7 ms·

I don't typically approve of in-group preferential treatment as discussed in the article. I've come across it most in dealing with various minority/ethnic grou

by crusso 14y ago

I don't typically approve of in-group preferential treatment as discussed in the article. I've come across it most in dealing with various minority/ethnic groups where it seems to be okay to admit to it. A colleague of mine who is Greek was once talking to me about various restaurants and shops he goes to because the owners are Greek and give him a discount. He saw nothing wrong with it. I've heard similar comments from other colleagues who were Indian, Jewish, etc. I couldn't imagine going to a restaurant and getting a discount because the owner and I are both white. Even typing this out and thinking about someone telling me they would give me preferential treatment because I'm white makes me uncomfortable. All that said, how is in-group preferential treatment any different than familial preferential treatment. The article mentioned giving away free tickets as an example. Is it wrong to give your brother some concert tickets you have because you should be equally inclined to give them to a perfect stranger? Okay, how about a third cousin whom you never but you know would like the tickets? Is giving that third cousin the tickets that much different than giving them to a neighbor?

mikestew 14y ago
All that said, how is in-group preferential treatment any different than familial preferential treatment. The article mentioned giving away free tickets as an example. Maybe they're not all that different, just different forms of tribalism. I can certainly see it applying early last century in the U. S., when you're fresh off a visit to Ellis Island and the natives aren't particularly fond of you. If you don't watch out for each other, who else will? Further back in history such prejudices may have been more valuable when unfriendly tribes are just a short walk away. Same thing for family: the rest of the world isn't going to give us a leg up, so we best watch out for each other. Or maybe for both it's just familiarity. When you're a long way from home, I can see value in having someone around who understands your cultural background and speaks the language you grew up with. As for family, I'm probably not the one to ask. Mine is spread all over the U. S., and even if my sister lived next door I'd be just as likely to give courtside seats to a coworker as I would to her.
mseebach 14y ago
You wouldn't get the discount because you're white, you'd get it because you're a member of a minority subculture in the context you're in. Say, you're back packing through [somewhere far away], and you walk into a restaurant somewhere that's run by a guy who went to your university (or is from your state or whatever). He gives you a free beer. Still feels uncomfortable?
- ajross 14y ago
  Bingo. This is the classic case of a tech geek looking at things through a lens of "abstract principle" when it's really not appropriate. Yes, sure, I think we can all agree that in a perfect world no one should get preferential treatment because of an objective fact of existence like ethnicity. But in the real world, we have social groups with complicated dynamics. Expressing solidarity with your group is a normal and important part of this. Tech geeks do it too! And yes, sometimes that takes the form or a free beer or a "Greek discount" or whatever.
  - fyi80 14y ago
    It is absolutely prejudicial. Citing a case where I benefit from it doesn't make it right. Why not randomly give a beer to every 1000th patron, or every 10th shirt with lettering, as a conversation-starter?
    - ajross 14y ago
      Again, you're citing "right". I'm saying this is a case of complicated social interactions being benign in one case where the same kind of behavior would be discriminatory in others. You can make it right/wrong if you want to, but you're not going to solve anything by doing so. And, it must be noted: if you really think hard about things (something that tech geeks, in my experience, are really bad at doing in a social context), you'll realize that your "wrong" filter always seems to be applied against some group other than the ones you're part of. Whether you realize it or not you participate in this kind of social game too, even to the exclusion of other groups. And it's not "wrong" when you do it either.
Anechoic 14y ago
I couldn't imagine going to a restaurant and getting a discount because the owner and I are both white. Think about all the times you went shopping at a department store and weren't hassled by store security. That's your preferential treatment.
- PommeDeTerre 14y ago
  That's not really "preferential treatment" in any sense. That's exactly how the store would ideally want to treat all of its customers. Retailers don't want to expend money and other resources on security personnel and equipment. Unfortunately, they have to do so because certain individuals do partake in behavior that harms the store in one way or another. If a given store repeatedly has trouble (or a lack of trouble) with individuals who have certain traits in common, perhaps even including skin color, then it's understandable that people exhibiting such traits may be treated with a certain degree of suspicion. The store is merely trying to manage risk in an efficient manner, rather than intentionally giving people with one trait an advantage over others without that trait.
  - poppysan 14y ago
    "Retailers don't want to expend money and other resources on security personnel and equipment. Unfortunately, they have to do so because certain individuals do partake in behavior that harms the store in one way or another." Ideally you're right (If the metrics backed this up). The problem is when stereotypes become the metric, which is common, especially with minorities.
    - powertower 14y ago
      > The problem is when stereotypes become the metric, which is common, especially with minorities. If 90% of your store's theft was caused by 5% of your customers - that can be identified of having the same race/color, are you really going to blame the owner or employee that gives more attention to those 5% than the other 95%? If so, what is your solution to this issue? Should it be ignored?
wslh 14y ago
In a similar line I recommend the paper "Cultural Biases in Economic Exchange?" http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/sapienza/htm/cultural_biases.pdf http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/sapienza/htm/cul...
colmvp 14y ago
> I couldn't imagine going to a restaurant and getting a discount because the owner and I are both white. What about a job? Or a political position? Or a promotion?
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  You won't get a job simply because you are white, at least in a place where whites the majority, though it would be interesting to see how this works in places where whites are a minority. It's more likely that you simply won't be discriminated against. It also means that you are statistically more likely to belong to a minority group that does have privilege, for example the minority group of people with high wealth. Of course you might well not belong to such a minority group. So for a poor white , the fact that bill gates is rich does not really help you. I think this is where a lot of where the confusion regards these issues comes from.
airfoil 14y ago
I think this is the crux of the article: "Greenwald and Banaji are not suggesting that people stop helping their friends, relatives and neighbors. Rather, they suggest that we direct some effort to people we may not naturally think to help."
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
powertower 14y ago
> Even typing this out and thinking about someone telling me they would give me preferential treatment because I'm white makes me uncomfortable. You need to shake that PC bullshit off. There is nothing wrong with freedom of association, nor with feeling good about being "white". Neither of those things is discrimination (or evil). Not only are you just 8% of the world's population (and on a decline), but you're also part of a race (if you accept white as meaning of somewhat Eastern European decent) that has built some of the most impressive civilizations, empires, and cultures on this planet,... filled libraries with countless works on all subjects and matters,... ended slavery (a long world-wide practice that was mosty done by non-whites; and still is),... built and financed just about every part and institution in America (USA was 90% white even up to 1960; now about 62-72%),... invented, refined, and progressed just about every modern technology and field,... actively discriminated against your own race to help & better minorities,... and did a countless other exceptional things in abundance. It's amazing how people will associate the bad things that some people did (the things that are all easy to do like kill and destroy - that all other races have done in abundance) to the white race, yet at the same time ignore all the positive things they did to advance the whole of humanity (things that are difficult to do - things that require quite a bit of work, self-sacrifice, intellect, and character/morality).
- anon808 14y ago
  How about just feeling good for being a human? Tribalism is not a virtue.
  - powertower 14y ago
    Ideally? Sure, but... The human condition is complicated, and the human brain is a pattern matching and association machine. Humans have been identifying and separating themselves by color/race since the beginning of time, even before we could talk. It is the first category... before rich/poor, beautiful/ugly, young/old, etc. It's almost primial. The context to what I wrote was in relation to the current "white privilege" PC bullshit that has been indoctrinated into our collective. Nothing more.
    - 14y ago
zampano 14y ago
When I was living in Tokyo, I used to go eat at a mexican restaurant in Yotsuya where a fellow Houston-ite was the chef. She'd always give me a couple of free cervezas and maybe a discount. I'm white and she is mexican, but since she knew we were both from Houston she gave me a discount. I accepted it and never thought anything of it, and before I read your post, I would have been surprised if anyone would have.

