The Secret Haters

I don't understand why our European American brothers and sisters want to define this as "WHITE GUILT" when all people are saying is that these ways exist for fact; the harvest of years of ingrained teachings and still accepted beliefs that still have an impact. Why still exists the EEOC, Civil Rights laws, La Raza and a host of other protective organizations if not for the fact there still exist many European-American who feel they are superior to others. Even European-males still feel superior to European females, ergo the still corporate glass cielings and pay differentials. You cannot deny the existence of sexism and racism if you are in a class of people or gender unfamiliar with its impact on daily life. The existence of Racism and Sexism in America is real. How many Asians do you see on "American magazines," How many Latinos, Hispanics and Mexicans do you see on iconic American food and commerce commercials? Reality is a real slap in the face...but this current European-American generation is making a differnece for the better.

There is a serious flaw in the author's conclusions, in that he appears to be unable to understand that there is a big, BIG difference between prejudice - conscious or unconscious - against people because of race, religion, gender, etc. than against people who engage in socially undesireble, and indeed, criminal behavior such illegal IV drug use.

Unconsciously racist? Yes we are. But, given the fact that Obama has succeeded in getting the white male demographic, I would argue that our unconcious sexism often competes (and wins) with our unconscious racism. ie, African American voters can vote for Obama simply because he is African American (no quetions asked, good enough reason) but women voting for Hillary only because she is a woman is considered not a good enough reason to vote for a candidate.

I disagree that such predjudices are sufficienty potent that they would prohibit Obama from beign electred president of the United States. I expect and hope that the American public is above and beyond this. I believe the way Obama conducts himself is very acceptable. I believe other african americans who carry themselves in different ways would, in fact be unelectable.

Why is it always reported to the effect that whites are the ONLY race that harbors racial predjudice??? I have been repeatedly exposed to non-whites who are just as, if not more, racially predjudiced as any white. I am the offspring of a bi-racial couple - I know more about predjudice and bigotry than many people. If anybody wants to put an end to racially charged issues, make sure the fingers point in both directions.

If you are implying that Barack Obama is not electable based on these findings please read the passionate responses to Robert Novak's article in the Washington Post. Rubbish...As long as wel believe these racial biases exist we will not push forward with confidense towrad a better future. Obama is the only candidate who can lead this country into a new era--an era that focuses on public service and community engagement--an era that asks "not what my country can do for me" but what we can do for each other and ourselves. While I understand that in some ways it may help to bring these possibilities to light, I also feel it creates a tendency toward fulfilling our own prophecies.

" Posted By: gaelicmissy13 @ 02/12/2008 12:28:42 PM:
So why is he afraid to debate Hillary? Because he can't provide the information on how he is going to do any of the things he is promising. I find that very sad.
"*

Obama is winning he has nothing to gain by debating her. She needs the debate not him.

"Move not unless you see an advantage; use not your troops unless there is something to be gained; fight not unless the position is critical." Sun Tzu

Interestingly, I think that we do harbor some prejudice that is developed during our lives through experience. Often times that prejudice comes about by being exposed to those that we truely care about but when opportunities for them to change are presented, they opt to keep doing the self destructive behavior rather than improve. If we work with individuals that continue to express this type of behavior, it is hard not to have some prejudice and a degree of differance to their personal choice which can bring about prejudice. But remember, (and I try) not all people want the same behavior from themselves or those around them. Prejudice isn't just a majority opinion against a minority, it can be the minority's unwillingness to conform as well. Smoking comes to mind. My right to breath fresh air is in direct oposition to a smoker's right to blow smoke in my direction. Whose rights are being violated depends on the point of view of the individual and society. This being said, we must be careful how we define prejudice so that it isn't always defined so that some one or group can justify not being responsible to society or for their own actions. We have the right to choose, but we don't have the right to define the consequences of our choices.

I cannot decide whether this article is silly or sinister. The attempt to root out all bias is not only impractical, it may even be unhelpful. In fact, what is being described in the article smacks a bit of thought police attempting to replace all "bad" individual judgments with "good" groupthink.

Biases are formed for many different reasons, warranted and unwarranted, good and bad, helpful and harmful. I have a favorable bias with respect to the trustworthiness of my friends. I have an unfavorable bias with respect to the trustworthiness of used car salespersons. The former is warranted, based on my experiences with people with whom I have interacted regularly for many years, and it typically serves me well in making judgments about my friends' statements.

The latter, however, is based only on some limited personal experience in buying cars, hearing about the experiences of others, and stereotypes of those working in auto sales. When confronted with a stranger making a sales pitch about a vehicle, my bias is expressed as a prejudice that questions the claims being uttered to me. Having no other information about the trustworthiness of the salesperson talking to me, I fall back on my bias in this case. Is this bias warranted or warrantless? Is it good or bad? Would it be helpful to eradicate this bias altogether?

