Do Most Of Us Hold An“Unconscious Bias” On Racism And Other Matters Such As Misogyny.

[anotheoldgit]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/07/30/prince-harry-warns-dangers-unconscious-racism-candid-interview/

I added Misogyny because on a radio phone-in, a woman said "that if there was a male and a female assistant in a book shop, a male customer was more likely to approach the male assistant for certain advice, thinking that the male assistant would be more knowledgeable".

I ask you????????? I gamble that a female customer would approach the female assistant for advice, it's got nothing to do with discrimination against the other sex.

[tamborine]

Bias by upbringing! Coming from Him who trailed my 14y niece &
friend in Eton “slags” he said as he passed.

[naomi24]

I’m conscious of my biases. I think he’s making an absolute twit of himself.

[anotheoldgit]

jim360

/// CVs with a generic name such as John tend to be viewed more favourably than those under the name Mohammed somebody-or-other, even if their content is literally exactly the same. ///

I don't think one could consider that 'Unconscious Bias' it could be intentional. Perhaps some employers are not willing to accept the baggage that goes with the religious beliefs of someone named Mohammed, taking time out to pray 5 times a day for example.

[jim360]

That doesn't make it better though does it? And anyway, one could replace "Mohammed" with a name that's more associated with African heritage and observe the same effect. Besides, the point of this particular effect is that you could presumably ask the employer what motivated them and they *wouldn't* have an answer along the lines of being concerned about religious/emotional baggage, but would point to some other aspect of the CV.

The rule with unconscious bias tends to be that you cannot see it in any one possible incident, but only when you start considering thousands of such cases and notice a genuine pattern.

[bainbrig]

Anyone over about 50 brought up as 'English' in the UK will have drunk in 'empirism' in their mother's milk, had it re-inforced by school-teachers and the like, in fact by almost every aspect of the British way of life.

Some of us recognised this in our 20s or 30s, and began actively to fight against it, in ourselves, and in the wider society. Some of us succeeded more than others(!)

And anyone who declares themselves free of racist or misogynistic thoughts is either a liar or a fool.

BB

[naomi24]

//they wouldn’t have an answer along the lines of being concerned about religious/emotional baggage..//

They COULDN’T voice such an answer because that would be deemed ‘racist’ and that would negate any genuine concerns.

[jim360]

Well, whatever. Let's not allow the question of whether or not it's right to tar all Muslims with the terrorism brush* to distract from the point. And in any case, the fates or otherwise of identical CVs under different names is but a small part of the mountain of evidence that demonstrates the existence and influence of unconscious biases.

*It's clearly not right.

[anotheoldgit]

jim360

/// Well, whatever. Let's not allow the question of whether or not it's right to tar all Muslims with the terrorism brush* to distract from the point. ///

I don't think anyone has tarred all Muslims with the terrorist brush, at least not on this thread.

But since you have brought the matter up, and since terrorists don't wear a uniform, it is a baggage that unfortunately they all must all carry.

[pixie374]

Hardly, aog and that is why it is bias and prejudice rather than fact. I have worked with plenty of Mohammeds and not one has ever taken time off to pray.

[jim360]

Well, as I say, it's not an issue confined to Mohammeds is it? But "baggage that they all must carry" is more or less the same as tarring with the same brush, is it not? Why should someone who is not, or never has been, and never even considered, and condemns and abhors, terrorism, carry any baggage at all about it?

[Khandro]

Why is the supposition always whites are biased against blacks (can I say that anymore?) when it can & does work the opposite way too?

[naomi24]

Jim, who said anything about terrorism? Only you. We were talking about employing Muslims, something I can understand an employer being reluctant to do. If I employ someone I want him to do the job he’s paid to do. I don’t want someone who might want time off to pray, or who might object to coming into contact with particular products or who might object to the dress code, etc. For that reason I’d choose John over Mohammed - and that isn’t unwarranted bias. It’s ensuring that my business runs as smoothly as possible.

[Peter Pedant]

// For that reason I’d choose John over Mohammed - and that isn’t unwarranted bias. It’s ensuring that my business runs as smoothly as possible.//
well it is lucky you dont employ anyone as you would get well and truly scrood over discrimination - you could refuse to employ Mohd because HE would refuse - but not an evanescent group ....
and what about if you just didnt want Fatima or Aliyah to get pregnant ?

Imagine a chief constable saying - well we dont employ any Pakistani plods because jesus they want to pray all the time- o god and the other lot - turban tommies we call 'em.
and roman catholics - babies, I cant stand babies

[Peter Pedant]

// Why is the supposition always whites are biased against blacks (can I say that anymore?)//
conclusion...

because you can show they are

[naomi24]

Pp, quick grab your brain. It’s escaped again.

[jim360]

Well, regardless of whatever logic you can claim exists for refusing to employ Muslims unless there were no other choice, it's a bigger issue than that. Also, I'm curious: if everyone makes the same judgement, whether or not Muslims take time out to pray, how exactly are they supposed to find work? Besides which, not everybody with an Islamic name is a practising Muslim, so it still falls down. Just because you're open about your prejudice doesn't make it OK.

It's just one mite of evidence of unconscious bias anyway. Be it who we ask for help in a store, or for directions, or who we choose to employ, or who we see in our heads when we imagine a given career, unconscious biases are a thing, and worth at least trying to overcome.

[jim360]

Oh, and whilst we're on the subject of unconscious biases, you and AOG are both entirely correct. Nobody mentioned terrorism on this thread until I brought it up. Sadly I just more or less assumed that that's where you both were going with your comments, and should have thought to check more carefully the point you were making.

So there's another example. Unconscious biases can make you look like a twit.

[naomi24]

Jim, not prejudice ... good business practice. Whether
or not they can find work isn’t my problem. My business is my priority.

[jim360]

If I remember correctly, you'd also prefer to hire men over women on good business practice reasons, no? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm sure we had a discussion where you said as much (particularly for young women who may or may not be getting married soon). In which case I dispute the claim that it's good business practice to be keen to exclude so many potential employees based on gender, possible religion, etc.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Dear oh dear.

"if you consider hundreds and thousands of such interactions -- eg, CVs with a generic name such as John tend to be viewed more favourably than those under the name Mohammed somebody-or-other".

This is not a bias, it's a rational decision based on evidence. You know that out of a hundred Mohammeds you'll get more troublemakers than you would from a hundred Jims. Or would you, Jim, or anyone else, care to contest this obvious fact?