Talk:Class discrimination/Archive 1

revisions and deletions
I do not understand the revisions and deletions that were made in this article.

Firstly, because they are poorly phrased. The opening sentence is now an ungrammatical jumble and several items are unclear. Secondly, because it deletes substantial amounts of important information--such as the distinction between individual and structural classism, which is necessary material to incorporate in any contemporary discussion of issues of prejudice or oppression. Thirdly because it inserts quite a bit of a material that applies to no use of the word "classism" with which I have ever been familiar. "Classism" is almost universally used by anarchists and communists as a term of criticism, parallel to "racism" or "sexism." As far as I can tell the only use of the notion of anarchism as "open classism" comes from the Openly Classist project in the UK. Fine; if you want to link to them as an alternate perspective on the meaning of the word you can feel free to link to them as an alternative usage but to imply that their peculiar usage of the term is broadly accepted within the anarchist community or by the Left is simply false.

I have, therefore, reverted the edits to the previous version. I'd try to work up some material mentioning the Openly Classist folks but it's late at night and frankly I'm not sure there's much of a point to it in a general discussion of the notion of classism. In the future if you want to re-incorporate some of this material please do so in a way that (1) does not destroy useful material previously composed and (2) does not make inaccurate blanket assertions about how the word "classism" is used. Radgeek 05:04, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I would argue that it's not only a 'top down' phenomenon. Plenty of people of lower economic classes hold prejudices (sometimes well-founded, sometimes not) against people of higher socioeconomic classes.  This doen't seem to be a really active page, so I might just check back in a couple of days and change it if no one objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.156.36 (talk) 22:03, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

classism and racism
i looked over the article and it's presented as if classism and racism are distinct entities. this isn't always true. sometimes there isn't a clear dividing line between the "two" concepts. the more i research and the more i learn, the more i come to this conclusion. yes, racism can be defined in completely different ways in different contexts, and it isn't always something economic. sometimes it IS. due to technical difficulties, my signature may appear as my ISP number rather than as my user name. Gringo300 20:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, I also came to the conclusion that Classism is a broader term for most forms of prejudice. If somone is prejudice towards another, then they belive them to be a lower class then them (or Higher). Which puts it in the catagory of classism. But their are also incidencies (I am a Bad speller, always have been) That it isn't. Classism is a very absract term, it isn't even in the spell-check for MicrosoftWord, see this for yourself! (Masterxak 23:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC))

Internal Classism
The perspective that takes -isms (classism, racism, or any other) only from the top-down makes sense in that, compared with the bottom of a stratified group, the top needs much less institutional support. I agree that individual -isms happen in both directions, but it's appropriate for institutional definitions to address constituents at the greatest disadvantage in order to attempt balance between groups.

Even so, the distinctions between institutional and personal or public -isms is rarely identified adequately; it's unlikely that personal -isms will disappear without greater understanding from both top and bottom. If a non-White person reacts negatively to a White person because of race, the stereotypes available to that White person are much more easily evoked because of a need to explain the perceived injustice. Inasmuch as personal -isms affect the pace of movement away from institutional -isms, it is essential to recognize personal -isms mutual to both top and bottom.

So, I'd propose an edit to the entry on Classism, in particular to the issue of Internalized Classism. This section points only to blue-collar workers as prey to internalized classism, but, in my mind, even to the most resolved anti-classist, limiting this definition to the "bottom" also limits the culpability of all individuals to recognize and respond to potential vices learned from class experience. Just as the blue-collar worker is unfairly forced to accept and recycle negative stereotypes, so is the white-collar worker. For instance, a person raised in a white-collar family might frequently hear publicly accepted negative stereotypes of the "top," such as those brought about by fraudulent business people and by elitist social circles. To stay in the upper class, this person would internalize and recycle those stereotypes; flouting them would mean a loss of "class status" given that the negative stereotype was learned as a natural and acceptable vice. The concept of internalized classism seems too powerful a vehicle for inspiring self-awareness of class experiences to limit it for purposes of achieving institutional equality.--Tavette (talk) 22:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Opinionated
This article needs serious revisions. The writer(s) have inserted their opinions without supporting it with facts, and it tends to show a bias towards lower classes. Both of these things can be observed in the following from the article. For example, the middle and upper classes in the US look down on those at the bottom due to negative stereotyping of poor people (i.e. the poor are lazy, stupid, lack work ethic, lack "soft skills", likely to steal, etc). Those with significant unemployment gaps, who live in the "wrong neighborhoods", and those who have bad credit are routinely denied employment due to poverty profiling in the hiring process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.97.14 (talk) 23:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Very U.S. centered
This article is entirely about the United States, except for a brief mention of England--and that as a contrast to the United States. (In addition, arguing that classism is *worse* in the US because it is harder to discern what class someone is seems...counterintuitive.)

