3 ms·
You have to be upper caste to not have to think about caste. That being said, I’ve seen very little evidence of this as well. Which makes it even more perplex
by addicted 3y ago
You have to be upper caste to not have to think about caste.
That being said, I’ve seen very little evidence of this as well.
Which makes it even more perplexing why groups would oppose the addition of caste among the list of factors on which someone can be discriminated.
I do think Newsom is right in that it’s covered under current ancestry laws (proponents point to a case in NY decades ago when ancestry wasn’t included). Clearly the CA govt actually believes that because they’re sued Cisco over caste discrimination a few years ago.
But again, I don’t see why people are opposing adding it to the list. If it’s added and redundant it makes no difference, except then they can point to the lack of caste based discrimination in the U.S. based on the low number of such cases that have succeeded.
- belltaco 3y agoI am not upper caste and I don't think about caste. Nor does any of my friends or family ever talk or mention someone's caste except rarely in very limited circumstances about older parents in India caring about their children's potential spouses' castes. And even that is dying out fast with society liberalizing extremely fast and the generational turnover.
- screye 3y agoSeconded. Not upper caste, never came up in the US. This entire bill feels so alien to the lived experience of every Indian I know in the US.
- nirav72 3y agoNot GP - but I come from a lower caste family. Although I was born and raised in the U.S, I cant recall a a single time someone wanted to know my caste or made it an issue. I have several friends who like me are of South-Ancestry. A diverse multi-ethnic group whose parents came from all over India. None of us are even aware what caste hierarchy we fall into.
- known 3y ago[dead]