Double standard

Last updated

A double standard is the application of different sets of principles for situations that are, in principle, the same. [1] It is often used to describe treatment whereby one group is given more latitude than another. [2] A double standard arises when two or more people, groups, organizations, circumstances, or events are treated differently even though they should be treated the same way. [3] A double standard "implies that two things which are the same are measured by different standards". [4]

Contents

Applying different principles to similar situations may or may not indicate a double standard. To distinguish between the application of a double standard and a valid application of different standards toward circumstances that only appear to be the same, several factors must be examined. One is the sameness of those circumstances – what are the parallels between those circumstances, and in what ways do they differ? Another is the philosophy or belief system informing which principles should be applied to those circumstances. Different standards can be applied to situations that appear similar based on a qualifying truth or fact that, upon closer examination, renders those situations distinct (a physical reality or moral obligation, for example). However, if similar-looking situations have been treated according to different principles and there is no truth, fact or principle that distinguishes those situations, then a double standard has been applied.

If correctly identified, a double standard usually indicates the presence of hypocrisy, bias or unjust behaviors.

Causes and explanations

Double standards are believed to develop in people's minds for a multitude of possible reasons, including: finding an excuse for oneself, emotions clouding judgement, twisting facts to support beliefs (such as confirmation biases, cognitive biases, attraction biases, prejudices or the desire to be right). Human beings have a tendency to evaluate people's actions based on who did them.

In a study conducted in 2000, Dr. Martha Foschi observed the application of double standards in group competency tests. She concluded that status characteristics, such as gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic class, can provide a basis for the formation of double standards in which stricter standards are applied to people who are perceived to be of lower status. Dr. Foschi also noted the ways in which double standards can form based on other socially valued attributes such as beauty, morality, and mental health. [5]

Dr. Tristan Botelho and Dr. Mabel Abraham, Assistant Professors at the Yale School of Management and Columbia Business School, studied the effect that gender has on the way people rank others in financial markets. Their research showed that average-quality men were given the benefit of the doubt more than average-quality women, who were more often "penalized" in people's judgments. Botelho and Abraham also showed that women and men are similarly risk-loving, contrary to popular belief. Altogether, their research showed that double standards (at least in financial markets) do exist around gender. They encourage the adoption of controls to eliminate gender bias in application, hiring, and evaluation processes within organizations. Examples of such controls include using only initials on applications so that applicants' genders are not apparent, or auditioning musicians from behind a screen so that their skills, and not their gender, influence their acceptance or rejection into orchestras. [6] Practices like these are, according to Botelho and Abraham, already being implemented in a number of organizations.

Common areas

Gender

It has long been debated how someone's gender role affects others' moral, social, political and legal responses. Some believe that differences in the way men and women are perceived and treated is a function of social norms, thus indicating a double standard. For example, one claim is that a double standard exists in society's judgment of women's and men's sexual conduct. Research has found that casual sexual activity is regarded as more acceptable for men than for women. [7] According to William G Axinn, [8] double standards between men and women can potentially exist with regards to: dating, cohabitation, virginity, marriage/remarriage, sexual abuse/assault/harassment, domestic violence and singleness.

Kennair et al. (2023) found no signs on a sexual double standard in long or short-term mating contexts, nor in choosing a friend. They did find however that women's self-stimulation was judged positively, and men's self-stimulated was judged negatively. [9] A 2017 study of American college students also found no evidence of a gendered double standard around promiscuity. [10]

Law

A double standard may arise if two or more groups who have equal legal rights are given different degrees of legal protection or representation. Such double standards are seen as unjustified because they violate a common maxim of modern legal jurisprudence - that all parties should stand equal before the law. Where judges are expected to be impartial, they must apply the same standards to all people, regardless of their own subjective biases or favoritism, based on: social class, rank, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age or other distinctions.[ citation needed ]

Politics

A double standard arises in politics when the treatment of the same political matters between two or more parties (such as the response to a public crisis or the allocation of funding) is handled differently. This could occur because of the nature of political relationships between those tasked with these matters, the degree of reward or power that stands to be gained/lost, or the personal biases/prejudices of politicians.[ citation needed ]

Double standard policies can include situations when a country's or commentator's assessment of the same phenomenon, process or event in international relations depends on their relationship with or attitude to the parties involved.[ citation needed ] In Harry's Game (1975), Gerald Seymour wrote: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". [11]

Ethnicity

Double standards exist when people are preferred or rejected on the basis of their ethnicity in situations in which ethnicity is not a relevant or justifiable factor for discrimination (as might be the case for a cultural performance or ethnic ceremony).