Also: Howard Zinn is about as biased as sources get. He should probably not be cited as the only extrenal site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.237.222 (talk) 12:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Wholesale deletion of material
Any reason for nuking all this material in this edit here? - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Classism&oldid=286625611 How about a decent re-write with sources, I'm inclined to discuss this a bit further with any other editors, before pulling out the hatchet so aggressively. Accordingly, I've reverted this edit. Critical Chris  02:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * In April of 2007 this article as posted was lacking references. Two years seems long enough to look for any refences. I think Jimmi Hugh's edits are appropriate.  If you can find reliable sources and references please add back appropriate information.   Capitalismojo (talk) 16:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Heightism (Sociology) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 15:30, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Height discrimination which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 10:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Name not suited
I'm here to introduce a new problem with the name of this article. Discrimination is prejudicial treatment. This article is not only about discrimination which applies to actions but prejudice which is based on thoughts.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 04:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. -- schwarze feder (talk) 01:41, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Horrible Article? No longer so horrible
Does anyone else agree this article is terrible? It reads like it written by a sociology 101 student and is full of cliche "Some people argue"/"Many say" weasel words [editor's note: the words "weasel" and "words," when used in conjunction, are themselves weasel words]. The 'classism and racism' section is just stupid (does anyone actually think that 'classism' is anything at all like racism?), and the "Individual versus structural" part is blatently original research. Theres almost nothing in this article worth keeping. GordonRoss 17:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Be bold and edit. I, for one, believe classism is a root cause of many social problems but the many books wriiten about the subject can explain better than I. Benjiboi 05:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I completely agree. In fact, I came into the talk section to express my belief that this article is garbage even by wikipedia standards. I'm glad someone else thought so too.

Actually I'd argue that with racism and classicism have been essentially one and the same in certain situations, I'm thinking of the Apartheid regime and the Caste system in India.


 * As of 2011 the article seems to be in better shape than it used to be in 2007. In addition, I've just quintupled the number of references from 1 to 5 by adding four additional references from books, journals, webpages of established associations, etc, see newly added section on personal versus institutional classism. The section "[edit] Accusations of classism" does however I agree, still need to be cleaned up.Harel (talk) 21:06, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Two main sections
I've just added "Institutional versus personal classism" and in so doing, have quintupled the entire article's number of references from 1 to 5 by adding (usually detailed) citations from books, journal articles, web pages of well established organizations, etc. Over time this can be further expanded and improved upon.

The other section, still needs considerable work; I've just added several "citation needed" and one "by whom?" and the language made more encyclopedic. That section, "Accusations of classism" might be worth re-naming. How about "Applicability of the term" or something similar? I'll leave this mostly for others to ponder to further improve the article (please contact me by email if I'm needed as it might be a while before I revisit this talk page).

The article is slowly but surely improving and much better than its apparent state in 2007, thank to all the hard work of everyone from all background in helping make this so. Harel (talk) 21:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed new section on history of classism/class discrimination
Dear editorial colleagues, I would like to propose new or expanded historical sections to the following Wikipedia pages: Sexism, Racism, Ageism and Classism (Class discrimination), with specific focuses on when was the first recorded case of each and how have these concepts changed over time to contemporary times in different cultures. I am more than happy to work on a first draft (with original sources of course) for your consideration, a have some degree of knowledge in these areas. However, I am unwilling to put the time and effort into such an endeavor if any of my esteemed editorial colleagues here do not consider this to be necessary and/or welcome. 20:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC) Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.164.195 (talk)
 * Go for it. Dkreisst (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

