OnePwaa 2019

OnePwaa 2019
WSC Study Guide
Social Studies:
The Edges of Society
Disclaimer from OnePwaa:

This study guide was created by our members with the intention to help members of the
community find a sense of direction when preparing for the competition. The information in
this Study Guide is true and complete to the best of our ability, but we cannot guarantee that
all information provided is 100% correct.

It is advised that you do not rely solely on the Study Guides for revision, and that do your own
extended research and reading regarding the curriculum to increase the breadth and depth of
your knowledge and understanding. The WSC curriculum is open to open to interpretation and
as such, can have several different analyses. Tip: click on underlined words in this study guide to
reach websites and articles for further reading!

As the ideas explored in the curriculum are highly controversial, we must stress that the
information and opinions provided in this guide do not represent our views as an organisation.
We apologise in advance if any content is seen as offensive, upsetting or unsettling.

To find out more about OnePwaa, visit our website (www.onepwaa.weebly.com). Should you
have any concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us (onepwaa@gmail.com).

Many thanks to the following people who contributed to the research, organisation and
formatting of this Study Guide:
Charlie Goldsworthy Stephanie Komala
Victoria Sin Emily Peng
Shaurya Chandrawanshi Daniel Pham
Sophia Giblett Haris Rizwan
Janet Jiang

2
Contents
People of a Feather: The Sources and Consequences of Groups………………4
Basic features of social groups.................................................................…......4
Entativity: when does a group think of itself as a group?........................5
To follow the Group, to go Astray....................................................................8
Them-ocracy: Understanding Exclusion and Rivalry.............................11
Here There be ____: Understanding the Margins of Society............................16
Mechanics of Marginalisation.........................................................................16
Poverty and Social Stratification....................................................................21
Race and Ethnicity................................................................................................24
Gender and Sexism..............................................................................................26
Additional Terms to Explore............................................................................32
Additional Cases & Guiding Questions....................................................................36

3
People of a Feather: The Sources
and Consequences of Groups
Basic features of social groups

Power Structures
The system through which power or authority is shared or distributed between groups. Power
Structures can be found in groups ranging from the government, to offices and even your
school. The basic distribution or hierarchy if you want to call it of how you share the authority
within a group, required to influence the actions of other members. An example of a power
structure can be seen in families where the parents have a big chunk of the “power” which in
turn influences the action of their children.

Roles
In the easiest way to put this forward, the functions or parts played by everyone in a society. It
is the expectations of a certain status which is created through norms, values, behaviours, and
characteristics. Roles in groups are divided into four categories; task roles, socio-emotional
roles (to maintain all the emotional needs of a group), procedural roles (to make sure rules and
norms are being followed and work is being done), individual roles.

Communication Structures
The basic framework that undermines the interaction and communication between the
individuals of a group. One has to take in account of the audience to set up an effective
communication structure. A basic example of a communication structure is in families, mothers
tend to interact more with their newborns than older kids.

Similarity
In simple words similarity means ‘being similar’ or ‘having the same things in common’.
Similarity between individuals tend to bring them together leading them to form groups. For
instance, in a school environment, students with a common interest in chess and board games
might lead to them forming a chess club. In my opinion, the more similar the members of a
group the greater chance of getting the job done more effectively.

4
Interdependence
The dependence on the members of group on each other.
Taking one individual out of the equation would in turn
lead to a domino effect all the other members. Even if two
people are dependent on each other equally, it doesn’t
necessarily create an equal power dynamic.
The following picture best illustrates the meaning of interdependence. (courtesy of Marc
Hughes for PlannersWeb)

Injunctive vs. Proscriptive Norms

Injunctive norms are perceptions on behavior that the people of a society approve of. They
help in determining what is acceptable and unacceptable in a community. For example staying
quiet in the cinema or in the library is an injunctive norm. Proscriptive Norms on the other
hand are behaviors you’re not supposed to show in a society. For instance in countries with
arranged marriages as a part of culture, Public Displays of Affection are considered to be
proscriptive norms.

Entativity: when does a group think of itself as a group?

Cultural identity groups

Cultural identity groups are a part of a person's self-conception and self-perception based on a
feeling of belonging (or actual belonging) to a group. This can be related to nationality,
ethnicity, religion, social class, generation, locality or any kind of social group with its distinct
habits and traditions. For example, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Pacific Islanders,
Native Americans and Hispanic and Latino Americans are all examples of cultural identity
groups, but they can also be more specific than that, relating to geographic regions, upbringing,
languages spoken etc.

Crowds vs. Mobs

A crowd is simply a large number of people gathered together in a disorganized or unruly way,
while a mob is a large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing
trouble or violence.
Similarities:
● Both involve large amounts of people

5
 ● Disorganized
Differences:
● Intents: crowd has neutral connotations while a mob is a crowd that aims to cause
disorder and usually has a common goal (e.g. to revolt)

Tuckman Model
It was first published by Bruce
Tuckman in 1965 in an article called
“Developmental Sequence in Small
Groups and consists of “forming ,
storming, norming, and performing,”
which are the stages NEW teams follow
to bond and increase their chances of
success.

● Forming: When teammates/colleagues start to know each other

(strengths/weaknesses)
● Storming: When teammates/colleagues get too comfortable with each other and push
each other to their boundaries. This is where most teams collapse and fail (conflict)
● Norming: When teammates/colleagues start to resolve their differences and
appreciate each others’ strengths
● Performing: When the team reaches their maximum effectiveness, without any
internal conflict
(image courtesy of https://medium.com/swlh/team-development-stages-51df5606c0a2 )

Seceder model
This looks at “Survival of the unfittest”. It consists of a population of simple, nonconforming
entities which reproduce and die and illustrates how the desire to be different than the
average can lead to formation of groups in a population. A simple algorithm generates a
complex group formation behavior:
● In a single reproduction event three individuals are chosen randomly
● Individual which possesses the largest distance to their center is reproduced by
creating a mutated offspring
● The offspring replaces a randomly chosen individual of the population

6
Homans’ Theory
Homans’ theory is the notion of what happens when groups form amongst individuals. It
consists of:
● Activities: Assigned tasks for people in a group to work
● Interaction: Happens when any person’s activity takes place or is influenced by the
activity of another
● Sentiments: Feelings and attitudes toward each other (ex. like or dislike, approval or
disapproval)

Social Exchange Theory

This is the sociological and psychological theory that studies the social behavior in the
interaction of two parties. It uses a cost-benefit analysis to determine risks and benefits, and
thus decides whether or not a person would be likely to perform an action and whether or not
such was the “right” decision to make. Calculations occur on romantic relationships,
friendships, professional relationships etc.

Swarm behaviour
Swarm behaviour is exhibited by entities, particularly animals, of similar size that aggregate
together to settle or migrate collectively. It could be for self protection, to attack other groups,
or simply for comfort.

