Agent/asset also explains related attitudes including homophobia(blurring lines between agent and asset), culturally accepted abuse(instrumental to asset control), and honor culture(no room for expression outside the agent hierarchy).
One second-order effect not mentioned in the article is as follows. Investors know that to be successful, their investees are going to need to succeed at social skills like marketing, business development, hiring, management of larger teams, etc. I suspect an inner dialogue that works against diversity may occur, such as "I am egalitarian enough to ignore this person's otherness, but will his vendors/customers/employees/future potential investors be this way too?"
I am reminded of something I heard about a distant relative of mine who was involved in breaking the color barrier in Opera back in the 50's. People told her it was silly to "waste" an opportunity on a talented singer of color, because they (of course) would never be accepted by the public.
These kinds of biases can be deeply ingrained in a culture, even when individuals in said culture are honestly free of first-order bias themselves.
The definition I found is : "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex."
Dig down another level and take a look at the root of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. You'll find all three are about assertion of power over another person or group of people on the basis of certain criteria (race, gender, ethnicity, etc).
I would have thought it would reduce his own stature, which is something that nervous speakers do seem to do for some reason.
That's the trick of self-deprecating humor. It's very effective in deflecting criticism from others. After all, once you've said something outrageous about yourself what else can someone do to you? However, it can also be used to soften or excuse what's likely to be a controversial statement. The investor's opening prattle works pretty much the same way.
I should point out that it is highly unlikely the investor planned these remarks. It is more a learned action, practiced over time, which has become institutionalized in his behavior and the behavior of those like him.
I don't think it's racism or any -ism of that kind any more than it is difficulty relating automatically.
I am fairly certain that this is something that can be trained, but the degree to which I can relate with a man with ABC properties (except gender) will almost always be less than the degree I relate to a woman with ABC properties as gender is also included.
These decisions are always made rapidly, unconsciously, and when we have very little information about a person other than what we can immediately observe.
Changing the image that we have about people with other properties alleviates this.
A difficulty of being a minority of any stripe must be the not knowing.
Was the architect dismissive of my ideas because I am a woman? Because he shoots down everyone’s ideas? Because he has a specific problem with me? Because my ideas are bad?
One of the greatest challenges I had to overcome in my career was not reading too much into the actions of others. When you do you can easily be offended by everything.
IMHO as a bi-racial person who has spent over a decade on three separate continents, I have come to a very different perspective on culturally-driven explanations for mores and behaviours like Amae, and appeals to duty /conformism/emotional repression. I don't beleive they are anything more than rationalizations for ingrained society-wide behavioral dysfunction.
reply