4 ms·

What repercussions do you imagine for someone you wouldn't think is high status?

hotpotamus 3y ago
That homeless man who was strangled to death on the NYC subway a few weeks ago comes to mind. I saw an incredible amount of argument that the strangling was justified based on assumptions likely due to his social status.
- throwaway8582 3y ago
  I'm sure that had far more to do with the threats he was shouting at the other passengers than his social status
  - hotpotamus 3y ago
    Do you think the propensity to shout threats at people would affect one's social status?
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    During recent protests in California, a white couple waved guns at the protestors. It was clearly, they had higher status, rich, white, and thus got a slap on the wrist. Black man on subway, yells, and dies. Very different outcomes. White, can wave guns around and make threats, its ok. Black, can raise voice, get killed, the killing is viewed as ok.
    - throwaway8582 3y ago
      It's quite easy to spin a false narrative when you cherry-pick cases, misrepresent facts, and leave out important context. > a white couple waved guns at the protestors If this is the case I'm thinking of, the protesters had broken down a gate and were trespassing on their property. What were they supposed to do in that situation? Risk their lives and property by putting themselves at the mercy of the mob? > Black, can raise voice That's a hell of a euphemism for "threatening to kill people". Apparently the subway riders felt that he was a real threat, because he was restrained by 3 people, and all of the passengers that have spoken up about it seemed to think it was necessary
      - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
        I was wrong, it was St Louis. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57521756 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57521756 Mr Callahan described the demonstrators as a "racially mixed and peaceful group, including women and children", who had made a wrong turn on the way to their protest. There was no evidence the group was armed, he said. https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61 https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was... Video shows gate was intact when St. Louis couple pointed guns at protesters Videos and photographs show the couple pacing on their Portland Place property, periodically pointing the weapons at the crowd For the Yelling I've seen a lot of people yelling about killing people. People act out, 'verbally'. Typically they calm down. Yelling didn't use to be a crime, especially with a death sentence.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  So do you think that anytime anyone ignores the social hierarchy they will be strangled? Nobody is saying that social hierarchy doesn't ever matter, just that it can be largely ignored with minimal consequences.
  - hotpotamus 3y ago
    Using a "so you're saying..." comment attached to a straw man might goad me on some days, but I'm not particularly feeling it today. Take it from someone who has felt the consequences of ignoring the social hierarchy on occasion that there are indeed consequences.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      My point is that the fact that there can be consequences is different from there are always consequences. The fact that there can be consequences is also different from claiming that the consequences can't be accepted or ignored. I'm not goading you with a straw man. You are the one that made it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
laeri 3y ago
Some of these points are perceived situations in which social status affects its outcomes without proof but here they are. The main point is that if you have low status you will be treated differently which greatly changes your interactions with others. 1. You won't get treated fairly, someone with perceived high social status will get fairer treatment. This I personally witnessed in a hospital setting where the sole presence of someone "important" was notified in advance and they got more attention which means probably better attention to detail and therefore outcome in treatment. You might also receive worse service, such as in restaurants, flights, hotels. As people want to court and leave a better impression with someone in a social status 2. People will not respect you. As the article said status comes with respect. You might not judge others by their status but others will for sure judge you. They will talk behind their back about you and this will negatively affect any encounters with other people. Even if you don't judge others low social status will negatively discolor your interactions with others. 3. Also cause and effect might be inverted here. Low skill and ability in a specific domain usually leads to low status. Therefore other's treat you worse as your skills are of relative little importance in the domain. If someone in a tech setting can't solve trivial problems they will aquire low status and suffer in a multitude of ways. In the best case you will be ignored and assigned to tasks with relative little value. In the worst case you can't continue to work there. Just the fact that you have low social status should get you to worry. If you had better skill your social status would actually improve, at least to people that are in the same domain and value the particular skills needed there. Either you suffer repercussions due to your low social status or you suffer repercussions due to the factors that lead to your status.
- theelous3 3y ago
  I don't think you're really addressing the question with the hospital example nor the others. I could be the senior engineer of Amazing Inc., as well as a jacked high level MMA fighter and gracious altruist - beloved by all known to me - but if someone who knows the hospital admins walks in they are of course going to get some preferential treatment. This sort of "I know a guy" status that gives you a leg up on other people _regardless_ of their status doesn't really capture the essence here, I think. I had an absolutely massive post written but I think it might be easier to ask, what do you think a low status person is?