Herd mentality
Herd mentality is also known as mob mentality or pack mentality. It is just making decisions
based on the perspective and actions of another instead of thinking and making the decision
oneself. Researchers at the University of Leeds discovered that it only takes 5% to influence a
whole crowd’s direction, and the other 95% will subconsciously follow.

Selfish Herd Theory

This theory was first coined by William Hamilton in 1971. It states that individuals within a
population will put space between themselves and others of their species in order to avoid
predator notice. The risk of predation is higher on the periphery (the side) than the center. It is
similar to the way a herd moves, with individuals preferring to be in the middle, where they are
less likely to be seen and thus hunted.

7
To Follow the Group, to go Astray

Informational vs Normative vs Referential Conformity

Social conformity as a whole is defined as one’s change of behavior in order to fit the norm of a
group. The most commonly found two types of social conformity are normative and
informational.
Normative conformity is when one changes themselves with the desire to be liked and
accepted. This could occur in a social situation. For example, let’s assume you and your friends
were trying to decide what you wanted to order for lunch. They all want pizza, but you want a
salad. In this scenario even though you may not want pizza, due to social conformity you
choose to pretend like you do so you don’t stand out.
Informative conformity on the other hand, is when one changes themselves with the desire to
be correct. Let’s suppose you and your friends were trying to figure out a hard math problem.
They may all agree that the answer is -1, but the answer you got is +1. In this situation you may
pretend like your answer is -1 too. However, the motivation of this wouldn’t be because you
want to fit in. Subconsciously, because all your friends agree on one answer, you automatically
doubt the validity of yours.
Lastly, referential conformity (which is not as ‘well-known’, but which occurs just as commonly)
is when one changes themselves in order to fit the expectations set on them based on their
background/religion/ethnicity. For example, an Asian may choose to concentrate on academics
(despite their love of the arts) because Asian culture recognizes ‘scholarly’ achievements, while
looking down on the pursuit of the arts.

Social Identity Theory

The social identity theory was proposed by Henri Tajfel in 1979. Firstly, social identity is a
person’s sense of identity of who they are based on their group membership(s). Our social
groups are a source of pride and self-esteem, because they give us a sense of social belonging.
Thus, in order to enhance our social identity, we enhance the status of the group in which we
belong in. Of course, we can also enhance our identity by judging and criticizing other groups.
These groups are known as the in-group (your group), and the out-group (another group).
This is base of the social identity theory which states that the in-group will discriminate against
the out-group in order to enhance their own image.
To read more about the theory, visit this site! https://www.simplypsychology.org/social-identity-
theory.html

8
Self-Categorization
The self-categorization theory was developed by John Turner in 1999, and serves to
differentiate personal and social identity.
As stated above, social identity is identity based on the social groups one is a part of. Personal
identity is independent of group memberships.
The self-categorization theory states that in any given situation, as individual is driven by
either social or personal identity, but rather a dynamic of the two.
To read more about the theory, as well as Turner’s SCT compared to Tajfel’s SIT, check out this
paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sabine_Trepte/publication/314531246_Social_Identity
_Theory_and_Self-Categorization_Theory/links/5a12b8eb458515cc5aa9ee51/Social-
Identity-Theory-and-Self-Categorization-Theory.pdf

Dominant Culture
A dominant culture is a cultural practice that is dominant in a political/social/economic entity,
in which multiple cultures are present. This could relate to language, social value/custom or
religion. For example, in USA the dominant culture is that of white, middle class, Protestant
Christian people of European descent.

Counterculture
A counterculture is a cultural group whose values and normalities counter that of the
social/religious mainstream. An example of this in history, is the 1960 Hippie movement in
USA.
For more information about cultures see:
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-sociology/chapter/culture-worlds/

High-Brow Vs. Low-Brow

Something ‘high-brow’ is something highly cultured and sophisticated. For example, in the
music industry, opera and classical music would be considered highbrow. As you may have
guessed, anything highbrow is intellectual in nature, and people who appreciate such things
are naturally considered highbrows as well.
Lowbrow is the opposite of highbrow. Lowbrow refers to things that are vulgar and less
sophisticated.

9
Asch Paradigm
The Asch Paradigm is an experiment conducted by Solomon Asch in 1951 to investigate the
extent in which social pressure can affect a person to conform.
50 male participants from a college in USA participated in a ‘vision test’. Each participant was
placed in a room with seven actors, who’d previously agreed on a shared answer to the test.
The participant is not aware of this, and thinks that all seven others are real participants like
himself.
The participant and the seven actors would then be asked a simple question, with a clear
answer. They then, took turns in answering the question, with the participant always
answering last. In the 12 trials, the participants didn’t always change their answers, but in
those 12 trials, the actors gave the incorrect answer. On average, about 32% of participants
(about a third) conformed. 75% of participants conformed at least once in the 12 critical trials,
while 25% didn’t. There was a control condition where less than 1% of participants gave the
incorrect answers.

Crutchfield Situation
The Crutchfield Situation was an experiment developed by Richard Crutchfield in order to
study conformity. It was a attempt the methodology of the Asch Paradigm, which had a few
major flaws. One major flaw is that many accomplices are needed to study on participant.
Furthermore, participants answer under the watchful eyes of others, which increases feelings
of embarrassment.
The Crutchfield experiment was able to deceive each participant without the need of any
actors, or any public embarrassment.
Participants were seated in individual cubicles, and asked to make opinions based on the things
flashed on the screen in front of them (for example, which shape had the greater area) by
flicking a switch. The answers of all participants are then displayed on their screens, one by
one.
However, all the participants were in fact being deceived. The answers being displayed weren’t
controlled by the participants, but by the experimenter. When the participant believed she/he
was seeing the responses of the others, the display was in fact being controlled.
Crutchfield made each participant believe that they were answering last, making it easy for
him to display that all the others gave the same incorrect answer.

10
Them-ocracy: Understanding Exclusion and Rivalry

Ingroup vs. Outgroup

Popularised by Polish social psychologist Henri Tajfel in formulating the social identity theory,
ingroups and outgroups may also be known as us and them. An "ingroup" is a social group which a
person self categorises to be a part of, or in other words, a social group to which a person
psychologically identifies as. On the contrary, an "outgroup" is a social group to which we do
not identify to be a part of. We tend to segregate ourselves according to race, age, religion,
social class and more- although this is mostly done subconsciously, it has been found that this
is associated with a wide range of psychological phenomena! To put it into clearer perspective
consider the example of how groups of ‘supposed’ witches in Salem were considered to be out-
groups to the regular community.