Not only is the role of bias in judgment is more complicated than the author suggests, it is also notable that biases are not all the same kind. Bias against someone based solely upon skin color is not the same as bias against someone engaging in homosexual activity, and neither of these is the same as a bias concerning drug addicts. Only the bias that makes a judgment about a person's character due to his or her phenotype is baseless. The others are based upon judgments about voluntary behavior in the one case and the ill effects of addiction in the other. Not all biases are created equal.

Finally, how is it helpful to call people such as the nurses in the study "secret haters?" A bias does not necessarily entail hate for another person, and it seems harmful to suggest, for instance, that those who have devoted parts of their lives to assisting drug addicts harbor secret hatred towards their patients. Are we really to believe that the self-destructiveness and harmfulness to a community caused by drug addiction is a baseless prejudice, and that those healthcare workers who move from this line of work to others are necessarily bearing "animosity" towards their former patients?

Surely, we would all do well to examine our consciences and question whether our judgments in particular instances were formed by baseless and even harmful prejudice. This author and the IAT go beyond that, however, by collapsing complex human behaviors and motives into simple categories of their own definition while simultaneously demanding that we engage in complicated second-guessing of our motives in

I am a South Asian American with two kids that were born in this country. We're Muslims, by the way. I hope your thesis is wrong otherwise we're doomed to the "unconscious" form of racism for rest of their lives. The attitudinal theory from Harvard may make sense but the Sydney study proposing a behavior linkage appears to be a bit of a stretch.

Why should Barack agree to debate Hillary anymore than normal. Just b/c she mismanaged her campaign and ran out of money he has to accommodate her? They should go ahead and have the debates they were scheduled to have and he should focus on campaigning. Believe it or not, The Clintons are still a household name. Barack on the other hand would be best served by campaigning and getting his message out to voters not debating Hillary and giving her free airtime. How many debates do we really need? He won the last one easily anyway. The bottom line is she only wants more debates b/c she's losing.

why should Barack agree to debate Hillary anymore than normal. Just b/c she mismanaged her campaign and ran out of money he has to accommodate her? They should go ahead and have the debates they were scheduled to have and he should focus on campaigning. Believe it or not, The Clintons are still a household name. Barack on the other hand would be best served by campaigning and getting his message out to voters not debating Hillary and giving her free airtime. How many debates do we really need? He won the last one easily anyway. The bottom line is she wants more debates b/c she's losing.

You can't focus on unity when in our "Desgregated school system": the students self segregate by race (blacks sit together and whites sit togehter). Even in where you choose to live, one chooses in the city the other chooses the suburbs. I believe alot of this is human nature and the prejudice of the young comes from the "If it Bleeds it Leads" news casts and from their home environment,

Bruce, point taken, but people in suits and ties with briefcases don't necessarily mean they aren't racist or criminal.

America seems not to understand itself. This election period has revealed to the world that America is still deeply rooted in hate, prejudice and racism. No psychologist is needed here. Its very obvious. You tube videos and Newspaper commentaries affirm the long journey America still has to make in moving beyond prejudice and racism. This is why many are interested in the political progress of the young Obama. He may really be the one to move America farword and out of this moral contradiction. The American youths are commendable for they are far ahead of their parents in terms of vision and collective responsibilty for a common future. I see hope. The hope Obama trumpets everywhere is on the way to its realization. It is already being fulfilled. I hope the mighty machines of the myopic group would allow this great awakening. God bless America.

I suspect there is more racism in this country than most white folks would be willing to admit, and less than most black folks perceive. It only stands to reason that the truth is somewhere in the middle. I think that things would be helped if both groups started assuming towards the middle -- whites assume there is more racism, blacks that there is less.

Sure people are subconsciously racist. We have millions of years of evolution equipping our brains to be able to make snap judgments about people based on their outward appearances, because that ability in the past could mean life or death. But we depend on lots of things as much or more than race, too: clothing, age, attitude. If you're stuck in the bad side of town, and on one side of the street there is a middle-aged black man in a suit, carrying a briefcase and wearing glasses, and on the other is a white teenaged skinhead in an army jacket, to whom will you go to ask for directions? Whether you're Jesse Jackson or David Duke, the other cues will trump the color cues.

"What's more, the stress of working with difficult clients was not in itself driving people away; they could tolerate the workaday stress. It was only the hidden animosity that was causing these dedicated workers to abandon their own do-gooder commitments."

Strikes me as overly facile psychobabble. I"m not sure you can so easily separate "workaday stress" from the situations presented by a particular client base, and the animosity, hidden or otherwise, may well be directed at both the clients and the stress their behavior causes. I'm also not so sure that the phrase "do-gooder commitments" doesn't reflect a hidden bias of the author.