," insincere well-wishes that serve as phatic communication, keeping the channel open but without real content.
This issue is more serious than those.
I've written before that I believe racism is a reflexive (there's that word) attitude held over from our many thousands of years as small tribes, where outsiders were dangerous and so clannish attitudes were emphatically survival-positive. It is emphatically systemic. As with the predilection toward religion these attitudes have outlived their usefulness but persist in our behavior genetics and need to be called out and consciously opposed.
Which I believe can only be done by passing laws.
Edit: and no, I am not advocating laws banning religion, through I think laws encouraging it, coddling it, should be ended.
"'Perfunctory' doesn't seem to be quite the right word."
😁Yeah, I usually let people get away with using big words they're not quite ready for. Bless 'em.
I think racism is something more than vestigial tribalism (I'd say unconscious bias is closer to that). Racism as in the practice of segregation, say, or in racially motivated violence, is based on a hatred or fear that I can't quite understand.
I've travelled to some fairly remote areas of the world where people certainly reacted to me as if they'd never met a black person before, but while some were a little hesitant, they were almost unfailingly kind once the initial surprise/curiosity wore off.
It's natural to react differently when you encounter somebody different to yourself, there's be no issue of that was all racism was. The mystery is the degree.
I didn't say it's vestigial tribalism; that would be cultural. I'm saying it has a basis in behavior genetics and until recently it was prudent.
Same for religion, I don't know of any human culture anytime in history that didn't have it. I think that if we had generation ships that went on centuries-long trips to other stars and where religion was unknown to the first generation, the ships would arrive full of mummified corpses anyway because religion would re-arise and bifurcate into opposing groups killing each other over doctrinal minutiae.
I don't mean to discourage; I am not saying we need to learn to live with bigotry. Quite the opposite. I'm saying we need to recognize its origins.
"Same for religion, I don't know of any human culture anytime in history that didn't have it. I think that if we had generation ships that went on centuries-long trips to other stars and where religion was unknown to the first generation, the ships would arrive full of mummified corpses anyway"
Hmm, I wonder about this. I'm not disagreeing exactly. Religion is a particularly insistent aspect of human culture, I just feel like we're outgrowing the old forms of it slowly but surely (though we're replacing them with things like "wokeness" I suppose).
But still, I guess that religion serves a purpose that I don't see for racism (again, I'm differentiating between hate and bias). I grew yup watching Star Trek as a kid, so I'm hopeful on both fronts.
The system is top down, and it took anti-discrimination laws to tame it, slowly.
Years ago, I worked for the government. A friend, and coworker, was being promoted to a supervisory position. At about the same time, the local newspaper published a story about the results of a class action suit where X numbers of black people were being promoted to Journeyman, supervisor and management positions.
His comment to me. "I'll just be damned! It's hard enough for a black man to get any respect around here and they do this now. I'll be seen as a token quota n****r." While he saw a need for such action, it came with a cost personal to him.
The idea of tokenism was a widespread damaging thing that even hit people who were generally not racists, "Is this surgeon good, or a token medical school graduate?" It still exists to a lesser degree today.
It also happened with respect to women and other demographics that were outside of the long accepted "white men do this stuff" norm.
Over time we saw it as unfounded. I've had non-white, non-American citizen non-male, managers, surgeons, etc. and hopefully I am not unique in not seeing that as something that should give me pause. The laws were needed, and helped, sometimes painfully as a process. Positive change is often like that. 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗲𝘀, 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗳𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗱𝘂𝗮𝗹𝘀.
"While he saw a need for such action, it came with a cost personal to him"
Yep, this is the curse of diversity programs in general. I've never felt as if I was on the receiving end of something like this, but I'd feel sick if I ever did. Change is messy sadly. And slow. Even changes that are designed to help in the long term will end up hurting some number of people along the way.
The ultimate irony of affirmative action in particular is that while it's seen as "that thing that got black people into positions they didn't deserve" the greatest beneficiaries of it were white women.
As with so many other advances it isn't possible to reach into someone's head (ugh) an change attitudes. It was NOT that long ago that a white worker could call a black one the n-word right in front of everyone with no fear of reprisal; now he will be escorted out of the building under guard.
Change the law, you change behavior. It may take a generation or two but attitudes will follow. Already the idea of opposing same-sex marriage is starting to seem just bigoted.
The charge of tokenism is inevitable, and complicated by the fact that a minority has to be superlative in the same role where a majority can be average.
It's also complicated by the fact that there really are people who think they're helping by promoting mediocrities above their level. The most uncontroversial example I can think of was Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine and its promotion of some truly awful women writers. There are some great women writing SF; LeGuin, Cherryh, others. ASFM printed some who were just awful, which did not help women writers one bit.
"Perfunctory" doesn't seem to be quite the right word. I think "reflexive" would be a better choice.
