prejudice

Prejudice Towards the Elderly, the Heavyweight and Towards LGBT People We have talked about prejudice in very general terms. Now we turn to

prejudice against two specific groups: the elderly and the heavyweight. Ageism People generally do not notice ageism – negative attitudes and

discrimination against the elderly – because it is institutionalized within nearly every aspect of our culture.

In what ways is ageism institutionalized? Go into any drugstore and look at some of the birthday cards. Almost immediately, you’ll notice a common message: Sorry to hear that you’re another year older. Birthdays are seen as a decline, a step toward being in a group that is not respected and not valued in society. Getting older is bad. Why would card makers put such a message on a card that is meant to be a celebration? Try that same message with another stigmatized group and you’re likely not to arouse laughter in the card recipient but anger: Sorry to hear that you’re overweight! Sorry to hear that you’re handicapped! Sorry to hear that you’re gay! I think you get the point.

People spend billions of dollars every year to hide the physical signs that come with aging. Skin creams, face-lifts, hair dye, and makeup are all used to conceal the external signs of age. Why? Because we are told in innumerable ways that aging is bad while youth is good. Yet the reality, according to the research, is that many people find that middle age and old age bring stability and happiness. Older adults with good health report higher levels of satisfaction and have fewer complaints than their younger counterparts. Moreover, a representative sample of U.S. citizens found that older adults are more likely to experience positive emotions such as ease and contentment and are less likely to experience negative emotions such as anxiety and anger, than their younger counterparts.

How are the elderly perceived and treated? Most people view older persons with a mixture of fondness and pity. They

are seen as incompetent yet loveable. Older people are also perceived as

2

dependent and in decline, both physically and mentally. As a result, their opinions are not given the same importance as those of a younger person. These stereotypes probably affect how older people are treated. Research on communication has identified a particular ageist communication style used with the elderly: baby talk or elderspeak. This is a patronizing style based on stereotypes, that includes simplifying one’s speech such as speaking more slowly or using simple vocabulary; using a demeaning emotional tone, such as being bossy or overly familiar or by keeping the conversation at a superficial level. Elderspeak is also reflected in a higher voice pitch, slow speech rate and shorter utterances. Interestingly, listeners are able to tell whether speakers are talking to an older or younger person just by hearing such voice cues.

People have been found to use such speech when communicating with the elderly, in nursing homes, between family members, and during interactions between strangers, such as in stores or work settings.

Interestingly, not all older adults find this treatment insulting. Caporael et al. found that older people who have good cognitive functioning and health find elderspeak to be insulting and it makes them angry. However, for those with diminished cognitive abilities or health problems, ageist speech and behavior is perceived as comforting because it is interpreted as a sign of care and concern. Other studies show that older adults associate elderspeak from friends with warmth but interpret elderspeak from service workers as condescending. Do you think that treating the elderly as if they cannot understand could actually reduce their ability to understand? Could this lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Giles and others found that older people appear to age instantly (speak, move, look and think more slowly) when younger people direct elderspeak toward them compared to when others do not use such speech. What happens if people come to accept such stereotypes? A study by Levy and colleagues showed that people who had disagreed with statements such as “When you get older, you are less useful” when they were younger, lived on average 7.5 years longer than those who had agreed with statements like this when they were younger. This survival advantage remained even when information such as age, gender and overall health was taken into account.

3

Why are people ageist? Why are people prejudiced against a group they may hopefully join

someday (if they are lucky)? Ageism may be driven in part by fear and hatred of the elderly. But why would we fear and hate the elderly?

Older people are a strong reminder to younger people that they are mortal and therefore life is finite. Older people may make younger people feel anxious about their own fear of dying and may make them think about their own mortality. Aging represents a possible future self for younger people. The fear of this possible self drives people to try to distance themselves from this future self by forming prejudices and stereotypes of older persons. Ageism is prejudice against a feared future self.

The importance of understanding ageism Understanding ageism is very important particularly because of the

“graying of America.” It is estimated that by the year 2030, the number of people over 65 will double. It is important therefore to understand this pervasive and institutionalized form of prejudice to which many people will be subjected.

Prejudice toward the heavyweight Prejudice against heavyweight people is prevalent and powerful and it has a

potent effect on people’s lives. This form of prejudice is much like other forms of prejudice in that it limits opportunities and is associated with negative stereotypes. In many ways however prejudice against heavyweight people is different when compared to the more commonly discussed and researched prejudices of race and ethnicity. Can you think of ways in which it is different?

Effects of heavyweight prejudice Mistreatment on the basis of weight begins at an early age. Rejection of

heavyweight people has been documented among 3-year-olds and among elementary school children. When researchers ask children to name their friends,

4

overweight children are less likely to be chosen as a best friend and more likely to receive few or no friendships choices than their leaner peers.

Heavyweight children are especially likely to be targets of teasing. 96% of heavyweight girls in one study reported being the target of hurtful comments or weight-related teasing. In a sample of 4,700 middle and high school adolescents, nearly 30% of the girls and nearly 20% of the boys reported being teased about their weight more than a few times a year. However, 45% of the heavyweight girls and 50% of the heavyweight boys reported being teased much more often.

