L3 Prejudice & Discrimination

2 364 212 182 30 entry quotas 2 1143 2571 4000 1710

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: nColl/non-norm 30% 21.2 36.4 21.2 18.2 3.0 Entry Quotas 2% 11.43 25.71 40.00 17.10 5.71 0% 14.71 20.59 20.59 8.82 35.29 Conclusion for Example 2 Dominant groups can use tokenism to control subordinate groups Competition and conflict within the Competition and conflict within the subordinate subordinate group is a likely result of tight quotas Example 3: The democrat donkey, and the pink triangle aka: “divide and conquer” 4 Example 4: Aristocratic Language Fall Trash Attic Molasses Loan Homely Autumn Rubbish Loft? Treacle Lend Plain Social creativity/dominant group High identification Legitimate, more or less stable Boundaries. . . A little too permeable little too permeable Result: Change language use to maintain exclusivity of identity Terrorism Example 5: Terrorism Subordinate group/social competition Identification with group? Legitimacy of dominant group status? Stability of dominant group status? of dominant group status? Permeability of boundaries? Note: Behavior is directed at social change 5 Example 6: Violence Against Minority Groups Minority Groups Social Competition from Dominant Group Identification with being white? Answers for Lecture 3: 1). Define pr...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/21/2014 for the course COMM 109 taught by Professor Reid,s during the Spring '08 term at UCSB.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online