Jane Elliot's Blue/Brown Eye Experiment and the discovery of latent racism

[Life]

I know that this is old news but whatever.

One of my favourite rappers (Killer Mike) mentioned this experiment a while back when talking to Stephen Colbert. So I went and essentially refreshed myself since I had seen the original version from the 70's with young children.

But then I found a version where Elliot tried with adults in GB and I was horrified.

I honestly could not believe that I was watching people defend discrimination so openly and having the gall to say "but I'm not racist". They quite literally would contradict themselves in the same sentence.

Me personally, I'm a white male so I should fall under the "have no idea this is really going on" category. But as a lot of you know, I'm also Jewish and have been discriminated for it. Sometimes with harmless pranks and sometimes it was more serious. Based on that, I probably fall under the "aware" category.

A good example of a harmless prank was when I went to Dalhousie University a few years back. I was the only Jew in my entire residence and I was slightly religious at the time (I ate kosher and went to synagogue on Saturdays and holidays). I went to Toronto for winter break and came back to find that something around 5000 pennies had been shoved under my door by my floor mates. They intended it as a harmless joke and helped me clean them up but it still counts as discrimination since it categorizes me as loving money simply because I'm a Jew. It didn't hurt me in any way because I personally found it funny and when push came to shove, nobody singled me out for my religious beliefs (at least to my face).

The other example is the first time I ever experienced discrimination. At age 8, I was wearing a kippah (skullcap) in downtown Toronto and a random man came up to me. He spat on me and called me a "dirty Jewish pig who should have been gassed". That quote is verbatim and I still remember it to this day. After that, he simply walked away and I never saw him again. I was a fucking 8 year old child who had done no wrong at the time.

I'm not saying that I have it easier or harder than the Black community or the Asian or whoever. But I understand through personal experience.

But how the absolute fuck can you say that as a white woman, you have probably gone through experiences in racism equal to many black people? In fucking England of all places. I don't get it.

Anyone want to help me out with that problem? Feel free to expound as necessary.

Edited February 11, 2016 by John Barrowman

[Crysta]

That episode was pretty cringe-worthy and actually had less closure for me than the others; there are quite a few of them on the YouTubes.

I think I actually liked the one she did in the deep south and 1970's more since the crowd seemed to finally come around and learn.

Edited February 11, 2016 by Crysta

[tuvarkz]

I read up on the Blue eye/Brown eye stuff, and first of all-It somewhat reminds me of the Standford Prison Experiment. Second, I believe the experiment would seem rather inconclusive, particularly when considering children's minds are easily impressionable. (Haven't checked up adult version yet)

Regardless, I believe it's more about "being in a position of power over" rather than "latent racism"-the experiment should've been with one group being told about being better but receiving no concrete benefits or advantages.

In your two examples, I'd honestly think that the former was just a prank(with meta-racism as the context of it), and the latter an actual case of someone being racist.

A white woman mentioning experiencing racism, however, seems more of a result of the hellish mess that is intersectional feminism. (However, for accuracy's sake, I'd rather have some context/more details on it)

Edited February 11, 2016 by tuvarkz

[Crysta]

The experiment is definitely about racism - with all the ugly power play that typically comes with it.

Also, what's meta-racism? I honestly haven't heard about it but I'm beginning to suspect it's some form of not-as-serious-as-real-racism racism and that bothers me.

[blah the Prussian]

What was this experiment? It sounds interesting.

Edit: Okay, not sure how to feel about this. On the one hand, it definitely demonstrated something. On the other hand, it was obviously traumatic to the kids and, as others have said, it was possible just an issue of someone suddenly getting power and not being able to handle it. Still quite interesting.

Edited February 11, 2016 by blah the Prussian

[tuvarkz]

The experiment is definitely about racism - with all the ugly power play that typically comes with it.

Also, what's meta-racism? I honestly haven't heard about it but I'm beginning to suspect it's some form of not-as-serious-as-real-racism racism and that bothers me.

No, because I find that the experiment isn't necessarily limited to a racial difference-Had it been done via genders, religion, or affluence, I bet there would have been similar results overall. Second, there's a difference between a racist system (Which applied in this case, as the "advantaged" group had real advantages) in opposition to individual racism.