Definition I get online is "carried out with a minimum of effort or reflection"; I think of this as a applying more to "perfunctory courtesies" as in "how are you" or "good morning," insincere well-wishes that serve as phatic communication, keeping the channel open but without real content.
This issue is more serious than those.
I've written before that I believe racism is a reflexive (there's that word) attitude held over from our many thousands of years as small tribes, where outsiders were dangerous and so clannish attitudes were emphatically survival-positive. It is emphatically systemic. As with the predilection toward religion these attitudes have outlived their usefulness but persist in our behavior genetics and need to be called out and consciously opposed.
Which I believe can only be done by passing laws.
Edit: and no, I am not advocating laws banning religion, through I think laws encouraging it, coddling it, should be ended.
"'Perfunctory' doesn't seem to be quite the right word."
😁Yeah, I usually let people get away with using big words they're not quite ready for. Bless 'em.
I think racism is something more than vestigial tribalism (I'd say unconscious bias is closer to that). Racism as in the practice of segregation, say, or in racially motivated violence, is based on a hatred or fear that I can't quite understand.
I've travelled to some fairly remote areas of the world where people certainly reacted to me as if they'd never met a black person before, but while some were a little hesitant, they were almost unfailingly kind once the initial surprise/curiosity wore off.
It's natural to react differently when you encounter somebody different to yourself, there's be no issue of that was all racism was. The mystery is the degree.
I didn't say it's vestigial tribalism; that would be cultural. I'm saying it has a basis in behavior genetics and until recently it was prudent.
Same for religion, I don't know of any human culture anytime in history that didn't have it. I think that if we had generation ships that went on centuries-long trips to other stars and where religion was unknown to the first generation, the ships would arrive full of mummified corpses anyway because religion would re-arise and bifurcate into opposing groups killing each other over doctrinal minutiae.
I don't mean to discourage; I am not saying we need to learn to live with bigotry. Quite the opposite. I'm saying we need to recognize its origins.
"Same for religion, I don't know of any human culture anytime in history that didn't have it. I think that if we had generation ships that went on centuries-long trips to other stars and where religion was unknown to the first generation, the ships would arrive full of mummified corpses anyway"
Hmm, I wonder about this. I'm not disagreeing exactly. Religion is a particularly insistent aspect of human culture, I just feel like we're outgrowing the old forms of it slowly but surely (though we're replacing them with things like "wokeness" I suppose).
But still, I guess that religion serves a purpose that I don't see for racism (again, I'm differentiating between hate and bias). I grew yup watching Star Trek as a kid, so I'm hopeful on both fronts.
The system is top down, and it took anti-discrimination laws to tame it, slowly.
Years ago, I worked for the government. A friend, and coworker, was being promoted to a supervisory position. At about the same time, the local newspaper published a story about the results of a class action suit where X numbers of black people were being promoted to Journeyman, supervisor and management positions.
His comment to me. "I'll just be damned! It's hard enough for a black man to get any respect around here and they do this now. I'll be seen as a token quota n****r." While he saw a need for such action, it came with a cost personal to him.
The idea of tokenism was a widespread damaging thing that even hit people who were generally not racists, "Is this surgeon good, or a token medical school graduate?" It still exists to a lesser degree today.
It also happened with respect to women and other demographics that were outside of the long accepted "white men do this stuff" norm.
Over time we saw it as unfounded. I've had non-white, non-American citizen non-male, managers, surgeons, etc. and hopefully I am not unique in not seeing that as something that should give me pause. The laws were needed, and helped, sometimes painfully as a process. Positive change is often like that. 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗲𝘀, 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗳𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗱𝘂𝗮𝗹𝘀.
"While he saw a need for such action, it came with a cost personal to him"
Yep, this is the curse of diversity programs in general. I've never felt as if I was on the receiving end of something like this, but I'd feel sick if I ever did. Change is messy sadly. And slow. Even changes that are designed to help in the long term will end up hurting some number of people along the way.
The ultimate irony of affirmative action in particular is that while it's seen as "that thing that got black people into positions they didn't deserve" the greatest beneficiaries of it were white women.
As with so many other advances it isn't possible to reach into someone's head (ugh) an change attitudes. It was NOT that long ago that a white worker could call a black one the n-word right in front of everyone with no fear of reprisal; now he will be escorted out of the building under guard.
Change the law, you change behavior. It may take a generation or two but attitudes will follow. Already the idea of opposing same-sex marriage is starting to seem just bigoted.
The charge of tokenism is inevitable, and complicated by the fact that a minority has to be superlative in the same role where a majority can be average.
It's also complicated by the fact that there really are people who think they're helping by promoting mediocrities above their level. The most uncontroversial example I can think of was Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine and its promotion of some truly awful women writers. There are some great women writing SF; LeGuin, Cherryh, others. ASFM printed some who were just awful, which did not help women writers one bit.