In today’s culture, the word discrimination is thrown about with reckless abandon. It seems that the word is being treated a bit unfairly, though. People act as though discrimination is a thoroughly negative concept and should be avoided at all costs. Is this really the case, though? Should discrimination in all its forms be forever banished from our society or are there different kinds of discrimination, some of which are actually beneficial and desirable? I would argue the latter. But before you go accusing me of being a racist, homophobic bigot, let’s take a moment to look at this logically. I know that’s not as fun as knee-jerk reactions and vitriol, but I’m going to do it anyway.
From the Merriam-Websters dictionary:
discrimination (n)
1a : the act of discriminating 1b : the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
2: the quality or power of finely distinguishing
3a : the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually 3b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment <racial discrimination>
The keen-eyed observer will note that it isn’t until definition 3b – the very last one – that we find anything relating to negative treatment of an individual. The very first definition talks about responding to two different stimuli in a different manner. That doesn’t sound particularly negative to me. It could be, of course, but just because you react to various stimuli differently doesn’t mean you should be confined to the lakes of hell for all eternity. Let’s look at a concrete example, shall we? Food. Food, apart from being tasty and nutritious, can be a stimuli. When you are presented a meal at a restaurant, that meal is a stimuli. If you order a salad (I don’t know why you would, but it’s an example – bear with me) and it arrives at your table with the lettuce wilted, the eggs rotten, the carrots shriveled, and all manner of other unpleasantness, you discriminate against the rotten salad and send it back. If, on the other hand, it arrives and is fresh and nicely prepared, you react favorably and discriminate in favor of the salad. You have just discriminated and no one was offended in the least.
The second definition is usually reserved for more formal writing. When someone is particularly choosy about a given item or subject, we say that he has “discriminating tastes.” By this we do not mean he is an evil hate monger deserving of eternal damnation. Instead, we mean that he requires things be done in a very particular way, or has very high standards as it pertains to a particular subject or item. Now, it is theoretically possible someone could be offended at this type of discrimination, but in reality it is unlikely. More likely, the person who is the subject of discrimination here will realize that their work wasn’t up to standard, there was a flaw in the item that the person discriminating didn’t like or something like that. Even the most sensitive individuals are most likely to just complain about the person doing the discriminating being far to demanding or picky rather than be offended because typically this type of discrimination is not a personal affront. Rather, it is a judgement against the item, work, or subject in question.
This last definition, or pair of definitions, is where we need to be careful. This definition is what causes the most problems in our society. It’s also the definition that’s least understood. I’m going to start with 3b because it’s much easier to tackle and get out of the way. 3b says “prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment <racial discrimination>.” This is the act of treating someone unfairly based on some quality – race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, hair color, whatever. Note that this definition makes no mention of relative power of the individuals or groups in question, which means it is 100% possible for a tiny minority to discriminate against an overwhelming minority. I’m going to hedge here just a bit and say that this is wrong most of the time. I don’t condone ill treatment of anyone based on factors such as these, but I’m guessing if I thought about it long enough I could come up with an example where it would be acceptable, even to a majority of Americans. Having said that, this type of discrimination is generally negative and to be avoided. Racism is bad, m’kay?
3a is a bit tricky. “the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually” That definition seems to be rather negative and worthy of inclusion with the racism, sexism, et all that 3b encompasses, but if you look at it closely, that’s not the case at all. Example time! I like to go to the movies. Movies are (generally) entertaining and are a great source of enjoyment for me. When I get to the theater and go to buy my ticket, I find not all people pay the same price! Senior citizens get a discounted price. Young children and school kids get a discounted price. I, as an adult but not yet of retirement age, am forced to pay a higher price. The movie theater is clearly (and inarguably) discriminating against me as an adult by charging me a higher price. Are they wrong? Maybe. If you take the tact that discrimination is always wrong, then you would have to conclude they are. This is a type of discrimination that society seems to accept without even thinking about it.
Going along with this last definition, let’s talk about all the times I discriminate. Yes, I admit it. I discriminate and no, I’m not even remotely sorry that I’ve done it. I’d put money on the fact that you’re in exactly the same boat, but we’ll get to that a bit later. Allow me to explain. I’m a straight man. When looking for someone to date, I automatically exclude all men. In doing so, I have discriminated against men. Is it because I hate men? No, I quite like them, but I have absolutely no interest in pursuing a romantic relationship with a man. Still, I have discriminated in this regard and I don’t regret it. Also, in dating, I automatically exclude anyone under the age of 21. In doing so, I have discriminated against minors. Is it because I hate minors? Again, I quite like them, but I’m not a pedaphile and have no wish to pursue a romantic relationship with them. Theoretically speaking, if I had kids and needed to hire a babysitter, I would not hire someone with a history of sexual abuse. In doing so, I have discriminated against sex offenders. Discriminating in this case is actually quite smart if you care for the safety of your children. When I go to buy a car, I automatically exclude any car that has an automatic transmission. In doing so, I have discriminated against automatic gearboxes. I actually do hate automatics, but that has more to do with my discriminating tastes and love of driving than any sort of malice. I doubt anyone will condemn me to hell for this hatred, since its object is an object itself and incapable of being offended or hurt.
I could provide examples like these for days, but I hope by now you are beginning to see my point. Discrimination can be a bad thing and there are very definitely concrete examples of wrong and hateful discrimination. On the other hand, there are very healthy, normal, and even smart examples of discriminating. It is these latter types that I wish to defend. Also to reclaim a word that has gained way too many negative connotations as of late. Want you join me in celebrating discrimination (the good kind, anyway)?
Latin Rite Motorsports 