by crusso 14y ago

mikestew 14y ago

All that said, how is in-group preferential treatment any different than familial preferential treatment. The article mentioned giving away free tickets as an example. Maybe they're not all that different, just different forms of tribalism. I can certainly see it applying early last century in the U. S., when you're fresh off a visit to Ellis Island and the natives aren't particularly fond of you. If you don't watch out for each other, who else will? Further back in history such prejudices may have been more valuable when unfriendly tribes are just a short walk away. Same thing for family: the rest of the world isn't going to give us a leg up, so we best watch out for each other. Or maybe for both it's just familiarity. When you're a long way from home, I can see value in having someone around who understands your cultural background and speaks the language you grew up with. As for family, I'm probably not the one to ask. Mine is spread all over the U. S., and even if my sister lived next door I'd be just as likely to give courtside seats to a coworker as I would to her.

mseebach 14y ago

You wouldn't get the discount because you're white, you'd get it because you're a member of a minority subculture in the context you're in. Say, you're back packing through [somewhere far away], and you walk into a restaurant somewhere that's run by a guy who went to your university (or is from your state or whatever). He gives you a free beer. Still feels uncomfortable?

ajross 14y ago
Bingo. This is the classic case of a tech geek looking at things through a lens of "abstract principle" when it's really not appropriate. Yes, sure, I think we can all agree that in a perfect world no one should get preferential treatment because of an objective fact of existence like ethnicity. But in the real world, we have social groups with complicated dynamics. Expressing solidarity with your group is a normal and important part of this. Tech geeks do it too! And yes, sometimes that takes the form or a free beer or a "Greek discount" or whatever.
- fyi80 14y ago
  It is absolutely prejudicial. Citing a case where I benefit from it doesn't make it right. Why not randomly give a beer to every 1000th patron, or every 10th shirt with lettering, as a conversation-starter?
  - ajross 14y ago
    Again, you're citing "right". I'm saying this is a case of complicated social interactions being benign in one case where the same kind of behavior would be discriminatory in others. You can make it right/wrong if you want to, but you're not going to solve anything by doing so. And, it must be noted: if you really think hard about things (something that tech geeks, in my experience, are really bad at doing in a social context), you'll realize that your "wrong" filter always seems to be applied against some group other than the ones you're part of. Whether you realize it or not you participate in this kind of social game too, even to the exclusion of other groups. And it's not "wrong" when you do it either.