Outgroup Homogeneity
Outgroup homogeneity or Outgroup Bias is normally a bias members of in-groups have due to
which they view the members of an outgroup as the same while they view members of their in-
group as different. “They are alike, we are diverse.” Bernadette Park and Myron Rothbart
were one of the earliest researchers on this topic, an example of which might be that although
the members of the Asian community (in-group) acknowledge each other’s differences
,perhaps to Americans (out-group) they might all be the same which in turn contributes to
stereotypes being formed (similar themes revised in What Kind of An Asian Are You)

Trait Ascription
The trait ascription bias is mainly the tendency that we consider others to
behave in a perfectly predictable way while we regard ourselves to be
completely unpredictable, thus leading to the formation of stereotypes.
Jones and Nisbett were among the first to argue that people are biased in
how they tend to ascribe traits and dispositions to others that they would
not ascribe to themselves. Motivated by the classic example of the student
explaining poor performance to a supervisor (in which the supervisor
might superficially believe the student's explanations but really thinks the
performance is due to "enduring qualities": lack of ability, laziness, ineptitude, etc.).
read more: http://brainshortcuts.blogspot.com/2010/11/trait-ascription-bias.html

11
Intergroup Interactions
In 1966, Muzafer Sherif defined intergroup interactions as follows: "Whenever individuals
belonging to one group interact, collectively or individually, with another group or its members
in terms of their group identification, we have an instance of intergroup behavior". Therefore
interactions of ingroup members with outgroups could be taken as an example of intergroup
interactions. Consequently, such interactions normally give rise to stereotypes and biases such
as outgroup homogeneity.

Social Comparison
Proposed by social psychologist, Leon Festinger, the social comparison theory states that
individuals evaluate themselves and determine their worth by comparing themselves to others
and seeing how they stack up to them. Comparing themselves to others is taken as a way of
self-improvement and self-motivation. However such a phenomena usually sparks up
judgmental, biased, over-competitive and superior attitudes towards others. There are two
types of social comparisons:
● Upward social comparison: where we compare ourselves we people who we think are
better than ourselves
● Downwards social comparison: where we compare ourselves with people who we think
are worse than us.

Social Invisibility
As said in the name, social invisibility refers to those people who have been overlooked or
marginalized by society. Since the general society doesn’t pay attention to them or usually acts
like “they’re not their”, these people become socially invisible. Examples of such people include
the elderly, minorities, migrant workers etc.

Amity-Enmity Complex
Introduced by Sir Arthur Keith in his book, “The New Theory of Human Evolution”, which
stated that all humans evolved as differing races, tribes, and cultures, exhibiting patriotism,
morality, leadership and nationalism. Those who belong to these and exhibit them are all in-
group members. All other classes are out-groups and are subject to hostility.

12
Internalized Oppression
Oppression means hatred or dislike towards a group which is upheld by public policy and
private action. Soon the people who are the target of such discrimination and hatred ‘get used
to it’. They start to believe the lie they are in fact inferior and less worthy. This is internalized
oppression. Internalized oppression is like….
● believing a lie
● taking dishonesty as the truth;
● having faith that persons or institutions that are not trustworthy should be trusted

Black Sheep Effect

Originally coined by José Marques , the black sheep
effect refers to the phenomena that likable group
members will be judged more positively by ingroup
members compared to being judged by outgroup
members. Similarly when a person will do something
unlikable,undesirable or deviant, then they will be
judged more harshly by ingroup members compared to
being judged by outgroup members. It happens because
(it’s an extension on the social identity theory) in group members want a positive image of their
group, and because of this the groups positive social identity may be threatened by members
who don’t follow the norms thus they feel more negative towards those in their ingroup who
don’t create a positive self image of their ingroup.
It happens because ingroup members want a positive image of their group, and because of this
the group’s positive social identity may be threatened by members who don’t follow the norms,
thus they feel more negative towards those in their ingroup who don’t create a positive self
image of their ingroup.
read more:
http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Black_sheep_effect
https://psychology-spot.com/black-sheep-effect-psychology/

13
Robbers Cave
By this we are not referring to a treasure hunt themed video game from the 90s. Robbers Cave
was actually an experiment conducted by social psychologist, Muzafer Sherif which revolved
around his Realistic Conflict Theory. The Realistic Conflict theory argues that intergroup
conflict takes place when two groups are in competition for limited resources which might give
rise to prejudice attitudes and discrimination.
-The experiment involved two groups each comprising of 11 twelve year old boys who were
strangers to one another and were randomly picked for group selection. They were then, as
individual groups, picked up by bus on successive days in the summer of 1954 and transported
to a 200 acre Boy Scouts of America camp in the Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma.
At the camp the groups were kept separate from each other and were encouraged to bond as
two individual groups through the pursuit of common goals that required co-operative
discussion, planning and execution. During this first phase, the groups did not know of the
other group's existence.
When they did however come to know about the other group’s existence, the boys chose
names for their groups, The Eagles and The Rattlers, and stenciled them onto shirts and flags.
Sherif now arranged the ‘competition stage’ to increase friction between the two groups. Both
groups competed against each other in competitive sports such as tug-o-war. There were
individual prizes for the winning group such as a medal and a multi-bladed pocket knife with no
consolation prizes being given to the "losers."
This sparked a sense of competitiveness in both the teams. The Rattlers began to devise group
tactics and even thought about putting a “Keep Off” sign near their group. At first the prejudice
was only verbally expressed through name calling and taunting. However the situation
escalated with the Eagles burning the Rattlers flag and the Rattlers ransacking the Eagles
cabins.
During the subsequent two-day cooling off period, the boys listed features of the two groups.
The boys tended to characterize their own in-group in very favorable terms, and the other out-
group in very unfavorable terms.
This study clearly shows that conflict between groups can trigger prejudice attitudes and
discriminatory behavior. This experiment confirmed Sherif's realistic conflict theory.

14
Stanford Prison Experiment
Conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a landmark
experiment in the field of social psychology, with the purpose of observing the effect
situational variables had on human behavior. As Zimbardo put forward: "Suppose you had only
kids who were normally healthy, psychologically and physically, and they knew they would be
going into a prison-like environment and that some of their civil rights would be sacrificed.
Would those good people, put in that bad, evil place—would their goodness triumph?"
● Participants and Setting: A mock prison was set up in the basement of Stanford
University’s psychology building and 24 undergraduate students were chosen as
participants with the half of them serving as prison guards and half of them as
prisoners.
● Procedure: Prisoners were to remain in the mock prison 24-hours a day during the
study. Guards were assigned to work in three-man teams for eight-hour shifts. After
each shift, guards were allowed to return to their homes until their next shift.
Researchers were able to observe the behavior of the prisoners and guards using
hidden cameras and microphones.
● Results: While the Stanford Prison Experiment was originally slated to last 14 days, it
had to be stopped after just six due to what was happening to the student participants.
The guards became abusive, and the prisoners began to show signs of extreme stress
and anxiety. The interactions between guards and prisoners became hostile and in
some cases, dehumanizing.

According to Zimbardo and his colleagues, the Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrates the
powerful role that the situation can play in human behavior. Because the guards were placed in
a position of power, they began to behave in ways they would not usually act in their everyday
lives or other situations. The prisoners, placed in a situation where they had no real control,
became passive and depressed.

