Category Archives: Discrimination

Status Characteristics, Implicit Bias, and the Production of Racial Inequality

Source: David Melamed, Christopher W. Munn, Leanne Barry, Bradley Montgomery, Oneya F. Okuwobi, American Sociological Review, OnlineFirst Published November 7, 2019
(subscription required)

From the abstract:
Racial stratification is well documented in many spheres of social life. Much stratification research assumes that implicit or explicit bias on the part of institutional gatekeepers produces disparate racial outcomes. Research on status-based expectations provides a good starting point for theoretically understanding racial inequalities. In this context it is understood that race results in differential expectations for performance, producing disparate outcomes. But even here, the mechanism (i.e., status-based expectations) is often assumed due to the lack of tools to measure status-based expectations. In this article, we put forth a new way to measure implicit racial status beliefs and theorize how they are related to consensual beliefs about what “most people” think. This enables us to assess the mechanisms in the relationship between race and disparate outcomes. We conducted two studies to assess our arguments. Study 1 demonstrates the measurement properties of the implicit status measure. Study 2 shows how implicit status beliefs and perceptions of what “most people” think combine to shape social influence. We conclude with the implications of this work for social psychological research, and for racial stratification more generally.

Running While Female: Using AI to Track how Twitter Commentary Disadvantages Women in the 2020 U.S. Primaries

Source: Sarah Oates, Olya Gurevich, Christopher Walker, Lucina Di Meco, Philip Merrill College of Journalism – University of Maryland, The Wilson Center, and Marvelous AI, August 28, 2019

From the abstract:
While there is conclusive research that female political candidates are treated unfairly by traditional media outlets, the volume and pace of information flow online make it difficult to track the differentiated treatment for female candidates on social media in real time. This paper leverages human coding and natural language processing to cluster tweets into narratives concerned with policy, ideology, character, identity, and electability, focusing on the Democratic candidates in the 2020 U.S. Presidential primary election. We find that female candidates are frequently marginalized and attacked on character and identity issues that are not raised for their male counterparts, echoing the problems found in the traditional media in the framing of female candidates. Our research found a Catch-22 for female candidates, in that they either failed to garner serious attention at all or, if they became a subject of Twitter commentary, were attacked on issues of character and identity that were not raised for their male counterparts. At the same time, women running for president received significantly more negative tweets from right-leaning and non-credible sources than did male candidates. Following the first Democratic debates, the individual differences between male and female candidates became even more pronounced, although at least one female candidate (Elizabeth Warren) seemed to rise above the character attacks by the end of the first debates. We propose that by using artificial intelligence informed by traditional political communication theory, we can much more readily identify and challenge both sexist comments and coverage at scale. We use the concept of narratives by searching for political communication narratives about female candidates that are visible, enduring, resonant, and relevant to particular campaign messages. A real-time measurement system, developed by MarvelousAI, creates a way to allow candidates to identify and push back against sexist framing on social media and take control of their own narratives much more readily.

Tax Justice Is Gender Justice

Source: National Women’s Law Center, November 2019

From the abstract:
The tax code sets the rules that shape our economy, reflecting and perpetuating notions of who and what our society values. It’s an opportunity to fight inequality. But today’s tax code contains outdated and often biased assumptions about family structures, marriage, participation in the paid workforce, and more that work together to perpetuate structural barriers against women, families with low incomes, and people of color. The tax code can be a barrier for realizing gender justice – but it can also be a tool. It’s time we take advantage.

Related:
Executive Summary

Reports include:
The Faulty Foundations of the Tax Code
Source: Ariel Jurow Kleiman (University of San Diego School of Law), Amy K. Matsui, and Estelle Mitchell, National Women’s Law Center, November 2019

This paper examines the outdated assumptions and gender and racial biases embedded in the U.S. tax code. It highlights tax code provisions that reflect and exacerbate gender disparities, with particular attention to those that disadvantage women with low incomes, women of color, members of the LGBTQ community, people with disabilities, and immigrants.