Anechoic 14y ago

I couldn't imagine going to a restaurant and getting a discount because the owner and I are both white. Think about all the times you went shopping at a department store and weren't hassled by store security. That's your preferential treatment.

PommeDeTerre 14y ago
That's not really "preferential treatment" in any sense. That's exactly how the store would ideally want to treat all of its customers. Retailers don't want to expend money and other resources on security personnel and equipment. Unfortunately, they have to do so because certain individuals do partake in behavior that harms the store in one way or another. If a given store repeatedly has trouble (or a lack of trouble) with individuals who have certain traits in common, perhaps even including skin color, then it's understandable that people exhibiting such traits may be treated with a certain degree of suspicion. The store is merely trying to manage risk in an efficient manner, rather than intentionally giving people with one trait an advantage over others without that trait.
- poppysan 14y ago
  "Retailers don't want to expend money and other resources on security personnel and equipment. Unfortunately, they have to do so because certain individuals do partake in behavior that harms the store in one way or another." Ideally you're right (If the metrics backed this up). The problem is when stereotypes become the metric, which is common, especially with minorities.
  - powertower 14y ago
    > The problem is when stereotypes become the metric, which is common, especially with minorities. If 90% of your store's theft was caused by 5% of your customers - that can be identified of having the same race/color, are you really going to blame the owner or employee that gives more attention to those 5% than the other 95%? If so, what is your solution to this issue? Should it be ignored?

wslh 14y ago

In a similar line I recommend the paper "Cultural Biases in Economic Exchange?" http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/sapienza/htm/cultural_biases.pdf http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/sapienza/htm/cul...

colmvp 14y ago

> I couldn't imagine going to a restaurant and getting a discount because the owner and I are both white. What about a job? Or a political position? Or a promotion?

jiggy2011 14y ago
You won't get a job simply because you are white, at least in a place where whites the majority, though it would be interesting to see how this works in places where whites are a minority. It's more likely that you simply won't be discriminated against. It also means that you are statistically more likely to belong to a minority group that does have privilege, for example the minority group of people with high wealth. Of course you might well not belong to such a minority group. So for a poor white , the fact that bill gates is rich does not really help you. I think this is where a lot of where the confusion regards these issues comes from.

airfoil 14y ago

I think this is the crux of the article: "Greenwald and Banaji are not suggesting that people stop helping their friends, relatives and neighbors. Rather, they suggest that we direct some effort to people we may not naturally think to help."

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

powertower 14y ago

> Even typing this out and thinking about someone telling me they would give me preferential treatment because I'm white makes me uncomfortable. You need to shake that PC bullshit off. There is nothing wrong with freedom of association, nor with feeling good about being "white". Neither of those things is discrimination (or evil). Not only are you just 8% of the world's population (and on a decline), but you're also part of a race (if you accept white as meaning of somewhat Eastern European decent) that has built some of the most impressive civilizations, empires, and cultures on this planet,... filled libraries with countless works on all subjects and matters,... ended slavery (a long world-wide practice that was mosty done by non-whites; and still is),... built and financed just about every part and institution in America (USA was 90% white even up to 1960; now about 62-72%),... invented, refined, and progressed just about every modern technology and field,... actively discriminated against your own race to help & better minorities,... and did a countless other exceptional things in abundance. It's amazing how people will associate the bad things that some people did (the things that are all easy to do like kill and destroy - that all other races have done in abundance) to the white race, yet at the same time ignore all the positive things they did to advance the whole of humanity (things that are difficult to do - things that require quite a bit of work, self-sacrifice, intellect, and character/morality).

anon808 14y ago
How about just feeling good for being a human? Tribalism is not a virtue.
- powertower 14y ago
  Ideally? Sure, but... The human condition is complicated, and the human brain is a pattern matching and association machine. Humans have been identifying and separating themselves by color/race since the beginning of time, even before we could talk. It is the first category... before rich/poor, beautiful/ugly, young/old, etc. It's almost primial. The context to what I wrote was in relation to the current "white privilege" PC bullshit that has been indoctrinated into our collective. Nothing more.
  - 14y ago

zampano 14y ago

When I was living in Tokyo, I used to go eat at a mexican restaurant in Yotsuya where a fellow Houston-ite was the chef. She'd always give me a couple of free cervezas and maybe a discount. I'm white and she is mexican, but since she knew we were both from Houston she gave me a discount. I accepted it and never thought anything of it, and before I read your post, I would have been surprised if anyone would have.