It's not a real term, just decided to use it just to refer as a fact that the prank referenced the already existing stereotype, in the same way meta-jokes in anime/manga/LN specifically mention character types, situations, and similar tropes (Saekano is a noticeable example of this) You make fun of the stereotype's concept, not reinforce it.

[Life]

No, because I find that the experiment isn't necessarily limited to a racial difference-Had it been done via genders, religion, or affluence, I bet there would have been similar results overall. Second, there's a difference between a racist system (Which applied in this case, as the "advantaged" group had real advantages) in opposition to individual racism.

It's not a real term, just decided to use it just to refer as a fact that the prank referenced the already existing stereotype, in the same way meta-jokes in anime/manga/LN specifically mention character types, situations, and similar tropes (Saekano is a noticeable example of this) You make fun of the stereotype's concept, not reinforce it.

Stop.

Hammer time.

You need to explain that last line. How is making fun of a stereotype's concept not reinforcing said stereotype? The logic doesn't flow here.

[tuvarkz]

Because by taking it as a joke, you're dismissing it as something serious. When not institutional, individual racism's effects on people are only as bad as the would-be-targets take it as (Since emotions are clearly subjective). ((Of course, to maximum effect, you make jokes out of all stereotypes-which is something quite common in my home country's style of humour. That way, stereotypes are all dismissed as joking material and not something of any actual worth.))

Edited February 11, 2016 by tuvarkz

[Life]

Because by taking it as a joke, you're dismissing it as something serious.

I'm going to stop you right here.

Understand that I took it as a joke because it was by friends who had no problem with me being Jewish (and more so, respected me) and wanted to play a practical joke on me. And only because it was friends who both admitted to doing so for a laugh and helped me clean it up. If a random person did that, it would have been absolutely insulting.

You realize that you are saying "don't sweat the small stuff" to racist actions as that. What if it was a swastika drawn on my door? Is it still considered a prank and a joke? Certainly the person who committed the act would think so. So should I dismiss that too as a joke? Because what harm has it actually done to me?

[tuvarkz]

The thing is, everything has its limit. Of course drawing a swastika is in terrible taste and something you should probably have a very stern talk with said person about what is off limits, even if it was meant as a joke; in the same way that jokes without context also have a breaking point when it stops being funny and it becomes outright offensive-It's the same difference between someone drawing on your face while you are asleep and someone dumping a bucket full of sewer water (or any other nasty substance) on you. There's always harmless jokes and stuff that shouldn't outright be done.

((And probably you should check the swastika's orientation to make sure it's not the Buddhist symbol and that someone played a meta-joke on you. In which case it's still something very distasteful, but just so that you don't get (even if unjustly) accused of being overly exasperated.))

Edited February 11, 2016 by tuvarkz

[Crysta]

Who gets to decide these limits, though? The people who make and observe them or the person/people who bear the brunt of the joke? You seem to acknowledge they're as offensive as the victim makes them to be but at the same time you're still dictating what should be offensive and what shouldn't be by calling it meta-whatever.

If someone accuses Life of being overly exasperated by getting offended by a swatsika being drawn on their door and contends it's really being used as a Buddhist symbol and he should just chillax it's no big deal then... lol.

[tuvarkz]

Who gets to decide these limits, though? The people who make and observe them or the person/people who bear the brunt of the joke? You seem to acknowledge they're as offensive as the victim makes them to be but at the same time you're still dictating what should be offensive and what shouldn't be by calling it meta-whatever.

If someone accuses Life of being overly exasperated by getting offended by a swatsika being drawn on their door and contends it's really being used as a Buddhist symbol and he should just chillax it's no big deal then... lol.

The difference is that the nazi symbol is specifically made in the context of a major, historically recent act of genocide against his people-in the meantime, the stereotype about Jews being greedy has been there for quite a long while and it's not specifically tied to the Holocaust. It's a matter of common sense.

Secondly, there is a difference because the Buddhist symbol has its orientation in opposite to the nazist one, which makes for a clear-cut difference. And as I said, it would be an unjust accusation.