What are the effects of such extensive teasing? Teens who were teased were more likely to use diet pills, abuse laxatives and binge eat than were those who did not experience teasing. Such teens are more likely to report depression, suicidal thoughts, and suicide attempts; the effects are worse for girls than boys. Heavyweight girls who had been teased reported twice the level of suicidal ideation than did girls who had not been teased (51% vs. 25%). Although boys reported fewer suicidal thoughts overall, boys who had been teased reported more than three times the level of suicidal thoughts than did those who had not been teased (13% vs. 4%).

Heavyweight people face a great deal of prejudice and discrimination in the workplace. They are recommended for hire much less often than are their thinner counterparts even when the credentials of both sets of candidates are equal. A number of studies indicate that they are evaluated more negatively and receive more limited workplace opportunities. Heavyweight salespeople are rated as being less punctual, enthusiastic, productive, competent, well-mannered and trustworthy than average-weight salespeople. Given these differences in evaluations, it would make sense that the salaries of heavy-weight and average- weight people would differ. Such salary differences exist for women alone. For example, one study revealed that women who were heavy as adolescents or young adults ultimately had lower household incomes than did women who were leaner. In general, penalties based on weight are stronger for women than for men.

There are some important ethnic differences when it comes to weight bias. African Americans tend to be more satisfied with their body shape, they rate heavyweight women as more attractive and they are less likely to reject

5

heavyweight women as dating partners. Although White women rate heavyweight women lower on a variety of dimensions, Black women generally do not show the same denigration of heavyweight women, especially when rating heavyweight Black women. Latinos also appear to be more accepting of obesity in adults than are White Americans.

What is unusual about weight based prejudice? Prejudice against heavyweight people is similar to ethnic, gender and racial

prejudice in many ways. All of these characteristics are visible, almost immediately perceived and usually central to the perception of the person. There are powerful stereotypes about all of these groups and many potential disadvantages to being a member of these groups.

The stigma of weight though differs from many other stigmas in important and interesting ways. Perhaps the most important difference is that weight is seen as changeable so the person is seen as responsible for being obese. As we have discussed previously, the origin of a stigma plays an important role in how people respond to stigmatized people. Most members of the public do not realize that body weight and body shape are mostly biologically determined with a very large genetic contribution. Consequently, people believe that body weight is completely controllable so the heavyweight are blamed for their weight. In contrast, people are not held responsible for their gender or race.

People who are victims of prejudice and discrimination often find comfort in identifying with their social groups. This aspect of their social identity can become an important component of self-esteem; as a result, people tend to have a positive view of their groups even if the larger world perceives their group negatively. Heavyweight people however do not show this ingroup bias; they do not perceive their group positively and are thus cut off from one important source of self-esteem. This is remarkable because ingroup bias is one of the most widespread and reliable of all social psychological phenomena.

Although people rarely leave their gender or ethnic group, many people actively seek to lose their heavyweight status – dieting and weight loss is a $55 billion-a-year industry. As just mentioned, one of the most important buffers against prejudice and discrimination for racial, religious and ethnic minorities is

6

to identify strongly with their group, to connect with other members of their group and to build a positive sense of self connected with their group membership. However, when people are members of low-status or devalued groups and they believe that it is possible to actually leave the group and enter a higher status group, they fail to identify with their group. They also do not pursue strategies for social change and group empowerment. The belief that heavyweight people can become average weight, cuts heavyweight people off from one of the most effective strategies for well-being – strong identification with similar others.

Prejudice Toward LGBT People

Prejudice toward LGBT people is different from prejudice toward other groups in two ways: 1. An Acceptable Form of Prejudice: People who generally reject other forms of

prejudice may still find prejudice against LGBT people to be acceptable. 2. Family Rejection: Family members often reject LGBT family. We do not see

this with other forms of prejudice. Consider the case of William Cox. William was raised as a Mormon. His father was a deeply religious man who had been inspired by Martin Luther King and believed that all forms of prejudice are wrong. Yet when William came out to his father, his father stopped the car they had been riding in, and threw William’s backpack out of the car. When William got out of the car to retrieve his backpack, his father drove away. William was 19 at the time and was in college. His first thought was that he had to finish an English paper for school the next day (which he did!). He never returned home after this incident. He stayed with friends for a while and was homeless for a time, but he completed college and went on to obtain a Ph.D. in social psychology. His area of research is how stereotypes affect people.

When we discussed the concept of stigmas, we noted that people with stigmas may conceal their stigmas and engage in passing. This is the case for many LGBT

7

people. Take the example of Nathan Hoskins. He knew from an early age that he was gay. When he was in the sixth grade, he received a Valentine’s day card from a male friend that his mother found. She drove him to a desolate place and put a shotgun to his head. She told him, “This is the tree that I’d take my son to and blow his head off if he ever decided to be a faggot.” He realized at that moment that he had to do whatever it took not to be gay. He was married for nine years before he divorced and eventually came out.

