Gordon Allport published his scale of Discrimination and Prejudice in 1954. Since that time, variations of this scale have been used to illustrate how sexism becomes sexual assault, how prejudice evolves into hate crimes, and several other harmful progressions. Allport's scale remains one of the foundations for the study of prejudice and discrimination and serves as a simple means to understand how behavior one person may rationalize as "Just a joke" can lead to grievous circumstances.
The scale begins at the bottom, where the behavior is most often discounted as not being very serious. Disparaging terms are those words or phrases that express negative meaning toward a person or group. These can be based on race, gender, national origin, color, religion, sexual orientation, or virtually anything else that separates "us" from "them". To be accurate, disparaging terms are not limited to only words. Non-verbal gestures, printed material, signs, symbols, insignia, or even tattoos can qualify as a disparaging term by some definitions.
The next progression is avoidance, which is exactly what it sounds like. See, when the disparaging terms from the first level becomes normalized, that is, no one challenges this behavior, or worse, encourages it, they help foster an environment that serves to reinforce the negative biases of some people. This reinforcement provides those with negative biases the motivation to avoid those who are different.
Once there is a greater degree of separation between "us" and "them" through avoidance, negative biases are easier to foster and any resistance the person may have toward discriminating also becomes easier to overcome. By this time, because the "in" group has isolated itself from opposing viewpoints (also known as groupthink), it becomes more likely for negative biases to evolve into prejudice. There are two things that a person or group must possess in order to effectively discriminate against another person or group: prejudice, which provides the motivation to discriminate in the first place, and power, which provides the means to do so effectively. If a person or group is lacking either of these elements, it becomes much less likely that he, she, or they will be able to discriminate with much effectiveness.
Once a person or group has crossed the line from the more internal aspects of bias and avoidance to the more outward expression of discrimination, there are some who then progress to the next level of prejudice: a physical attack. I should mention at this point that, like disparaging terms, physical attacks aren't limited to only what the term explicitly implies. A physical attack can be physical violence between two or more people, but it can also include crimes against property such as vandalism or even graffiti.
In the evolution of these prejudicial behaviors, it is almost inevitable at this point that a physical attack would end with the demise of the victim. The final stage of Allport's scale is extermination. This is obviously the most grievous stage and unfortunately is also perhaps the simplest to explain. See, by the time a group of folks create a biased environment through the use of disparaging terms, some isolate themselves through avoidance. Of those who isolated themselves, some begin to discriminate against the "out" group. Of those who engage in discrimination, some will take it a step further and perpetrate a physically attack. Finally, of the physical attacks perpetrated, some will end the life of the victim.
I say all of that to say this...
Think of how many times you've been around someone who has made a sexist joke or used a racial slur in the context of "just joking". What was the reaction of those around? What was your reaction? Did you laugh and reinforce that bias? Did you say nothing and allow the behavior to continue unchecked? Or did you challenge the person and tell them that you don't share their biased view?
Don't think this is easy. When I, as a white male, am around a group of other people like myself (read: other white males) and biases are exposed through comments or humor, I am faced with a decision. I can smile, be polite, and say nothing or I can agree and laugh along with the others. Either way, I'm fairly certain of remaining part of the "in" group and avoiding any social discomfort. Peer pressure is very real and definitely not a phenomenon exclusive to teenagers.
If I choose to challenge these biases though, I am exposing myself to the group as definitely not being "one of them". There will more than likely be some level of discomfort and perhaps conflict because not many people truly enjoy having their attitudes and beliefs challenged, especially not in front of their peers. So, one may ask, why would anyone make this choice? That answer is easy, at least for me. I care. I care about the people who are the targets of these negative biases. I care about the people who hold these biases within them and are unaware of the ways in which they express them and the hurtful impact those expressions have on others. I even care about those who are keenly aware of their biases and are making conscious decisions to reinforce them.
There is one more reason why I choose to challenge negative biases. It is because I know that I am not alone. I am not the only person who cares. I'm not the only person who believes that people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect regardless of whether they are a man, woman, Black, White, Latino, Asian, Christian, Muslim, Wiccan, Sikh, Athiest, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or whatever other category for people which we may invent.
These are the reasons I resist the status quo. Regardless of what kind of wrapper they put on it, or how persuasive their advertisements are...I'm not buying it.