The intentional efforts of some people to counteract racism and ethnic double standards can sometimes be interpreted by others as actually perpetuating racism and double standards among ethnic groups. Writing for The American Conservative , Rod Dreher quotes the account published in Quillette by Coleman Hughes, a black student at Columbia University, who said he was given an opportunity to play in a backup band for Grammy Award-winning pop artist Rihanna at the 2016 MTV Video Music Awards Show. According to Hughes, several of his friends were also invited; however, one of them was fired and replaced because, according to Hughes, his white Hispanic background did not suit the all-black aesthetic that Rihanna's team had chosen for her show. The team had decided that all performers on stage were to be black, aside from Rihanna's regular guitar player. [12] Hughes was uncertain about whether he believed this action was unethical, given that the show was racially themed to begin with. He observed what he believed to be a double standard in the entertainment industry, saying, "if a black musician had been fired in order to achieve an all-white aesthetic — it would have made front page headlines. It would have been seen as an unambiguous moral infraction." [12] Dreher argues that Hughes's observations highlight the difficulty in distinguishing between the exclusion of one ethnic group in order to celebrate another, and the exclusion of an ethnic group as the exercise of racism or a double standard. Dreher also discussed another incident, in which New York Times columnist Bari Weiss, who is Jewish, was heavily criticized for tweeting, "Immigrants: They get the job done", in a positive reference to Mirai Nagasu, a Japanese-American Olympic ice skater, who Weiss was trying to honor. [12] The public debate about ethnicity and double standards remains controversial and, by all appearances, will continue.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender</span> Characteristics distinguishing between femininity and masculinity

Gender includes the social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of being a man, woman, or other gender identity. Depending on the context, this may include sex-based social structures and gender expression. Most cultures use a gender binary, in which gender is divided into two categories, and people are considered part of one or the other ; those who are outside these groups may fall under the umbrella term non-binary. Some societies have specific genders besides "man" and "woman", such as the hijras of South Asia; these are often referred to as third genders. Most scholars agree that gender is a central characteristic for social organization.

Bias is a disproportionate weight in favor of or against an idea or thing, usually in a way that is closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair. Biases can be innate or learned. People may develop biases for or against an individual, a group, or a belief. In science and engineering, a bias is a systematic error. Statistical bias results from an unfair sampling of a population, or from an estimation process that does not give accurate results on average.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prejudice</span> Attitudes based on preconceived categories

Prejudice can be an affective feeling towards a person based on their perceived group membership. The word is often used to refer to a preconceived evaluation or classification of another person based on that person's perceived personal characteristics, such as political affiliation, sex, gender, gender identity, beliefs, values, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race, ethnicity, language, nationality, culture, complexion, beauty, height, body weight, occupation, wealth, education, criminality, sport-team affiliation, music tastes or other perceived characteristics.

Androcentrism is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing a masculine point of view at the center of one's world view, culture, and history, thereby culturally marginalizing femininity. The related adjective is androcentric, while the practice of placing the feminine point of view at the center is gynocentric.

The term "minority group" has different usages, depending on the context. According to its common usage, the term minority group can simply be understood in terms of demographic sizes within a population: i.e. a group in society with the least number of individuals, or less than half, is a "minority". Usually a minority group is disempowered relative to the majority, and that characteristic lends itself to different applications of the term minority.

In-group favoritism, sometimes known as in-group–out-group bias, in-group bias, intergroup bias, or in-group preference, is a pattern of favoring members of one's in-group over out-group members. This can be expressed in evaluation of others, in allocation of resources, and in many other ways.

Tokenism is the practice of making only a perfunctory or symbolic effort to be inclusive to members of minority groups, especially by recruiting people from underrepresented groups in order to give the appearance of racial or gender equality within a workplace or educational context. The effort of including a token individual in work or school is usually intended to create the impression of social inclusiveness and diversity.