[Naughx]

Secondly, there is a difference because the Buddhist symbol has its orientation in opposite to the nazist one, which makes for a clear-cut difference. And as I said, it would be an unjust accusation.

Hmmm context is very relevant.

If you draw a reversed swastika (The buddhist one) on his door just because he is a jew... This is racism.

If you bring it to buddhist monks as a symbol of good fortune that should be perfectly fine.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Naughx

[Life]

The difference is that the nazi symbol is specifically made in the context of a major, historically recent act of genocide against his people-in the meantime, the stereotype about Jews being greedy has been there for quite a long while and it's not specifically tied to the Holocaust.

Let me get this straight.

Are you attempting to say that the stereotype of Jews being greedy and cheap is less harmful than the swastika based on its historical reference?

How do you explain Cossack raids on Jewish communities in Russia (my family actually fled from the pogroms) where one of the motivations was the seizure of Jewish lands and properties if not destruction? Same thing with the Spanish Inquisition and Expulsion. Both arose from the stereotype of Jews being greedy rats and pigs with riches stored away.

[tuvarkz]

Let me get this straight.

Are you attempting to say that the stereotype of Jews being greedy and cheap is less harmful than the swastika based on its historical reference?

How do you explain Cossack raids on Jewish communities in Russia (my family actually fled from the pogroms) where one of the motivations was the seizure of Jewish lands and properties if not destruction? Same thing with the Spanish Inquisition and Expulsion. Both arose from the stereotype of Jews being greedy rats and pigs with riches stored away.

First of all, I was taking into account cultural context and general death toll. (And yes, I'm counting eastern europe as culturally different enough from western europe for the racism accounts to have actually happened, considering that an offense done due to ignorance shouldn't be treated as harshly as one with awareness of malicious intent-the holocaust is far more known than the pogroms or their full extent amongst western europe/US). The pogroms did leave a large amount of Jewish people deprived of their belongings and many lost their lives, but I don't think it does amount to the massive genocide committed by Nazi Germany.

Secondly, the Inquisition is something that happened too long ago for it to be exactly relevant anymore-And the total death toll of Inquisitorial executions didn't go beyond 2000 total, not counting of what the victim was accused of. The Expulsion is ancient history-bringing it up in the context of current racism would be about as relevant as treating the Spanish colonization of South America in a similar context-said Spain is long gone, and western culture has changed already.

[blah the Prussian]

Let me get this straight.

Are you attempting to say that the stereotype of Jews being greedy and cheap is less harmful than the swastika based on its historical reference?

How do you explain Cossack raids on Jewish communities in Russia (my family actually fled from the pogroms) where one of the motivations was the seizure of Jewish lands and properties if not destruction? Same thing with the Spanish Inquisition and Expulsion. Both arose from the stereotype of Jews being greedy rats and pigs with riches stored away.

Agree with you here, but IIRC Pogroms, or at least the worst wave of them, happened because the Russians thought the Jews had killed Alexander II.

[Life]

First of all, I was taking into account cultural context and general death toll. (And yes, I'm counting eastern europe as culturally different enough from western europe for the racism accounts to have actually happened, considering that an offense done due to ignorance shouldn't be treated as harshly as one with awareness of malicious intent-the holocaust is far more known than the pogroms or their full extent amongst western europe/US). The pogroms did leave a large amount of Jewish people deprived of their belongings and many lost their lives, but I don't think it does amount to the massive genocide committed by Nazi Germany.

Secondly, the Inquisition is something that happened too long ago for it to be exactly relevant anymore-And the total death toll of Inquisitorial executions didn't go beyond 2000 total, not counting of what the victim was accused of. The Expulsion is ancient history-bringing it up in the context of current racism would be about as relevant as treating the Spanish colonization of South America in a similar context-said Spain is long gone, and western culture has changed already.

I'm not sure you understand why you're arguing.

In a nutshell, you're saying that because Nazi Germany found a way to more recently outdo both Isabella and the Russians in regards to killing/expelling Jews that these events are less severe even though they arose because of stereotypes of Jews. And therefore, they are explainable in a way of saying "well, it was a long time ago and modern culture isn't like that".