"C" rating
The rater hit it on the nose with "C." This is not implemented well. Not sure why it is so "important." Student7 (talk) 21:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Reverse classism delete
I agree that part on reverse classism was sloppy and I almost deleted it myself, but I think it should be noted somewhere in this article that classism needn't always be a 'top-down' phenomenon. A black man can have racist attitudes (justified or not) toward white people he's never met- even if that black man truly is systematically discriminated against by white people in general. I think the same is true with classism. There are many people of lower social classes who pre-judge someone they have never met based on their real or perceived wealth/upper class membership/clothing/whatever. And aren't classism and racism (at least on the personal, non-institutionalized level) simply prejudices? i.e. pre-judging someone? Let me know what you think because I'm thinking of adding a line or two or possibly a paragraph.--Hraefen 01:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I definitely agree - classism can act both ways; just look at the recent Big Brother controversy. I think class conflict has played a significant role in it, with the three bullies reacting to the fact that Shilpa comes from a very well off background and even has servants. And yes, embarassingly enough, that does mean I've been watching Celebrity Big Brother :/ Saluton 00:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've just had a go changing the initial paragraph to include this. Saluton 00:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I've made some changes to the prose (although not added anything extra) to make it read neutrally. Class prejudice is by no means a one-way street -- indeed the deleted part "reverse classism" was bizarrely titled. Classism is classism, and there's no inherent direction involved.


 * When I was a kid there was intense rivalry between local schools, some kids were bullied for being "posh" or "snobs" because of the school they went to. This attitude exists in adult society ('rich as muck', 'fat cat', etc), and equally the rich criticize the aspiring classes for their "new money", whilst the poor also criticize them. It goes across every conceivable boundry in every direction.


 * I'm also surprised no-one has mentioned Marx yet - theory of society itself as being based on class conflict. 81.96.164.105 10:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I think structural classism is only against lower classes but individual classism is not that one-way. But structural and individual classism is in the real life not separated. -- schwarze feder 16:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

The word classism means that its structural - terfore it can only be top-down. Individual discrimination of people because they are seen as memebers of a "higher class" is individual or group based discrimination and not a structural element of society and therefore no "reverse classism"  Klx 25 (talk) 13:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Classism NOT Class discrimination
This article has the wrong term. It's an article about classism and not about class discrimination. An article about rassism isn't the same as an article about race discrimination. An article about sexism isn't the same as an article about sex discrimination. This is an article about classism. -- schwarze feder (talk) 07:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The title of the article should be changed. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Media representation
Class discrimination can be seen in many different forms of media such as television shows, films and social media. Class discrimination in the media displays the knowledge of what people feel and think about classicism. When seeing class discrimination in films and television shows, people are influenced and believe that is how things are in real life, for whatever class is being displayed. Media is a big influence on the world today, with that something such as classism is can be seen in many different lights. Usually the low income people are displayed in the media as dirty, lack of education and manners, homeless. Elites are usually displayed as snobby, rude, high education and rich. From both sides of that being displayed in the media, people are able to take what they see, whether that be true or not and believe what they want to believe. People can use the media to learn more about different social classes or use the media, such as social media to influence others on what they believe. In some cases, people who are in a social class that is portrayed in a bad way by the media can be effected in school and social life. "Teenagers who grew up in poverty reported higher levels of discrimination, and the poorer the teens were, the more they experienced discrimination." Class discrimination in the media is a current thing that has been happening from the beginning times of media and is still happening today. Class discrimination even be found in films made for kids, which exposes class discrimination at a young influential age. In Disney's 1992 film Aladdin it portrays a young homeless boy, named Aladdin, as a thief. He goes on a whole adventure in the beginning of the film, just to steal a piece of bread to eat. It also shows views how Aladdin as a homeless boy would not get noticed by the beautiful elite Princess Jasmine. Aladdin had wish to become a Prince so he could be noticed by her. Classism is being portrayed in all forms of media and it has been happening for a long time, without people even noticing. AliaHolness (talk) 01:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

--Afuakessie (talk) 04:16, 5 December 2016 (UTC)It's a good contribution but I think you should a sentence or two about how class discrimination makes people feel both the people it favors and those it restricts.--Afuakessie (talk) 04:16, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Class discrimination. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120309015508/http://www.magazine.org/diversity/managing/defining/8478.aspx to http://www.magazine.org/diversity/managing/defining/8478.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:01, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

recommended reading
Paul Fussell, Class: a painfully accurate guide through the American status system (1983). Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

As part of my class I was assigned to critique this article and here are my findings

-	Yes, each fact is referenced with an appropriate reference. I know this because after each fact there is a number that you can click on and it brings you to the person who wrote it and it gives you their credibility. Yes, the links for the citations work. There is also no plagiarism there is only quotes from the other articles.

-	Yes, the information is all from neutral cites.

-	Yes, all of the information in the article is relevant to the topic. No there is nothing that distracted me.