15
Here There be __: Understanding
the Margins of Society
Mechanics of Marginalisation

Discrimination
Discrimination is when someone treats another person with prejudice and injustice based off
their race, age, gender, etc. For instance, when someone donates to an orphanage but donates
less to black children as a racist act. As a result, this restricts these specific group from
receiving the same privileges and opportunities as everyone else.
Based off conflict theory and social identity theory, Rubin and Hewstone made three types of
discrimination:
● Realistic competition: describes an individual obtaining material/resources for a
certain type of group due to self interest.
● Social competition is driven by the need of self-esteem, aim for a positive social status.
● Consensual competition is like favoring for a high status in-group because of its high
hierarchy.

Colonialism
Colonialism refers to the practice or policy by which a country seeks to extend its authority
over foreign peoples and territories, typically with the objective of opening new trade
opportunities and siphoning off the colonised’s wealth and power to strengthen themselves.
Colonial countries will seek to economically exploit their colonies, and may choose to impose
their religious and practical beliefs on the colonized. Historians categorize colonialism into
several different types:
● Settler colonialism: involves large-scale immigration by a foreign nation that aims to
replace the original population of an area
● Exploitation colonialism: involves fewer colonists and focuses on the exploitation of
natural resources or labor; signified by the domination of an indigenous people by a
foreign minority
● Surrogate colonialism: describes a colonization project supported by a colonial power
in which the colonists come from a different ethnic group

16
 ● Internal colonialism: refers to an uneven distribution of power within a single state that
makes it seem as though the central government is exploiting one/some of its
territories
Major colonial projects did not just start during the modern Age of Discovery; colonialism has a
history dating to antiquity, as evidenced by the colonies established by the Egyptians, the
Phoenicians, the Greeks and the Romans.

Slavery
Slavery is a system where the principles of property law apply to people. Systems of slavery
allow people to buy and sell other individuals; slaves are forced to work and follow the
instructions of their owners. Someone could be enslaved the moment they were born.
Chattel slaves is a term to describe people who are treated as complete property. This practice
was supported and made legal by European governments and monarchies.
Though it has been legalized institutionally in most societies, slavery is now outlawed. The last
country to officially abolish slavery was Mauritania in 2007.

Hegemony
This is a Greek term for “over dominance”- the dominance of city-state over other city states. It
is defined as the dominance of one group over another, often backed up with norms and ideas.
The great powers meant to establish European hegemony over Asia and Africa.
Hegemony denotes a situation when:
● One has more material than another
● More powerful military power
● Controls raw materials and natural resources
This is associated with Antonio gramsci Marxist theory of cultural hegemony- the ruling class
has the ability to manipulate as influence the value system of other society.

Nepotism
Nepotism refers to the practice among those with power and influence of favoring relatives
and friends, typically by handing out jobs or positions of power within an organization or
government. Nepotism can occur across all sorts of fields: politics, sports, religion and business
(very common), among other ers.
History:
● The practice originated from antiquity, with ancient Indian texts making references to
and criticizing nepotism.

17
 ● The term originates from the Italian word nepotismo, based on the Latin word nepos
which means “nephew”. Apparently, it refers to the practice of Catholic popes and
bishops assigning their relatives to important positions within the Catholic church; this
they did because, as they were not allowed to have offspring, they treated their
nephews like sons and treated them with preference, with the intention of creating a
papal “dynasty” of sorts.
● This was most commonly exemplified by the Borgia popes: Pope Callixtus III made his
nephew Rodrigo a cardinal, before Rodrigo became Pope Alexander VII; Pope
Alexander VII then made Alessandro Farnese, his mistress’s (Popes are not actually
allowed to have mistresses!!) brother, to cardinal, before he himself became Pope Paul
III.
● The papal practice of nepotism ended with Pope Innocent’s XII, who issued the bull
Romanum decet Pontificem, which prohibited

Endogamy
Endogamy is the practice of marrying within a specific social group, caste, or ethnic group. It
rejects others who are considered to be unsuitable for marriage or other close personal
relationships. This serves as a form of self-segregation because these individuals avoid
merging with others to make sure that their community stay homogenous.
However, it can result to the group’s extinction because it may result in genetic disorder due to
the interaction within the relatively close community
● eg. Urapmin: a small tribe in Papua New Guinea
○ A small community in south Atlantic island of Tristan da Cunha practices
endogamy due to his geographic location. Many people in this community suffer
from glaucoma and asthma

Xenophobia
Xenophobia is the fear of people from other countries. It can involve perceptions of an ingroup
towards an outgroup and can manifest itself in suspicion of the activities of others and a desire
to eliminate their presence.
An example of xenophobic sentiment in Western culture is the Ancient Greek denigration of
foreigners as "barbarians". Studies attribute the hatred of foreigners to a various causes: the
fear of loss of social status and identity; a threat, perceived or real, to citizens’ economic
success, etc. For further reading:

18
https://www.sahistory.org.za/sites/default/files/file%20uploads%20/sapss_22_solomon_kosaka_0.p
df

Rankism
○ The act of discriminating and exploitation behaviors due to their rank in a
particular hierarchy
○ Coined by physicist, educator, and citizen diplomat Robert W. Fuller.
■ Abuse of rank is experienced by victims as an affront to their dignity.
■ Also promoted a social movement to the creation of a dignitarian
society targeted to racism and sexism.
○ Examples of Rankism include:
■ Abusing a position of power (corruption).
■ Uses rank to get away from humiliation.
■ Superior value to others due to social class.

Sexism
This word emerged from second-wave feminism of the 1960s-80s and was most likely
modelled on the civil rights movement’s term racism. It is the belief that one sex is superior
to/more valuable than another, and imposes limits on what men and women are allowed to do.
Originally, the idea was meant to raise awareness about the oppression women faced.
However, it can also apply to all other sexes. This includes intersexual and transgender people.

Racism
Racism is the belief that one race is more superior than the other. Examples of racist events
include: the holocaust, apartheid regime in South Africa, and slavery.

Ageism
For older people, ageism is an everyday challenge. Overlooked for employment, restricted
from social services and stereotyped in the media, ageism marginalises and excludes older
people in their communities.The World Health Organization states that 80% of people over 60
will live in low and middle-income countries by 2050.

Ableism
Ableism is the discrimination against individuals without able bodies. This term emerged in the
1960s and ’70s, when disability activists placed disability in a political context. Disabled

19
persons may experience labeling, altered expectations, and discrimination in the context of
eugenics.
Eugenics can be defined as the collection of beliefs that have a goal of improving the genes of
the human population. However, eugenics has often been viewed as morally wrong since it
portrays certain genetic groups as less desirable than others.
Hitler’s motives correlate to eugenics and ableism since he believed that certain groups were
superior. He scorned those who were disabled and deemed them inferior.

Elitism
This is the belief that the people who form an elite—a select group of people with a certain
ancestry, intrinsic quality, high intellect, wealth, special skills, or experience—are more likely to
be constructive to society. Belonging to the elite means that you deserve greater influence and
authority over the rest of society. One’s elitist status is usually attained through being
recognized for high achievements.But sometimes we’re just lucky- maybe you were integrated
into the elite by being born into a wealthy family.

