« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER SIX DO THE CIRCUMSTANCES MATTER?
Introduction
6.1 The previous three chapters discussed separately the character of discriminatory attitudes towards particular groups in respect of relationships, employment and the provision of bed and breakfast accommodation. We now briefly bring together some of the threads of those three chapters by comparing the incidence of discriminatory attitudes towards each group in each of these three sets of circumstances. To what degree does the incidence of discriminatory attitudes vary according to circumstance? In particular, is it the case, as suggested in Chapter One, that discriminatory attitudes are more common in intimate settings than in less intimate ones? 9
Comparing circumstances
6.2 We were not able to ask about exactly the same set of groups across all three sets of circumstances. In part, this was because of restrictions on the length of the questionnaire. But equally, sometimes it did not seem sensible or appropriate to ask about a particular group in a particular context. For example, people were not asked about the suitability of a person with a learning disability for the job of a primary school teacher. Meanwhile, where we have asked about a group more than once, there were sometimes differences in the way questions were worded. For example, we asked about an individual gay man or lesbian's suitability to be a primary school teacher, but whether a B&B owner should be allowed to refuse a booking from a gay or lesbian couple.
6.3 However, as Figure 6.1 demonstrates, some of the differences between contexts in the incidence of discriminatory attitudes are so pronounced that it is unlikely they can be explained by variations in question design and wording alone. For example, as many as 50% express unhappiness about the prospect of a close relative having a relationship with a transsexual person, whereas only 32% consider such a person unsuitable for employment as a primary school teacher. Moreover, and importantly, on the eight occasions where we can make the comparison 10 in five cases the incidence of discriminatory attitudes is higher in respect of a possible long-term relationship than it is a primary school teacher or a B&B booking. This suggests that discriminatory attitudes are indeed rather more likely to be held about intimate matters than those less intimate. It seems that the closer that someone might touch us, the greater the danger we might (mentally at least) recoil.
6.4 There are, however, three exceptions that should be noted. First there is one case where more people express a discriminatory attitude about someone being a primary school teacher than they do about a close relationship. Nearly half (48%) say that a Gypsy/Traveller would be unsuitable as a primary school teacher while only just over a third (37%) say they would be unhappy about a relative forming a close relationship with a Gypsy/Traveller. One possibility is that people are under the misapprehension that all Gypsies/Travellers frequently move from place to place and might therefore be unable to hold down a permanent job.
Figure 6.1 Discriminatory responses to different groups across contexts
Sample size: 1,594 (relationships & B&B booking); 1,437 (primary teaching)
6.5 Second, as we have already had reason to highlight, our bed and breakfast scenario clearly evinced the highest level of discriminatory attitudes so far as gay men and lesbians are concerned. We remarked in the previous chapter that the bed and breakfast question seemed to raise different or additional considerations in people's minds; whatever they may be those considerations clearly had particular force in the case of a same sex couple. Meanwhile, in the case of someone with a learning disability the proportion of people who say that a bed and breakfast owner should be allowed to refuse a booking is much the same as the proportion who say they would be unhappy in the event of a close relative forming a long-term relationship.
Conclusion
6.6 The incidence of discriminatory attitudes does not simply depend on the group in question. It also apparently depends on the circumstances. In particular the evidence suggests that the more intimate the relationship, the more likely discriminatory attitudes are to be expressed. Or to put it differently, a society that accepts that people should not be discriminated against in the public realm, such as in employment, need not necessarily be one in which people do not feel able to discriminate in what they consider to be private business. Here it seems is a potentially important barrier to any attempt to secure full inclusion.
Key points:
- The incidence of discriminatory attitudes varies according to both the circumstances and the group in question.
- In general, more intimate settings, such as family relationships, are more likely to evoke discriminatory attitudes than less intimate ones, such as employment.
- Just because discriminatory views are not expressed about a group in one setting does not necessarily mean that such views will not manifest themselves in a different one.
« Previous | Contents | Next »