That homeless man who was strangled to death on the NYC subway a few weeks ago comes to mind. I saw an incredible amount of argument that the strangling was justified based on assumptions likely due to his social status.

throwaway8582 3y ago
I'm sure that had far more to do with the threats he was shouting at the other passengers than his social status
- hotpotamus 3y ago
  Do you think the propensity to shout threats at people would affect one's social status?
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  During recent protests in California, a white couple waved guns at the protestors. It was clearly, they had higher status, rich, white, and thus got a slap on the wrist. Black man on subway, yells, and dies. Very different outcomes. White, can wave guns around and make threats, its ok. Black, can raise voice, get killed, the killing is viewed as ok.
  - throwaway8582 3y ago
    It's quite easy to spin a false narrative when you cherry-pick cases, misrepresent facts, and leave out important context. > a white couple waved guns at the protestors If this is the case I'm thinking of, the protesters had broken down a gate and were trespassing on their property. What were they supposed to do in that situation? Risk their lives and property by putting themselves at the mercy of the mob? > Black, can raise voice That's a hell of a euphemism for "threatening to kill people". Apparently the subway riders felt that he was a real threat, because he was restrained by 3 people, and all of the passengers that have spoken up about it seemed to think it was necessary
    - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
      I was wrong, it was St Louis. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57521756 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57521756 Mr Callahan described the demonstrators as a "racially mixed and peaceful group, including women and children", who had made a wrong turn on the way to their protest. There was no evidence the group was armed, he said. https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61 https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was... Video shows gate was intact when St. Louis couple pointed guns at protesters Videos and photographs show the couple pacing on their Portland Place property, periodically pointing the weapons at the crowd For the Yelling I've seen a lot of people yelling about killing people. People act out, 'verbally'. Typically they calm down. Yelling didn't use to be a crime, especially with a death sentence.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
So do you think that anytime anyone ignores the social hierarchy they will be strangled? Nobody is saying that social hierarchy doesn't ever matter, just that it can be largely ignored with minimal consequences.
- hotpotamus 3y ago
  Using a "so you're saying..." comment attached to a straw man might goad me on some days, but I'm not particularly feeling it today. Take it from someone who has felt the consequences of ignoring the social hierarchy on occasion that there are indeed consequences.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    My point is that the fact that there can be consequences is different from there are always consequences. The fact that there can be consequences is also different from claiming that the consequences can't be accepted or ignored. I'm not goading you with a straw man. You are the one that made it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

laeri 3y ago

Some of these points are perceived situations in which social status affects its outcomes without proof but here they are. The main point is that if you have low status you will be treated differently which greatly changes your interactions with others. 1. You won't get treated fairly, someone with perceived high social status will get fairer treatment. This I personally witnessed in a hospital setting where the sole presence of someone "important" was notified in advance and they got more attention which means probably better attention to detail and therefore outcome in treatment. You might also receive worse service, such as in restaurants, flights, hotels. As people want to court and leave a better impression with someone in a social status 2. People will not respect you. As the article said status comes with respect. You might not judge others by their status but others will for sure judge you. They will talk behind their back about you and this will negatively affect any encounters with other people. Even if you don't judge others low social status will negatively discolor your interactions with others. 3. Also cause and effect might be inverted here. Low skill and ability in a specific domain usually leads to low status. Therefore other's treat you worse as your skills are of relative little importance in the domain. If someone in a tech setting can't solve trivial problems they will aquire low status and suffer in a multitude of ways. In the best case you will be ignored and assigned to tasks with relative little value. In the worst case you can't continue to work there. Just the fact that you have low social status should get you to worry. If you had better skill your social status would actually improve, at least to people that are in the same domain and value the particular skills needed there. Either you suffer repercussions due to your low social status or you suffer repercussions due to the factors that lead to your status.

theelous3 3y ago
I don't think you're really addressing the question with the hospital example nor the others. I could be the senior engineer of Amazing Inc., as well as a jacked high level MMA fighter and gracious altruist - beloved by all known to me - but if someone who knows the hospital admins walks in they are of course going to get some preferential treatment. This sort of "I know a guy" status that gives you a leg up on other people _regardless_ of their status doesn't really capture the essence here, I think. I had an absolutely massive post written but I think it might be easier to ask, what do you think a low status person is?