Health equity arises from access to the social determinants of health, specifically from wealth, power and prestige. Individuals who have consistently been deprived of these three determinants are significantly disadvantaged from health inequities, and face worse health outcomes than those who are able to access certain resources. It is not equity to simply provide every individual with the same resources; that would be equality. In order to achieve health equity, resources must be allocated based on an individual need-based principle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intersectionality</span> Theory of discrimination

Intersectionality is a sociological analytical framework for understanding how groups' and individuals' social and political identities result in unique combinations of discrimination and privilege. Examples of these factors include gender, caste, sex, race, ethnicity, class, sexuality, religion, disability, height, age, weight, species and physical appearance. These intersecting and overlapping social identities may be both empowering and oppressing. However, little good-quality quantitative research has been done to support or undermine the practical uses of intersectionality.

Employment discrimination is a form of illegal discrimination in the workplace based on legally protected characteristics. In the U.S., federal anti-discrimination law prohibits discrimination by employers against employees based on age, race, gender, sex, religion, national origin, and physical or mental disability. State and local laws often protect additional characteristics such as marital status, veteran status and caregiver/familial status. Earnings differentials or occupational differentiation—where differences in pay come from differences in qualifications or responsibilities—should not be confused with employment discrimination. Discrimination can be intended and involve disparate treatment of a group or be unintended, yet create disparate impact for a group.

Gender inequality is the social phenomenon in which people are not treated equally on the basis of gender. This inequality can be caused by gender discrimination or sexism. The treatment may arise from distinctions regarding biology, psychology, or cultural norms prevalent in the society. Some of these distinctions are empirically grounded, while others appear to be social constructs. While current policies around the world cause inequality among individuals, it is women who are most affected. Gender inequality weakens women in many areas such as health, education, and business life. Studies show the different experiences of genders across many domains including education, life expectancy, personality, interests, family life, careers, and political affiliation. Gender inequality is experienced differently across different cultures and also affects non-binary people.

Feminist epistemology is an examination of epistemology from a feminist standpoint.

Sentencing disparity is defined as "a form of unequal treatment in criminal punishment that is often of unexplained cause and is at least incongruous, unfair and disadvantaging in consequence". In the United States men are most adversely affected by sentencing disparity being twice as likely to be sentenced to jail after conviction than women and receiving on average 63% longer jail sentences.

Sexual script theory is a theory introduced by sociologists John H. Gagnon and William Simon in their 1973 book Sexual Conduct. Its basic principle states that all social behavior, including sexual behavior, is socially scripted. The idea is that sexual scripts are guidelines for appropriate sexual behavior and sexual encounters. Sexual behavior and encounters become behavior which is learned as well as instinctive. Each partner in consensual encounters acts as if they are an actor in a play or film following a script, rather than acting on impulse alone. Research on sexual scripts and sexual script theory has concluded that sexual scripts are gendered.

The social construction of gender is a theory in the humanities and social sciences about the manifestation of cultural origins, mechanisms, and corollaries of gender perception and expression in the context of interpersonal and group social interaction. Specifically, the social construction of gender theory stipulates that gender roles are an achieved "status" in a social environment, which implicitly and explicitly categorize people and therefore motivate social behaviors.

Role congruity theory proposes that a group will be positively evaluated when its characteristics are recognized as aligning with that group's typical social roles. Conversely, the stereotype fit hypothesis suggests that group members will experience discrimination in different social roles or positions to the extent that their group stereotypically does not have characteristics associated with success in the position. For instance, women may not be considered a good fit for a managerial position if being aggressive is seen as a characteristic of a successful manager. Due to stereotype fit, men may be considered more qualified for the position and are not only more likely to be hired, but are also more likely to be promoted as well.

Slut-shaming is the practice of criticizing people, especially women and girls, who are perceived to violate expectations of behavior and appearance regarding issues related to sexuality. The term is used to reclaim the word slut and empower women and girls to have agency over their own sexuality. Gender-based violence can be a result of slut-shaming primarily affecting women. It may also be used in reference to gay men, who may face disapproval for promiscuous sexual behaviors. Slut-shaming rarely happens to heterosexual men.