Bullying
“Bullying culture” is prevalent. It is a common problem in school nowadays- I’m sure none of us
are new to this one. Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to assert dominance over
other individuals. Those who bully do it repetitively- almost like a habit. It is important to note
that an imbalance of power (not necessarily physical) will be present.

Victimization
Simply put, this is the process of being made a victim.
The lifestyle/exposure theory states that the likelihood an individual will suffer from personal
victimization depends heavily upon their lifestyle. For example: most people are victimized at
night, meaning that those who go out to high-risk places often will be more vulnerable to
victimization. Other theories to look into regarding abuse against women:
● Interpersonal model
● Family violence model
● Gender-politics model

20
Social Dominance Orientation
A product of the social dominance theory, SDO measures how much someone prefers to have
a social system with a hierarchy, where the domination over lower-status groups is present. It
is a predisposition toward anti-egalitarianism.
Egalitarianism: the doctrine that all people are deserving of equality (applicable to human
rights, opportunities, etc).
Individuals who score high in SDO desire to maintain and, in many cases, increase the
differences between social statuses of different groups, as well as individual group members.

Poverty and Social Stratification

Gini Index
Also known as the Gini coefficient, the Gini Index measures
inequality in terms of distribution of income in a country.
Inequality is measured between 0 (everybody has the same
income) and 1 (all the money earnt is by one person only). The ‘Line
of Equality’ shows the perfect distribution of income, and the
Lorenz Curve shows the actual distribution of income. The further
away the curve is from the ‘Line of Equality’, the more unequal the
distribution is.

Great Gatsby Curve

This is a chart which shows the connection between
inequality in one generation, and intergenerational
social mobility. High amounts of inequality is associated
with generations being less likely to improve their
economic status. Children from poor families are less
likely to socially mobilize upwards in countries with
wealth held in a few hands.

21
Poverty Gap Index
This is a measure of ‘the intensity’ of poverty, how far the
poor are below the poverty line (on average).

The poverty line is the minimum level of income thought to

be acceptable in that country, and the headcount ratio (an old method of calculating poverty) is
the percentage of population below that poverty line.

The lower the PGI, the closer the poor people’s income is to
the poverty line, and the higher the PGI, the more intense the
poverty.

Read more: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/poverty-

gap.asp

Social class
Social class is a concept of dividing society based on someone’s economic or social status,
based on social stratification- most often lower, middle, and upper class.

Social mobility
This refers to the movement of people between social classes in a society. There are many
different types of social mobility: horizontal mobility, vertical mobility, intergenerational
mobility…
Read up on the different types: http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/social-mobility-the-
meaning-types-and-factors-responsible-for-social-mobility/8539

Dissimilarity
This refers to difference, variance and diversity. The index of dissimilarity is a demographic
measure of how groups of people are spread over a geographical area.
Read up on the index of dissimilarity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_dissimilarity

22
Division of Labour
This is the separation of tasks in any type of working system, so that people may specialize in
them, and the effectiveness of that task rises. This often raises the output per person as the
person becomes competent with the repetition of doing a task, and also lowers the supply per
cost unit, which in turn lowers the prices for the consumers.

Just-World Fallacy
This is the assumption that the world is a meritocracy, that someone’s actions will bring fitting
consequences to them, and that good people will get rewarded, and eventually evil people will
get punished. This is obviously untrue as life is just a game of luck, and poor people do not
always deserve their poverty.

Redlining
Redlining is denying to serve specific residential areas, which is most often to do with racism.
This could be done either directly or raising the prices for that neighbourhood. The term comes
from the presumed practice of mortgage lenders drawing red lines on a map around areas that
they won’t loan money to- redlining based on race is now illegal.

Davis-Moore Hypothesis
This is a hypothesis/theory that attempts to explain social stratification. Every society sorts its
members into different positions and classes- the more inequality in a society, the more
productive it is.
A system of unequal rewards (status or wealth) is necessary. Higher level jobs are more
important, thus the people doing these jobs deserve to receive higher compensation for them.
Without social stratification, society will break down. Meritocracy is less productive than caste
systems.
For more reading: https://www.slideshare.net/ainaamalina3/davis-and-moore-on-education

Homelessness
This is a situation where someone doesn’t have a permanent home. This is often due to a lack of
income, or unsafe situations at home.

23
Slums
Slums are overcrowded urban streets or districts inhabited by lower income people.
Favelas
This is a Brazilian-Portuguese word for slum. Favelas are situated in a low-income densely
populated urban areas in Brazil. The first favela was created towards the end of the 1800’s,
and was built by soldiers who had no homes after a war.
Discuss with your team: do the existence of slums and favelas segregate society?

Shanty Towns
A shanty town is a settlement of improvised housing, inhabited by poorer people.
‘Housing’ is known as shanties, or shacks, and is made from scraps such as plywood or metal
sheets.

Skid Row
This refers to an impoverished area (usually urban) in Los Angeles. People who live there are
‘on the skids’, which refers to in general people forgotten by society.

Race and Ethnicity

Segregation
Segregation is the act of separating groups of people based on race and ethnicity in everyday
life. For examples:
● Caste system in India
● Apartheid in South Africa
● Systemic discrimination against Arabs in Israel
● Indirect segregation in most of the developed world

Self-Segregation
Self-segregation is when a community separates itself from society at large, possibly to
preserve customs and traditions. Examples:
● Sweden - High-income, high-education individuals prefer to live away from non-
european migrant neighbourhoods. i.e. Though they are positive to multiculturalism,
they prefer not being an ethnic minority
● USA - College campuses often self-segregate into groups based on ethnicities.
Point of contention: “Is self segregation justified in the context of social cohesion?”

24
Ethnocentrism
Ethnocentrism is the act of judging the contents of another ethnic culture through the lenses
of your own. Comes with the implicit idea that one’s culture is the highest form of culture.
Examples:
● A Buddhist judging an extravagant Hindu wedding for the importance it attaches to
material wealth.
● British colonialists believing that the importance of superstitions in Indian culture
shows a lack of rational thought.
Read more: https://www.utne.com/community/self-segregation-on-college-campuses-ze0z1504zdeh

Tribalism
This literally refers to respecting the tribal way of life, which includes small groups, generally
less technologically advanced than larger groups.
In the social context, the term is used to refer to people who focus more on their own social
groups than other factors. Such as extreme political partisanship, or an obsession with
injunctive and proscriptive norms.

Supremacism
Supremiacism is an ideology that states a certain group is not only superior to others, but has
the right (or even obligation) to subjugate and dominate other groups. Ahem colonialism ahem

Reverse Racism
Colloquially, it’s the concept of minorities discriminating against the majority. This can be
anything from racist slurs like “cracker”, or jokes about white people not being able to handle
spice. Contextually, it also refers to the concerns that majority groups have about actions such
as affirmative action.