Reckoning With the Hidden Rules of Gender in the Tax Code
Source: Katy Milani, Melissa Boteach,Steph Sterling, Sarah Hassmer, Roosevelt Institute & National Women’s Law Center, November 2019

Low taxes for the wealthy and corporations have played a role in enabling – and in some cases encouraging – those with the highest incomes and the most capital to accumulate outsized wealth and power in our economy. Centuries of discrimination and subjugation of women and people of color interact today with widening income inequality, such that white, non-Hispanic men are disproportionately represented among the wealthiest households, while labor and economic contributions from women of color are consistently undervalued. An agenda to advance racial and gender justice must reckon with provisions in our tax code perpetuate and enable these inequities.

A Tax Code for the Rest of Us: A Framework & Recommendations for Advancing Gender & Racial Equity Through Tax Credits
Source: Melissa Boteach, Amy K. Matsui, Indivar Dutta-Gupta, Kali Grant, Funke Aderonmu, Rachel Black, Georgetown Institute on Poverty and Inequality & National Women’s Law Center, November 2019

While the U.S. income tax system is progressive overall, many aspects of the tax code reward wealth-building by the already wealthy and exclude low- and moderate-income families. Given the historical discrimination and ongoing structural barriers that have locked women and people of color out of economic opportunity, such tax provisions not only exacerbate economic inequality, but also amplify gender and racial disparities. This report considers the question: how can our tax code build on the success of the EITC and CTC to better dismantle structural barriers that impede economic security and wealth-building for women and people of color? It ultimately proposes a framework to help policymakers, advocates, and the public evaluate when and how refundable tax credits can advance equity, economic mobility, and opportunity for all.

They Still Just Don’t Get It: The Lessons of the #MeToo Movement Through the Lens of Supreme Court Nominations

Source: MaryAnn Grover, Richmond Public Interest Law Review, Date Written: April 23, 2019

From the abstract:
Many have hailed the #MeToo Movement as a turning point in the way this country discusses sexual assault and sexual harassment, but when looking at the #MeToo Movement through the lens of Supreme Court nominations, it is unclear whether the impact of the Movement will be as far reaching as some imagine. The hearing of Anita Hill, which came before the #MeToo Movement, and the hearing of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, which came after the #MeToo Movement, perhaps demonstrate that the #MeToo Movement has reached its limit culturally and now institutional change must be the focus in order for the goals of the #MeToo Movement to be fully realized. Looking to the hearing of Professor Hill to analyze what we should have learned, the #MeToo Movement to assess what we thought we learned, and the hearing of Dr. Ford to recognize what we still have to learn about survivors of sexual assault, this Article begins to develop creative solutions to ensure that our institutions change as our society changes, with the ultimate goal of creating a society where no one else has to say #MeToo.

How pronoun policies can help HR referee when gender and religion clash

Source: Ryan Golden, HR Dive, October 18, 2019

In general, employers have a lot of leeway over workplace policies, but they should be careful with phrasing, attorneys told HR Dive. ….

….This particular case concerns public-sector employment and state law claims but it may not be too much of a stretch to imagine how a similar situation could arise in the typical U.S. workplace.

Consider the landscape: nearly one-fifth of U.S. adults in a 2019 Pew Research Center survey said they personally know someone who uses pronouns such as “they” over pronouns such as “he” or “she.” A recent report by the Chicago Tribune on inclusive language policies at IBM indicated employers are beginning to encounter issues around pronouns more frequently. And at this year’s annual Society for Human Resource Management conference, pronouns were included as part of an early session on LGBTQ awareness and best practices for the workplace.

So could an employer, hypothetically, discipline an employee who does not adhere to a rule that employees must properly address co-workers, pronouns included? Does it matter if the employee cites a sincerely held religious belief?….

The Unequal Race for Good Jobs: How Whites Made Outsized Gains in Education and Good Jobs Compared to Blacks and Latinos

Source: Anthony P. Carnevale, Jeff Strohl, Artem Gulish, Martin Van Der Werf, Kathryn Peltier Campbell, Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, 2019

From the summary:
Inequities in access to good jobs by race and ethnicity have grown in past decades. The Unequal Race for Good Jobs: How Whites Made Outsized Gains in Education and Good Jobs Compared to Blacks and Latinos explores how White workers have relied on their educational and economic privileges to build disproportionate advantages in the educational pipeline and the workforce. Black and Latino workers, on the other hand, have strived to overcome discrimination, racism, and other injustices that continue to perpetuate earnings inequality. Policy changes can help narrow these equity gaps; otherwise, they will continue for generations to come.