Discrimination against LGBT people Discrimination against LGBT people is similar in many ways to discrimination towards other groups. Employment - Like other targets of prejudice, research has shown that LGBT people are not treated equally in the many walks of life. In one study of workplace discrimination, resumes were sent to 1,769 job postings in seven states. Half of the resumes indicated that the job applicant had been a member of a gay campus organization while the other half had been members of a different organization. Gay applicants had a lower chance of being invited for an interview (7.2% vs. 11.5%). The chance of a gay applicant getting an interview was much lower in the South (Florida, Texas, Ohio) and midwest and higher in the northeast and west (California, New York, Nevada). Helping - Prejudice toward LGBT people isn’t confined to formal organizations. In one study male and female confederates wore t-shirts with the words, “Gay pride” or t-shirts with no letters and asked pedestrians for change for a parking meter. Pedestrians were much less likely to help the confederate with the gay pride t-shirt. Why are people prejudiced against homosexuals? 1. The View that Homosexuality is Not Normal People are likely to feel prejudice toward gays and lesbians if they believe that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice rather than a biological predisposition. However, the APA says, “Most people experience little or no sense of choice

8

about their sexual orientation.” After all, who would choose to be gay if it means being persecuted and rejected by society, peers, even possibly family members? It also begs the question, “When did heterosexuals choose to be straight?” Some people invoke religious or biblical reasons that condemn homosexuality, seeing it as unnatural. Homosexuality however, is found in many other species, including beetles, birds, dolphins, orangutans, sheep, fruit bats. Nature at least, does not regard homosexuality as unnatural. 2. Fear of Being Hit On - Some people condemn homosexuality, fearing romantic advances from homosexuals. 3. Secret Gay Desires - Research indicates that people with the most extreme antigay attitudes may in fact have unconscious homosexual desires. In one study, men with the strongest negative attitudes towards homosexuals were the ones who were the most sexually aroused when watching gay pornography (the researchers showed them gay pornography and measured physical sexual arousal). 4. Fear of Being Thought Gay - some people may distance themselves from gay people to prove that they’re not gay. Even people who do not express antigay feelings may avoid spending time with openly gay people because they fear others will see them as gay. This may account for the fact that antigay prejudice, although stronger among men than women in general, is stronger toward one’s own gender. Heterosexuals do not want to be mistaken for homosexuals. They fear “Guilt by association.” Positive Signs Even though some people still have strong antigay attitudes, there have been recent positive signs that attitudes are becoming more positive. Shift in Explicit Attitudes One sign of increasing tolerance, is support for same-sex marriage. Since 2011, the percentage of Americans who support same-sex marriage is greater than the

9

percent who oppose it. In 1988, 11.6% of Americans supported gay marriage. By 2018, 60% supported gay marriage. This support has included support from traditionally conservative groups such as Evangelical Christians, Republicans and people living in rural areas. The positive change in attitudes towards gay people has been more rapid than change in attitudes toward any other issue. This change is not a generational change. The change has not occurred because younger people are more in favor of gay rights than older people. Older people like William Cox’s father have changed their attitudes as well. Indeed, William Cox’s father eventually apologized to his son and the two now have a close relationship which includes William’s husband. William’s father came to believe that gay rights are the same as the civil rights that he had supported for minorities. Change in Implicit Attitudes A particularly encouraging sign is that implicit attitudes towards gays have changed. There has been a 33% drop in implicit bias towards gays on the Implicit Association Test. This is huge! More people now endorse positive attitudes towards LGBT people, but as we know, people can still have biased unconscious views. The research indicates however, that unconscious negative attitudes toward LGBT people have declined by 33%. If this decline continues at the present rate, in nine years, the majority of people will have neutral attitudes toward LGBT people. That means, that when taking the implicit association test, people will have not prefer straight people over LGBT people. Their scores will not indicate an unconscious negative bias toward LGBT people. This finding is particularly astounding because when we look at implicit attitudes towards African Americans, implicit attitudes have become more positive, but at the current rate, it will take more than 60 years for implicitly biased attitudes to reach neutrality (where participants do not exhibit a preference for white people over black people). The situation is even more dire for unconscious preferences for light skin over dark skin. At the present rate of change, it will take 138 years for the preference for light skin over dark skin to disappear. The situation is even worse for prejudice toward elderly people,

10

overweight people and disabled people. At the present rate of change, it will take 150 years for the unconscious biases towards these groups to disappear. When placed in the context of these other biases, the positive change in anti-LGBT attitudes is astounding.

We can see the implementation of these changes in recent political events. Lori Lightfoot became the first black openly gay mayor of Chicago in 2019. Pete Buttigieg, the first openly gay mayor (of Southbend, Indiana) is also the first gay, married candidate to run for President (in the 2020 presidential election). The fact that openly gay people feel free enough to run for political office (and win) indicates that change has really occurred.