Eugenics
Eugenics is a set of beliefs related to a field of science focused on exemplifying the genetic
‘superiority’ of the human race. Generally, this consists of removing ‘undesirable’ genes, and
promoting ‘desirable’ genes.
This was the basis of the Nazi ideology relating to the Aryan brotherhood, and was generally
accepted as a legitimate science throughout the history of colonialism, and even before it.

25
Institutionalized Racism
This is when social and political institutions subtly discriminate against individuals on the basis
of ethnicity, religion etc. A hot button example is police brutality in the USA, wherein some
claim that security forces actively discriminate against African-Americans.

“Race Traitor”
This is directly related to proscriptive norms. When a member of a race is perceived to be
acting opposite to the interests of the race. A great example is colonized Indian individuals that
adopted European customs being told they’re ‘traitors to India’.

“Passing”
Individuals being regarded as part of a group that they don’t belong to.
For example, an Arab ‘passing’ for a respected English gentleman in times of colonialism.

Reparations
When a group has lost land, lives, wealth or even dignity at the hands of another group, they
may seek symbolic redresses.
Example: Shashi Tharoor, an Indian politician suggests that the British provide India with a £1
per year symbolic reparation for 200 years.

Gender and sexism

Institutional Sexism
This may refer to practices in workplaces, governments, public institutions, financial
institutions etc. which derive from systematic sexist beliefs that men are superior to women. A
great example: the gender pay gap, which will be explored below.
Read more: https://thecynicalgirl.com/institutional-sexism/

Objectification
Objectification describes the act of seeing a human being as an object. Sexual objectification is
the act of treating a person as an object of sexual desire without regard to their personality or
dignity. Both men and women can be subjects of sexual objectification, but the objectification
of women is an idea that is commonly addressed and explored in many feminist groups. This is

26
largely linked to the idea of dehumanisation. Read more:
https://www.mit.edu/~shaslang/mprg/nussbaumO.pdf
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification
Masculinity vs femininity
These both describe gender identities and do not map onto biological sex. What gets defined
as feminine or masculine may be defined by social and cultural factors, and differs by region,
religion, social class etc. Masculinity refers to a set of attributes, behaviors, and roles
associated with boys and men, while femininity refers to that of girls and women. Hofstede, a
Dutch psychologist, defines them as follows:
“Masculinity stands for a society in which social gender roles are clearly distinct: Men are
supposed to be assertive, tough, and focused on material success; women are supposed to be
more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life.”
“Femininity stands for a society in which social gender roles overlap: Both men and women are
supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life.”
From Hofstede (2001), Culture’s Consequences, 2nd ed. p 297.
Dichotomisation of children’s toys by gender is not uncommon. Do you know any examples of
these children’s toys that reflect masculinity and femininity?
Read more: https://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/terms/femininities.html
https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/HofstedeMasculinity.html

Mansplaining
This is a newer and relatively
more informal term which is a
blend word of “man” and
“splaining” from the gerund
“explaining”. According to
Merriam-Webster and
Dictionary.com, to mansplain is
for a man to comment or explain
something to a woman in a
condescending, overconfident,
and often inaccurate or oversimplified manner. This is seen as problematic as it reinforces
gender inequality by reinforcing gender stereotypes about women’s presumed lesser
knowledge and intellectual ability. In an article for BBC, Kim Goodwin identified three main

27
factors to identify whether a man is mansplaining, illustrated in the chart above (courtesy of
Kim Goodwin and BBC).
Do you have any real-life examples of mansplaining? (ever been mainsplained to?)
Read these articles to find out more… https://qz.com/1214707/where-does-the-word-mansplain-
come-from/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/it-s-man-s-and-woman-s-world/201603/the-
psychology-mansplaining

Pay Gap
The pay gap or ‘gender pay gap’, is the median salary
of women who work full-time and and year-round
compared to the median salary of a similar cohort of
men. No matter how you evaluate it, the gender pay
gap is very real and concerning for the economic
security of women. The gender pay gap is the result
of many factors, including occupational segregation,
bias against working mothers, and direct pay
discrimination. Additionally, such things as racial
bias, disability, access to education, and age come
into play. Consequently, different groups of women
experience very different gaps in pay.
(image courtesy: American Association of University
Women)

Gendercide
First coined by Mary Allen Warren in 1985, the term gendercide refers to the systematic
killing of a specific gender. While femicide and gynocide have been used to refer to the
wrongful killing of woman, gendercide is a sex neutral term and therefore can be used to
indicate the killing of both male or female genders. One such case is Srebrenica, the subject of
renewed analysis – although it shouldn't take a news story to remind us of it – after the capture
of Karadzic last week. It is widely acknowledged that the killing of 8,000 Bosnian men and boys
was part of a policy to kill as many non-combatant males as possible, in order to reduce the
pool of possible enemy soldiers.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jul/30/gender.warcrimes

28
Heteronormativity
Popularised in 1991 in one of the first major works in queer theory, heteronormativity refers
to a system that normalises behaviours and societal expectations with the assumption that
everyone is heterosexual and adheres to a gender binary. A lot of things that appear to be
common in everyday life are actually examples of heteronormativity: acknowledging the
existence of only male and female and nothing else (gender binary), assuming that “old school”
gender roles are correct and should be followed (patriarchal gender roles), only viewing
marital/sexual relations to be legitimate they involve heterosexual individuals,
assuming that being monoamorous, monogamous, cisgender and having reproductive sex with
one’s partner is the only way to go (simply put, monogamy), among many others.
Heteronormativity is said to bring about many problems in our modern society. Do you agree?
Read more:
https://everydayfeminism.com/2015/07/what-is-heteronormativity/
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/heteronormativity-gender-identity-sexual-orientation
https://www.entitymag.com/heteronormativity-meaning-problems/

Glass ceiling
Coined by feminists who noticed the barriers in the
careers of high-achieving women, the glass ceiling is a
metaphor for an invisible barrier that obstructs a
certain group within a demographic (in this context,
referring to women) from rising beyond a certain level
in hierarchy. Many individuals are trying to break
through the “glass ceiling”, and a fair amount have
succeeded. Others have sought alternatives, such as
starting their own businesses.
Research about the “mommy track” from the late 1900s and how it relates to the glass ceiling
effect. Discuss: are there new “alternative pathways” for women to take nowadays that are
also related to the glass ceiling effect?
Do some extended reading: what are some examples of people who have broken the “glass
ceiling”?