Related:
Executive Summary
Press Release
PowerPoint

Writing in Race: Evidence against Employers’ Assumptions about Race and Soft Skills

Source: Jessi Streib, Jane Rochmes, Felicia Arriaga, Carlos Tavares, Emi Weed, Social Problems, Advance Access, October 9, 2019
(subscription required)

From the abstract:
Hiring managers and segments of the American public believe that white, black, and Hispanic job-seekers present distinct soft skills to employers. Sociologists have not tested this belief and provide competing theories about whether it is likely to be true. Structural theories maintain that different resources and networks inhibit racial groups from displaying similar non-technical skills and experiences, while cultural approaches posit that all groups can access and display a variety of soft skills. Based on a content analysis of 1,124 applications that white, black, and Hispanic job-seekers used to apply for the same job, we find little evidence supporting the belief in racial distinctions in soft skills. Instead, white, black, and Hispanic applicants in our sample presented the same top reasons for applying, the same top personal characteristics, the same top college activities, and were equally likely to follow professional norms. We discuss the generalizability of our findings and their implications for theories of access to these skills.

How the Best Bosses Interrupt Bias on Their Teams

Source: Joan C. Williams, Sky Mihaylo, Harvard Business Review, November–December 2019
(subscription required)

Companies spend millions on antibias training each year. The goal is to create workforces that are more inclusive, and thereby more innovative and more effective. Studies show that well-managed diverse groups outperform homogeneous ones and are more committed, have higher collective intelligence, and are better at making decisions and solving problems. But research also shows that bias prevention programs rarely deliver. And some companies don’t invest in them at all. So how can you, as an individual leader, make sure your team is including and making the most of diverse voices? Can one person fix what an entire organization can’t?

Although bias itself is devilishly hard to eliminate, it is not as difficult to interrupt. In the decades we’ve spent researching and advising people on how to build and manage diverse work groups, we’ve identified ways that managers can counter bias without spending a lot of time—or political capital.

The first step is to understand the four distinct ways bias plays out in everyday work interactions: (1) Prove it again: Some groups have to prove themselves more than others do. (2) Tightrope: A narrower range of behaviors is accepted from some groups than from others. (3) Maternal wall: Women with children see their commitment and competence questioned or face disapproval for being too career focused. (4) Tug-of-war: Disadvantaged groups find themselves pitted against one another because of differing strategies for assimilating—or refusing to do so.

The second step is to recognize when and where these forms of bias arise day-to-day. In the absence of an organizational directive, it’s easy to let them go unaddressed. That’s a mistake. You can’t be a great manager without becoming a bias interrupter. Here’s how to do it.

Intersectional Representation on State Supreme Courts

Source: Greg Goelzhauser, Judicial Politics Reader – Forthcoming, Last revised: August 25, 2019

From the abstract:
Women of color face unique hurdles gaining equal access to the legal profession. This chapter considers the representation of women of color on state supreme courts, emphasizing the importance of judicial selection institutions. It makes two empirical contributions. First, it highlights women of color serving on state supreme courts through 2016 — individuals who have received comparatively little recognition for their achievements. Second, using original data on state supreme court seatings from 1960 through 2016, I examine whether selection institutions are associated with intersectional differences in seating new justices. The results indicate that women of color are more likely to be seated under appointment systems. Compared to other gender-race combinations, the results are similar for men of color, while white men are more likely to be seated through elections. Selection system choice is not associated with differences in seating white women. The results have important implications for our understanding of intersectional political representation and the judicial selection debate.

3 ways to combat gender bias in the workplace

Source: Sara Brown, MIT Sloan School of Management, October 11, 2019

Many stand to benefit when companies embrace diversity and inclusion. Women, people from different perspectives, and people of color challenge cognitive biases, prompting higher quality ideas and innovation, according to MIT Sloan senior lecturer and research scientist Renée Richardson Gosline. Women also score higher than men on 17 of the 19 most important leadership skills, according to a recent study.

While some companies focus on creating inclusive practices, women continue to battle bias as they navigate their careers. Doing so while becoming a strong leader isn’t easy, according to three business execs who shared their experiences at the recent MIT Sloan Global Women’s Symposium. What have they learned along the way? Learn to say no, get comfortable talking about uncomfortable topics, and help others coming up behind you.