Openly Gay Employment Discrimination - Article Example

Openly Gay Employment Discrimination Thesis Discrimination is a social aspect rampant in the United States of America for quite a long time. It varies mostly according to gender, class and race. Many researches exist on the study of the prevalence of various types of discrimination in the states, most of which provide useful information as others lack enough of it. This work is a critique article of an article by Andras Tilcsik of Harvard University on Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States, which found that gay job applicants faced discrimination in some of the states, a finding that shows there is varied regional perception on men who appear to be gay. The work also found that employers who emphasize on stereotypes discriminated openly gay men. Methods Previous researches on discrimination in America lack proper evidence about sexual orientation discrimination; thus limiting the understanding on discrimination levels in the states. Lack of viable methods in previous researches leads to lack of evidence on levels of discrimination. One of the methods the author uses is; choosing one target group or limiting the study scope on one group. This method of choosing one group has an advantage over analyzing many groups because it makes it easy for one to get detailed information. People have different perceptions on different groups, leading to varied discriminatory actions; thus the method of choosing one group helps get access to enough information. For example, according to the author, people view gay men as feminine and lesbians as masculine (Tilcsik, 2012). These perceptions may lead to different employer’s perceptions when looking for an employee. Choosing one group helps in attaining the goals of studying discrimination because it gives clear information on employers’ perception towards gay men. The second method the author uses is the study on geographical location. The author studies discrimination in a wide geographical location, as opposed to previous studies, which concentrated on a limited area, like a city. Studying discrimination on a limited geographic area for a country that has a history on discrimination may not bring the best results. This is because the rate varies according to different regions. As the author points out, indications from public poll opinions are that, there is varied regional attitude towards gay men (Tilcsik, 2012). Regions also have varied antidiscrimination laws in that there are those with laws concerning gays, and those that do not have. As perceptions vary in the various regions, so will employment discrimination vary among employers in those regions. The findings from this method are a suggestion of how the society accepts gay men, and it supports the thesis of this work. The third method the author uses is the study on the role of stereotypes. Stereotypes, as per this study, are perceptions that people associate with gay men. There is a deep root of stereotyping in the United States where people have certain characteristics that they associate with gay men. Studying the role of stereotyping can help in identifying people’s perception on gay men in the United States, because it helps understand what people associate to them. The above methods turn appropriate for studying about discrimination in America. First, limiting the scope of study to one group gives clear information about how people perceive of it. This is because there is enough time to get deep into the group as opposed to studying many groups at once. Studying a wide geographic area brings viable information on discrimination because it brings out perceptional views from a wide area. This approach on studying discrimination makes sense, and other researchers can imitate it in their studies on discrimination. Evidence of Thesis Support The results from this study support the thesis because they indicate that there was discrimination on gay applicants as compared to heterosexual applicants. 11.5 % of heterosexual applicants got a callback for an interview compared to only 7.2% of gay applicants. This results from studying the role of stereotypes on discrimination. The evidence on regional discrimination shows that a gay applicant who has a probability of 3.7% of receiving a callback for an interview in Texas would have a probability of 10.2% of receiving a callback in California for a similar job (Tilcsik, 2012). Strengths and weaknesses of evidences Strengths of evidences brought are that there are regions which adopt laws protecting gay men from discrimination; thus it is in those regions that there were lower discrimination rates as compared to others that have no laws protecting gay men. However, a weakness of the evidences is that public opinion on gay men also matters and can limit the effect of the law on gay men protection. The strength on stereotypes is that an employer who emphasizes on traits like aggressiveness or assertiveness has a likelihood of discriminating gay applicants. The possibility of a gay man getting a callback for an interview from an employer who does not emphasize on stereotypes is 10% as compared to 3% of the one who emphasizes on stereotypes (Tilcsik, 2012). However, the weakness is that not all discrimination relied on stereotypes as there was still a difference in callback possibilities from employers who did not emphasize on stereotypes. These arguments give a presentable support to the thesis. Contribution to the Literature The study contributes to literature in that it gives a concrete evidence of discrimination against gay men. It surpasses other studies because it concentrates on a wide geographic area; thus giving a wide representation of the state of discrimination on openly gay men. Previous studies present discrimination rates of not more than two cities (Tilcsik, 2012). For a viable contribution to literature, a study must cover a wide area so as to bring a comparative presentation. To meet this, the study focuses on seven geographical regions. The study also makes a contribution to literature by identifying mechanisms underlying discrimination against gay men. It shows that employers who considered stereotypes most likely discriminated gay applicants. It gives strengths and weaknesses of the mechanisms used, leaving room for more research, and this contributes to the literature. Recommendations and Implications Social demographics in population change the way government runs. For example, changes in age affect the government’s investment in social security of the aging. This calls for the government to cut costs associated with the program so as to meet the rise in economic changes. According to the research, there is an evidence of discrimination on gay jobseekers and the research gives implications on the policies. First, the study suggests that there is a penalty for states practicing discrimination so that there is no favoritism between socialists and gay applicants (Tilcsik, 2012). Secondly, the research implies that gay applicants hide their sexual orientations during hiring, in places where employers have bias considerations. There are existing public policies by United States gay rights that go against public and private sector employers from discriminating gay men (Jefferson and Badgett, 2007). The policy has 14 states, 25 countries and 131 cities that ban discrimination based on sexual orientation in private employment with 150 jurisdictions banning discrimination on public employment. The policies protect individuals against discrimination in hiring, promotions, wages and firing. If employers follow these policies and governments take actions according to the policies, the problem of discrimination in employment would, even if not completely, come to an end. References Jefferson, F, & Badgett, M.V.L. (2007). Sexual Orientation: An International Perspective. New York: Routledge Publishers. Tilcsik, A. (2012). Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States. Retrieved on June 10, 2013 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/661653 Read More