29
Additionally, read this article exploring this idea. Discuss with your team: what situations in
real life have you noticed a situation with the glass ceiling effect?
(image courtesy: https://www.entitymag.com/heteronormativity-meaning-problems/)

Gender identities
One’s internal perception of their gender and how they label themselves is known as gender
identity. Contrary to societal beliefs, more than two genders exist- a person can identify as
male, female, transgender, gender neutral, non-binary, agender, pangender, genderqueer, two-
spirit, third gender, and all, none or a combination of these. (These are just examples! There are
more gender identities than the ones listed above!)
Read more:
http://teentalk.ca/learn-about/gender-identity/
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/gender-identity-terms#slide-3

LGBTQ+
Sometimes known as LGBTTTQQIAA. This is an initialism for a community involving the
following groups:
● Lesbian: a female homosexual who experiences romantic or sexual attraction to other
females.
● Gay: a male homosexual who experiences romantic or sexual attraction to other males
(however lesbians may also refer to themselves as gay).
● Bisexual: an individual who experiences romantic attraction, sexual attraction or
sexual behavior toward both males and females, or romantic or sexual attraction to
people of any sex or gender identity (the latter aspect is sometimes termed
pansexuality).
● Transgender: people who identify to a different gender identity than their biological /
assigned gender are known as transgender.
● Queer: an umbrella term for all individuals who are sexual and gender minorities.
● Questioning: a person who is questioning may be unsure or exploring their own gender,
sexual identity and sexual orientation who may be concerned about applying a social
label to themself for various reasons.
● Intersex: a variation in sex characteristics including chromosomes, gonads, or genitals
that do not allow an individual to be distinctly identified as male or female.
● Asexual: a lack of sexual attraction to anyone, and a low/absent interest in sexual
activity.

30
 ● Ally: a person who considers themself a friend of the LGBTQ+ community.
And also:
● Pansexual: individuals who experience sexual and romantic attraction toward people
of any sex or gender identity.
● Genderqueer: an umbrella term for gender identities that are not exclusively masculine
or feminine—identities which are thus outside of the gender binary and cisnormativity
● Bigender: a gender identity where the person moves between feminine and masculine
gender identities and behaviours.
● Gender variant: people who exhibit behaviour or gender expression that do not match
masculine and feminine gender norms may label themselves as gender variant.
● Pangender: individuals who feel they identify as all genders.

Toxic masculinity
Toxic masculinity is a colloquial term that refers to the social expectations for the masculine
gender role to be violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth. This term first came
to use when the psychologist Shepherd Bliss in the 1980s and 1990s sought to separate the
negative traits of men from the positive traits, and used the term “toxic masculinity” as a means
of making the distinction.
Read up more on this topic and consider: how is toxic masculinity potentially harmful? How are
males marginalised by it?
Research and consider: how is toxic masculinity linked to hegemonic masculinity? How are
these two ideas interrelated?
Look into this work by George Bellows which is a part of this year’s curriculum. Research the
circumstances under which it was created and does the painting in any way support toxic
masculinity, because the sport certainly did.
Read more:
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/toxic-masculinity-definition-what-is-boys-men-gillette-ad-
behaviour-attitude-girls-women-a8729336.html

Intersexuality
Intersexuality is used to describe individuals born with a reproductive or sexual anatomy that
doesn’t seem to fit the typical definitions of female or male. According to the Intersex Society
of North America, “Though we speak of intersex as an inborn condition, intersex anatomy doesn’t
always show up at birth. Sometimes a person isn’t found to have intersex anatomy until she or he
reaches the age of puberty, or finds himself an infertile adult, or dies of old age and is autopsied. Some

31
people live and die with intersex anatomy without anyone (including themselves) ever knowing.”
Intersex is a socially constructed category that reflects real biological variation- societal
necessity sometimes leads us to make such distinctions.
Discuss: do labels such as intersex create unneeded margins or segregation in society?

Additional Terms to Explore

Second-class citizen
A second-class citizen is a citizen whose rights and opportunities are not regarded as highly,
nor upheld equally compared with other members in a given society. Such citizens have
limited, or non-existent entitlement of rights to education, healthcare, movement, ownership
of property, among others. They may face discrimination in both legal and social contexts.
Examples: burakumin, several minorities in Bosnia & Herzegovina (according to an HRW
report), or Emecheta’s personal account.
Further reading: Other classes of citizenship.

Dehumanization
Dehumanization is a process in which the target is considered and treated as sub-human, or
lacking qualities of a human.
Examples: slaves, Hitler’s reference to Jews as vermin and rats, or Trump accusing Democrats
of allowing immigrants to infest the U.S.
It is used to express anger, disgust, or hatred of the target, therefore often serves as a
justification for violence and precursor to more discrimination.
Further reading: a summary and analysis.

Vagrant
A person who has no fixed abode or method of self-sustenance; may rely on charity or crime to
earn a living.
Distinguish with bum, trap, or vagabond, which refer to sluggish or criminal behavior.

Alien
Definition: A person without citizenship status within the country in which they are living.
On a broader sense, this may refer to a person/thing that belongs to a foreign entity or
country.

32
Untouchable
Definition: Refers to the lowest caste in the traditional Indian social hierarchy; alternatively
known as Dalit. The status is hereditary.
They are often involved in ritually polluting activities, such as taking lives (fishermen, butchers,
executioners), being in contact with human/animal waste or corpse, or eating pork/chicken.
For those higher in the caste system, physical contact with untouchables is considered
offensive, hence the name. Legal provision and opportunities have been made to prevent
untouchability.
Further reading: the caste system in India.

Homo sacer
Definition: A figure of Roman law (also called the accursed/sacred man), who can be killed
without legal consequence, but may not be sacrificed.
- As a person ‘beyond human and divine law’, a homo sacer may have violated an oath,
among other reasons.

Lumpenproletariat
In Marxist ideology, this term refers to the most inferior group within the working class, who
are indifferent to revolution or even susceptible to being manipulated by counter-
revolutionary forces. This term was used extensively by the Social Democratic Party of
Germany.
Further reading: Marxism and the proletariat.

Baekjeong
The usage of this term originated from the Buddhist Goryeo period in Korea, referring to a
group of people without any obligations to the state, and therefore no claim to citizenship.
These people belong in the cheonmin (vulgar commoner) class, and suffered grave
discrimination. Those in this class may engage in numerous occupations, the most relevant to
its current use being butchery (regarded as religiously unclean).
Further reading: Allen Lee’s take.

33
Burakumin
Meaning ‘hamlet people,’ it refers to the outcasts of the traditional Japanese society who dwell
in ghetto-like communities. It is also related to eta (literally ‘pollution abundant’) - a derogatory
term. It is used for people with impure or death-related occupations (executioner, butcher, and
undertakers, among others) The Emancipation Act of 1871, during the Meiji period, formally
abolished the class.

Cagot
Definition: a persecuted minority of outcasts on the Pyrenees, Béarn, Brittany, and Gascony
provinces, as well as Northern Spain. A phenomenon rooted in religion, cagots are ostracized
by outside society, which cite reasons (which are often baseless or used as an excuse) such as:
unorthodox views, inherent evilness, mental instability, or even cannibalism. They are heavily
discriminated: they live in separate cagoteries with limited career choices, separated in
religious practice. It is a hereditary status, hence there is no intergenerational mobility.