-	Yes, this article is neutral and there are no biased claims. The perspectives that are missing are the perspectives of lower class people.

-	One underrepresented view is the view of lower class people. The only information that may be out of date is the march 2012 information from the Wayback machine. Chrisob99 (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC) Chris O'Brien

Suggestions
I am a student assigned to try to help revise this article. Here are my comments on this article so far:The article that I have chosen, class discrimination/classism, is in need of some editing and fact-checking, specifically in the “media representation” section. Here are the first three sentences to this section: “Class discrimination can be seen in many different forms of media such as television shows, films and social media. Class discrimination in the media displays the knowledge of what people feel and think about classicism. When seeing class discrimination in films and television shows, people are influenced and believe that is how things are in real life, for whatever class is being displayed.” To me, these all seem a bit like opinions, and there are no citations used in the section until a few sentences later. They also use the incorrect term “classicism” in the second sentence, which refers to classical music rather than class discrimination. Later, a sentence used is: “Media is a big influence on the world today, with that something such as classism is can be seen in many different lights.” This just doesn’t make that much sense grammatically. As for the citations, the first one refers to an article published by Stanford in 1999 titled “Portrayal of Minorities In The Film, Media, and Entertainment Industries”. While it is a legitimate scholarly article, I could not find a reference to actual class discrimination. The other references used in the media section of the article all come from legitimate sources. However, the last sentence in the article refers to Homer Simpson being a “concrete example” of class discrimination, and at the end of the sentence there is a “Citation Needed” tag. Overall, the article does not seem to have any heavy biases one way or another, however it is definitely not perfect. Jgratt21 (talk) 04:35, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposed addition/change to the "Media Representation" section
Since classism is something that is systemic, it goes largely unnoticed in the media that is consumed by many on a daily basis. This is something that children are exposed to at a young age, with a majority of high-grossing G-rated movies displaying some classism in some form. Since children are known to develop biases at a young age and hold on to them as they grow older, this leads to a class discrimination bias that can potentially stay with them for a long time. Classism as portrayed on the media goes beyond children’s movies. News media in the past has skewed coverage to over-represent some classes while under-representing others.

"Classism is systematic, and it's implications can go unnoticed in the media that is consumed by society." Would be a good way to neutralize the first sentence so it has less bias. I do question the legitimacy of your source for this one, while it is published by a teacher with a masters degree, to unlock the entirety of her study post, you must pay for a subscription to this private company. It is unknown if there are sources provided, or if it is peer reviewed. I would find another source for this particular portion of your edit.

"Classism can be exposed to children through movies, with a large pool of high-grossing G-rated movies portraying classism in different contexts." This takes out the fluff from sounding like a personal essay and cuts right to the information. "Some classism in some form" sounds too diluted.

I would stay away from the word "Since" as it alludes to a conclusion. Also the article you reference uses the word "may be" or "can" rather than "is". I would change it to

"Children may develop biases in youth that shape their beliefs throughout their lifetime, which would demonstrate the issues with systematic implications of class."

I'm having a hard time with your last source, as it even indicates in its conclusion paragraph that it's collection sample was limited within the study, so it may not be entirely accurate. Even with using this source, I would note that within your writing that this study may contain bias.

I would find more sources that are peer reviewed and scholarly that support this in both information about news medias discrimination of classism and in movies.

Kodamehalba (talk) 13:50, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Family?
Isn't family background a factor for classism too? Rbakels (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

“to benefit the upper classes at the expense of the lower classes”
It's the same debate as the one about whether racism is only about Black people or whether sexism is only about women. That a group is somehow privileged does not exempt the group from being subjected to undue hostility. Lord knows, the world has heard enough nudniks complaining that successful people don't apologize to them for their success or calling for the expropriation of the means of production. EIN  ( talk ) 03:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * ...set up to benefit the upper class at the expense of the lower class or vice versa (my emphasis)


 * Where is there ever anything in existence which meaningfully disadvantages the upper echelons?


 * Nuttyskin (talk) 03:51, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Dekulakization, mass killings of the educated classes by the Khmer Rouge, Chinese Land Reform. Is getting executed, getting your property expropriated and/or getting sent to forced labor camps enough of a disadvantage? Neozoen (talk) 02:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AliaHolness. Peer reviewers: Afuakessie.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2018 and 11 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chrisob99.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2019 and 30 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jgratt21. Peer reviewers: Kodamehalba.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ZedBanks123. Peer reviewers: Morganbmark95, CARLITO5967.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)