Gendered sexuality is the way in which gender and sexuality are often viewed as likened constructs, whereby the role of gender in an individual's life is informed by and impacts others' perceptions of their sexuality. For example, both the male and female genders are subject to assumptions of heterosexuality. If a man were to behave in feminine ways, his heterosexuality would be doubted, and individuals may assume that he is gay.

Voting behavior refers to how people decide how to vote. This decision is shaped by a complex interplay between an individual voter's attitudes as well as social factors. Voter attitudes include characteristics such as ideological predisposition, party identity, degree of satisfaction with the existing government, public policy leanings, and feelings about a candidate's personality traits. Social factors include race, religion and degree of religiosity, social and economic class, educational level, regional characteristics, and gender. The degree to which a person identifies with a political party influences voting behavior, as does social identity. Voter decision-making is not a purely rational endeavor but rather is profoundly influenced by personal and social biases and deeply held beliefs as well as characteristics such as personality, memory, emotions, and other psychological factors. Voting advice applications and avoidance of wasted votes through strategic voting can impact voting behavior.

Internalized sexism is a form of sexist behavior and attitudes enacted by women toward themselves or other women and girls. Internalized sexism is a form of internalized oppression, which "consists of oppressive practices that continue to make the rounds even when members of the oppressor group are not present." Internalized sexism can have a range of effects on women and girls such as problems with mental health and body image. Modes of internalization of sexism include early childhood inculturation and consumption of media, while language can also moderate power imbalances between groups and perpetuate internalized sexism.

References

  1. "Definition of double standard". dictionary.com. Retrieved 27 July 2020.
  2. (no author). "double standard" (Web article). collinsdictionary.com. HarperCollins Publishers . Retrieved 3 March 2019.{{cite web}}: |last1= has generic name (help)
  3. "double standard Meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary". dictionary.cambridge.org. Retrieved 9 June 2018.
  4. Eichler, Margaret (1980). The Double Standard: A Feminist Critique of Feminist Social Science (Print). London, U.K.: Croom Helm. p. 15. ISBN   978-0-85664-536-5.
  5. Foschi, Martha (2000). "Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research". Annual Review of Sociology . Annual Reviews. 26: 21–42. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.21. JSTOR   223435.
  6. Dr. Tristan Botelho; Dr. Mabel Abraham (1 December 2017). "Pursuing Quality: How Search Costs and Uncertainty Magnify Gender-based Double Standards in a Multistage Evaluation Process" (Journal article). Administrative Science Quarterly. 62 (4): 698–730. doi:10.1177/0001839217694358. S2CID   157322669 . Retrieved 9 March 2019.
  7. Vrangalova Ph.D., Zhana (3 March 2014). "Is Our Sexual Double Standard Going Away?" (Web article). Psychology Today . Sussex Publishers, LLC. Retrieved 20 February 2019.
  8. Axinn, William G.; Young-DeMarco, Linda; Ro, Meeso Caponi (1 March 2011). "Gender Double Standards in Parenting Attitudes". Social Science Research. 40 (2): 417–432. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.08.010. ISSN   0049-089X. PMC   3035381 . PMID   21318125.
  9. Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair, Andrew G. Thomas, David M. Buss ja Mons Bendixen (27 March 2023). "Examining the Sexual Double Standards and Hypocrisy in Partner Suitability Appraisals Within a Norwegian Sample". Evolutionary Psychology. 21 (1). doi: 10.1177/14747049231165687 . PMC   10303487 . PMID   36972495. S2CID   257772494.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. Stewart-Williams, Steve; Butler, Caroline A.; Thomas, Andrew G. (2017). "Sexual History and Present Attractiveness: People Want a Mate With a Bit of a Past, But Not Too Much". Journal of Sex Research. 54 (9): 1097–1105. doi:10.1080/00224499.2016.1232690. ISSN   1559-8519. PMID   27805420. S2CID   25336484.
  11. Farooqi, Anis (2003), "Gujral, Satish", Oxford Art Online, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/gao/9781884446054.article.t035630, ISBN   9781884446054
  12. 1 2 3 Dreher, Rod (5 June 2018). "The Racial Double Standard". The American Conservative. Retrieved 9 March 2019.

Further reading