Except that it is. You realize that Jews are fleeing France today because they fear for their lives? My uncle joked about 15 years ago that France would be entirely Muslim by 2020. It's scary to see that he's not only right but French Muslims have taken it upon themselves to loot Jewish stores in 2016 and rally troops with cries of "gas the Jews" and "Hitler was right".

Or you can look at Arab expulsion of Jews over the last hundred years or so. Yemen, Morocco, Egypt... all of these countries once had sizable Jewish communities. They don't anymore. This is a lot more recent than the Inquisition.

History simply repeats itself.

Agree with you here, but IIRC Pogroms, or at least the worst wave of them, happened because the Russians thought the Jews had killed Alexander II.

The Russian progroms, yes. Not the Ukrainian ones that started late 19th century.

Edited February 13, 2016 by John Barrowman

[tuvarkz]

I'm not sure you understand why you're arguing.

In a nutshell, you're saying that because Nazi Germany found a way to more recently outdo both Isabella and the Russians in regards to killing/expelling Jews that these events are less severe even though they arose because of stereotypes of Jews. And therefore, they are explainable in a way of saying "well, it was a long time ago and modern culture isn't like that".

Except that it is. You realize that Jews are fleeing France today because they fear for their lives? My uncle joked about 15 years ago that France would be entirely Muslim by 2020. It's scary to see that he's not only right but French Muslims have taken it upon themselves to loot Jewish stores in 2016 and rally troops with cries of "gas the Jews" and "Hitler was right".

Or you can look at Arab expulsion of Jews over the last hundred years or so. Yemen, Morocco, Egypt... all of these countries once had sizable Jewish communities. They don't anymore. This is a lot more recent than the Inquisition.

History simply repeats itself.

The Russian progroms, yes. Not the Ukrainian ones that started late 19th century.

The thing is, Islam-dominated countries do not have modern culture. Saudi Arabia has shariah law, Kuwait still has it apply to Muslim citizens. I guess this part would be more of a matter of forcing Islam to become an ideology (Because yes, religions are ideologies) that is acceptable in modern standards or for it to die out.

[Crysta]

So... what I'm getting now is because these horrific events happened so long ago and had comparably weak death tolls, they're not relevant enough to be brought up and discussed during discussions of current era racism - the implication being there is no link between them. This is what makes the swatsika more offensive and harmful than the stereotypes which have been cultivated for hundreds of years and are still believed today.

I dunno man I think I'd be more uncomfortable in the presence of a dozen nazi-sympathizers than in the presence of a dozen drawn swatsikas. Symbols hold power, but the latter is just the mascot of the former.

In other words, I don't really believe it. I think historical tragedies have ripple effects which last long after they are done, not all of which are immediately acknowledged or seen (particularly by those who were not alive at the time and don't have any personal experience with them). I really hope three hundred years from now slavery and the Holocaust aren't considered 'irrelevant' when people are still debating issues concerning race (which will probably still happen even then, btw), because while I may not have any personal experience with it, I do consider it important to remember that it happened and the circumstances to make it happen did occur. Modern society is still a very flawed beast, inhabited by people with very short memory spans and limited lenses.

EDIT: A recent tl;dr explanation of the exercise's origin, purpose, and feedback by Jane herself for those interested.

Edited February 13, 2016 by Crysta

[Tryhard]

Except that it is. You realize that Jews are fleeing France today because they fear for their lives? My uncle joked about 15 years ago that France would be entirely Muslim by 2020. It's scary to see that he's not only right but French Muslims have taken it upon themselves to loot Jewish stores in 2016 and rally troops with cries of "gas the Jews" and "Hitler was right".

Funny, because my sister who is a French Muslim tells me that they are often marginalized. And there is one thing that I do know, that Europe has had an increase in right-wing mentality and with it also an increase in anti-Muslim rhetoric (not really that surprising after the attacks in Paris, but it was happening even before that). While I'm not sure if what you said is true, and I'm not trying to downplay it if so, but Muslims only make up 5-10% of the national population of France, it is still a primarily Christian country and both Muslims and Jews are (relatively) minorities compared to Christians.

Edited February 13, 2016 by Tryhard