Ragyabpa
Definition: the untouchable social class in Tibet society, performing ritually unclean work.
Divided into several layers, some being less berated than others - nevertheless all considered
to be ‘polluting and polluted.’ This status is inescapable and hereditary.

Bui doi / Bụi đời

Literally meaning ‘the dust of life’ in Vietnamese, it can refer to either (1) the hardships of life,
(2) the vagrant children on the streets, or (3) Amerasian children in Vietnam after the Vietnam
War. They are victims of social stigmatization and ostracization by society, the government,
and sometimes by their own family members.
Many settled in the U.S. with the passing of the 1988 Amerasian Homecoming Act, granting
immigrant status to these people and their kin.

Tanka
Also known as boat people, they are a group of marine settlers in the marine territory of
Southern China, Hong Kong and Macau, living on junks. Referred to as outcasts, and dwindling
in population; only a small proportion still lives onshore. They are gradually experiencing
assimilation due to loss of language.

34
Osu
This involves a caste system in Igboland (Nigeria) that encourages discrimination of the osu
(outcast in Igbo). Individuals labeled osu, historically, committed great crimes or disobeyed the
king, and was banished or sacrificed to deities to prevent the wrath of the earth Deity. Being
regarded as inferior, even until today, osu in Igboland face heavy discrimination and
stigmatization, especially in marriage.

Akhdam
Meaning ‘servants’ in Arabic, it refers to the untouchables in the Yemeni caste system. They
often carry out ‘impure’ work, such as being servants, magicians, or music-performing,
according to this article, and they are characterized by extreme social stigmatization and poor
living conditions.

Bitlaha
This is a concept used by Santals of India and Satars of Nepal (called ‘hod’), used to punish those
that transgress rules about marrying those inside/outside their sect. Bitlaha means outcast, the
status given to violators, who either live exiled from the community and the hod, or be
reinstated with the help of the pancha (a male politician in the society) and the payment of a
hefty fine. It is also used to punish sexual misconduct.

35
Additional Cases & Guiding Questions
Discuss the following questions with your team!

Merging with the Masses

Consider the so-called Asch Conformity Experiments and the conclusions drawn from them
about how and why people might conform to the opinions of those around them. Are there
ways in which you might critique the original experiment or the resulting paradigm? Discuss
with your team: when, if ever, is it good to conform?

Look into the work of Project Implicit. Should its findings be applied in everyday life, and, if so,
how? How might someone critique their work? If you have time, try taking one of the tests on
this page, and, if you feel comfortable sharing the results, discuss the experience with your
team afterward.

Fashion (voluntary and involuntary) is strongly linked to group formation and membership.
Does the rise of the often unisex “normcore” movement in recent years point toward a more
inclusive fashion industry, or is it just another way for the “ingroup” to spend money to
differentiate itself? Discuss with your team: does fashion perpetuate perceived differences
between genders, races, and cultures?

Have you ever known someone who didn’t want to dance—whom someone else tried to force
onto the dance floor? Consider this article by the scientist Henry Reich, then discuss with your
team: when is it right to encourage someone to do something they don’t want to do? Would
you ever pressure someone to go to a party? Should we always let people opt out of social
activities, or are there times when it is appropriate to intervene “for their own good”? You may
also want to look at expectations around cosmetics, marriage, and vacation days.

Beyond the Norm

Consider schools dedicated to the education of highly gifted children—such as the Mirman
School in California, which admits only children with IQs of at least 145, and its many highly
selective counterparts around the world, from Kazakhstan to Israel. Then, discuss with your
team: should high-achieving learners be separated, in whole or part, from other students? Is
there a difference between exclusion and exclusivity, and is one more acceptable than the

36
other? Are people too quick to judge programs of this kind - and, if so, what might be
motivating their judgments?

Consider the phenomenon of self-segregation on school campuses. Do you see it at your own
school? Is it something administrators should take measures against, and, if so, what kinds of
measures? Does it matter what the reason for the self-segregation is—for instance, among
gender, ethnicity, religion, age, or other values?

For every superstar in the NBA, a player is warming the bench. Do such players deserve more
credit than they receive—and is it ever right for them to ask for more recognition or for more
playing time? Are there similar hierarchies in other sports, or in the professional world, and are
they ever unfair? Discuss with your team: should special talents lead to special treatment?

Explore social programs in countries with very low rates of homelessness and destitution, such
as Finland, Denmark, and Japan. What is particularly effective about their approaches? How
would you advise countries—or cities, such as San Francisco—that are experiencing very high
rates of homelessness?

Toward a More Integrated World?

Some researchers have concluded that companies (and even countries) are more likely to
select women for positions of leadership when they are already in decline—making it more
likely that these women will fall off what they term the “glass cliff” of failure. Discuss with your
team: to avoid such a phenomenon, should companies and countries be required to alternate
regularly between male and female leaders?
Is Canada really inclusive, or does it just have excellent branding? Discuss with your team:
what is the best way to measure the inclusiveness of a country or society? What countries
would you consider to be the most inclusive, and what do you think has made them that way?

In a world in which many countries (including the United States) are highly religious, atheists—
nonbelievers—arguably encounter challenges fitting in with mainstream culture. Consider this
article about the rise of an atheist rights movement, then follow up on its claims. Is such a
movement justified?

Ancient Greeks mocked people with physical differences; today, we have disability rights
movements and disability studies. How have people with disabilities such as deafness,

37
blindness, and lack of mobility advocated for inclusion in mainstream society? Discuss with
your team: do you support those who may wish to resist that inclusion?

Are women held to different standards than men in the pursuit of elected office? Discuss with
your team: can elections ever be counted on to produce fair results, if people have underlying
prejudices toward one or more groups?

In India, a woman just scaled a mountain that until now had been reserved for men only.
Discuss with your team: is it ever right to restrict access to a place to members of one gender?
How about to one age group, or to one religion or culture? If your answers are different for
different categories, what makes one restriction okay and another not?

Do computer algorithms - such as those that power Google search - perpetuate harmful or
undesirable views of the world? Consider the work of Safiya Noble and other researchers with
similar concerns. Then, discuss with your team: should private companies regulate or censor
search results and the results of other algorithms to achieve goals such as racial and gender
equality? Should governments?

Sometimes, people are excluded from society for (ostensibly) the common good; for example,
criminals are placed in prisons. In some of Norway’s prisons, however, the criminal justice
system aims to keep prisoners as part of society. Discuss with your team: to what degree
should we prioritize reintegrating prisoners with the rest of the world?
Marginalized communities are often those with the least access to the Internet - and, in at least
one case, their access is intentionally limited by those with power over them. Discuss with your
team: should prisoners have the right to free and unfettered Internet access? Would no access
at all be more fair than the scheme described here?

Consider this introduction to "defensive" designs, many of them meant to prevent loitering by
homeless or otherwise challenged populations. Then, discuss with your team: are critics
justified in describing these as examples of "hostile" architecture? When, if ever, might such
designs be warranted? Or should all public places and spaces be made equally comfortable for
all who might need them?

38