Last edited Sat Jul 12, 2014, 04:26 PM - Edit history (1)
I'm pretty sure this defense of discrimination could work on other discrimination as well...discrimination works best when a person buys into whatever negative stereotyping feature discrimination is built around.
I don't subscribe to the following notions but they are things I've experienced others say and they demonstrate how emotional cost could be connected to them essentially becoming vindication for people who wish to discriminate...
Fat people are lazy. Having a lazy coworker is bad for moral, which would be an emotional cost under this sort of argument.
People who don't use standard English are 'ignorant'. Having dumb people on the team is tough for team members. Can't that also be an emotional cost?
As well as the flip side...People who use advanced academic English are arrogant, having arrogant people on the team is tough for team members. No one likes a 'smarty pants',
Gay men on the crew make the other men fear they'll be 'hit on'. Wouldn't that be disruptive and an emotional cost?
A man in a dress disrupts, so emotional costs accrue from transsexuals/transvestites who disrupt when they are "made" by co-workers?
Is the concept of contagion/contamination of the workplace by the mentally ill really all that different from the way bigots/chauvinists look at other targeted groups?
Does a rationale that can be stretched to fit many forms of discrimination really represent a rationale to sympathize with discrimination, or is it really just a rewording of what after all is at the root of discrimination?
= new reply since forum marked as read